Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on June 08, 2018, 09:14:AM
-
...
-
Not Peace but Division
'From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son, and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, Mother in law against daughter in law, and daughter in law against mother in law'...
-
Insight (LUKE 12:46)..
'The one who does not know and does things deserving punishment (Sheila) will be beaten with few blows' (Sheila, only shot twice, compared to Neveille Bamber shot 8 times, June Bamber shot 7 times, Daniel Caffell shot 5 times, and Nicholas Caffell shot 3 times)...
-
It does look as though the Bible had been used as a reference when you consider its words.
-
Who's bible is this? Also the ISBN number written on it is different to the one printed on it.
-
Mike, why have you chosen to post Luke 12?
-
Though Sheila hadn't been religious and just quoted certain sections from the Bible----which we can all do but it doesn't make us religious.
-
Though Sheila hadn't been religious and just quoted certain sections from the Bible----which we can all do but it doesn't make us religious.
Sheila was religious.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=9207.0;attach=51870)
-
Sheila was religious.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=9207.0;attach=51870)
I say she wasn't. It was only a copy-cat image of what her mother was.
-
How many people particularly prisoners say " they have found God ?". This is not to say that they are religious.
Colin was driven mad when he knew his boys were made to kneel and pray at every opportunity and wouldn't have tolerated Sheila following suit. He'd blamed June for Sheila's condition and as far as I know religion wasn't practiced when Colin and Sheila were together. Sheila would not have bombarded her boys with religion.
-
In case you missed it - Mike, why have you chosen to post Luke 12?
-
How many people particularly prisoners say " they have found God ?". This is not to say that they are religious.
Colin was driven mad when he knew his boys were made to kneel and pray at every opportunity and wouldn't have tolerated Sheila following suit. He'd blamed June for Sheila's condition and as far as I know religion wasn't practiced when Colin and Sheila were together. Sheila would not have bombarded her boys with religion.
For the first time I found myself looking into the contents of Sheila's letter and reading what is possibly an underlying message. She makes it clear that she hadn't wanted to be there. WHY is she telling Ann and Peter that she's not in hospital because of gynae problems. She seems to feel it's important that they know this and goes into huge detail to refute it. Might it be that June had told them that this was the reason she was there? She seems to be admitting that there HAD been a problem, ie she'd OD'd on God. She speaks very openly about her confused thinking, but she also speaks of it being in the past. The PS about her having "found God in a simple way" almost sounds as if she'd telling them that she's not involved with something which is anything out of the ordinary.
-
For the first time I found myself looking into the contents of Sheila's letter and reading what is possibly an underlying message. She makes it clear that she hadn't wanted to be there. WHY is she telling Ann and Peter that she's not in hospital because of gynae problems. She seems to feel it's important that they know this and goes into huge detail to refute it. Might it be that June had told them that this was the reason she was there? She seems to be admitting that there HAD been a problem, ie she'd OD'd on God. She speaks very openly about her confused thinking, but she also speaks of it being in the past. The PS about her having "found God in a simple way" almost sounds as if she'd telling them that she's not involved with something which is anything out of the ordinary.
"Finding God" is almost a confession/pardon for having done wrong--------hence a lot of prisoners and sinners say this as an act of forgiveness.
-
"Finding God" is almost a confession/pardon for having done wrong--------hence a lot of prisoners and sinners say this as an act of forgiveness.
Confession/pardon -in Sheila's case- for having done what?
-
Confession/pardon -in Sheila's case- for having done what?
For what she was about to do.
-
For what she was about to do.
Must have been months in the planning then. No mental illness. No psychosis. A cold blooded killer, wouldn't you say?
-
For the first time I found myself looking into the contents of Sheila's letter and reading what is possibly an underlying message. She makes it clear that she hadn't wanted to be there. WHY is she telling Ann and Peter that she's not in hospital because of gynae problems. She seems to feel it's important that they know this and goes into huge detail to refute it. Might it be that June had told them that this was the reason she was there? She seems to be admitting that there HAD been a problem, ie she'd OD'd on God. She speaks very openly about her confused thinking, but she also speaks of it being in the past. The PS about her having "found God in a simple way" almost sounds as if she'd telling them that she's not involved with something which is anything out of the ordinary.
I'm afraid Sheila's letter doesn't make sense to me----- though it might to you !
Even your own interpretation of it is questionable.
-
I'm afraid Sheila's letter doesn't make sense to me----- though it might to you !
Even your own interpretation of it is questionable.
'Course it is. It'd choke to admit I might have a point. Just remember, It wasn't I who wrote it and it wasn't I who chose what tense to write it in.
-
Must have been months in the planning then. No mental illness. No psychosis. A cold blooded killer, wouldn't you say?
It may surprise you that it's not only " inheritance killers " who plan in advance. Killers are cold-blooded whether sane or not.
-
'Course it is. It'd choke to admit I might have a point. Just remember, It wasn't I who wrote it and it wasn't I who chose what tense to write it in.
Takes one to know one as they say.
-
I'm afraid Sheila's letter doesn't make sense to me----- though it might to you !
Even your own interpretation of it is questionable.
It doesn't!!!? Well maybe you could employ some the the 'superior' psychological knowledge you claim to be possessed of.
-
It doesn't!!!? Well maybe you could employ some the the 'superior' psychological knowledge you claim to be possessed of.
C'mon,it doesn't take a Philadelphia Lawyer to work it out,or a numbskull for that matter.
-
It may surprise you that it's not only " inheritance killers " who plan in advance. Killers are cold-blooded whether sane or not.
But according to you, a cold blooded Sheila, in order to be so clear sighted wasn't insane. What, then, was her motive?
-
C'mon,it doesn't take a Philadelphia Lawyer to work it out,or a numbskull for that matter.
But you didn't, did you?
-
But according to you, a cold blooded Sheila, in order to be so clear sighted wasn't insane. What, then, was her motive?
You're asking me what her motive was ? Haven't you read anything about WHF at all ?
-
You're asking me what her motive was ? Haven't you read anything about WHF at all ?
I wonder what you're going to put forward. She wasn't mercenary. She adored her boys. She adored her father. Her relationship with June was iffy but I imagine Nevill would have been somewhat put out if she'd killed her. Clear minded and sane, I can see no reason for her to kill. Clear minded and sane, I can see no reason for her to plan to kill. Deeply depressed, as she appeared to be during her last fortnight, she'd have lacked the mental energy required to kill.
-
I say she wasn't. It was only a copy-cat image of what her mother was.
People are religious in their own ways. Sheila's faith was nothing like June's in my opinion. June was a god fearing fundamentalist living day by day as the bible teaches. Whereas Sheila got into it for emotional reasons as her life was going downhill.
-
People are religious in their own ways. Sheila's faith was nothing like June's in my opinion. June was a god fearing fundamentalist living day by day as the bible teaches. Whereas Sheila got into it for emotional reasons as her life was going downhill.
June's diagnosis was religious psychosis,Sheila's wasn't.
Sheila's " religion "was by way of an appeasement for the benefit of her mother.
-
June's diagnosis was religious psychosis,Sheila's wasn't.
Sheila's " religion "was by way of an appeasement for the benefit of her mother.
Despite what's been put forward about her -for fairly obvious reasons, I'm inclined to think- I'm beginning to wonder if Sheila actually had 'religion'. Saying she'd "found God in a simple way" is almost like her saying she believed as opposed to disbelieved. It MAY have been an appeasement to June. I think she was spiritual -she may also have been introspective- but that's a world away from being religious.
-
Despite what's been put forward about her -for fairly obvious reasons, I'm inclined to think- I'm beginning to wonder if Sheila actually had 'religion'. Saying she'd "found God in a simple way" is almost like her saying she believed as opposed to disbelieved. It MAY have been an appeasement to June. I think she was spiritual -she may also have been introspective- but that's a world away from being religious.
Sheila and Colin often visited the clairvoyant friend of theirs--------mentioned in his book.
-
They did and I read one of her books Lookout, was quite a while ago and can't remember much about it but I was curious at the time.
Sheila and Colin often visited the clairvoyant friend of theirs--------mentioned in his book.
-
Sheila and Colin often visited the clairvoyant friend of theirs--------mentioned in his book.
It is. I think both she and Colin were spiritual. It wouldn't have impacted on his atheism.
-
For the first time I found myself looking into the contents of Sheila's letter and reading what is possibly an underlying message. She makes it clear that she hadn't wanted to be there. WHY is she telling Ann and Peter that she's not in hospital because of gynae problems. She seems to feel it's important that they know this and goes into huge detail to refute it. Might it be that June had told them that this was the reason she was there? She seems to be admitting that there HAD been a problem, ie she'd OD'd on God. She speaks very openly about her confused thinking, but she also speaks of it being in the past. The PS about her having "found God in a simple way" almost sounds as if she'd telling them that she's not involved with something which is anything out of the ordinary.
I think this letter is quite touching. However I think it was written in March 1985 and the "all people are bad and should be killed" remark in June if I recall the chronology of the CAL book.
-
It may surprise you that it's not only " inheritance killers " who plan in advance. Killers are cold-blooded whether sane or not.
Do you really think Sheila was planning killing in advance when she was vacant at the party, didn't speak on the way down to the Farm, was blank at the Tiptree shop with lipstick smudged on teeth, was listless all week as she sat round the table with her parents and hardly had strength to pick up the telephone, let alone make conversation with Auntie Pam..
-
This thread really is about Sheila's state of mind in the run-up to the murders and whether she was influenced in any way by her Bible reading.
-
People are religious in their own ways. Sheila's faith was nothing like June's in my opinion. June was a god fearing fundamentalist living day by day as the bible teaches. Whereas Sheila got into it for emotional reasons as her life was going downhill.
But did she ever reject God or was it true as she claimed that she had "found God in a simple way"
-
Do you really think Sheila was planning killing in advance when she was vacant at the party, didn't speak on the way down to the Farm, was blank at the Tiptree shop with lipstick smudged on teeth, was listless all week as she sat round the table with her parents and hardly had strength to pick up the telephone, let alone make conversation with Auntie Pam..
There's every possibility that she'd put deep thought into what she had intended to carry out. Timings for instance of farm workers arriving early morning so the " deed " would have to have been done in advance of that thought.
Her dreaded thoughts of the possibility of losing her sons,a nightmare in itself and of course the last night before the twins were due to go away in the next day or two,so the killings had to be that night come what may.
Sheila must also have pondered her own future in her time of desperation.
It's little wonder that there was nothing else left for her to do other than to wipe away all the misery.
-
People do sink to their lowest ebb and see no way out.Nobody can foretell or foresee what a person is thinking or what their next move is going to be.
Separation plays a huge part in suicides and a lot of people can't cope or deal with it.
-
The point is whether there's something contained in Sheila's bible reading of which Jeremy could claim to have no knowledge but which would implicate her in the crime. Remember he claimed to Julie that this was the "perfect crime", so no trail leading to him, no forensic evidence, him gambling that he had done enough to rope her in as an accessory should she disclose, which makes me think he didn't care much for her in the first place, that she was a mere expedient in the whole process.
-
But did she ever reject God or was it true as she claimed that she had "found God in a simple way"
Steve, reading her letter properly has lead me to believe that Sheila's belief in God was not the all consuming obsession that June's appeared to be. I'd have called it within the parameters of balanced. The letter indicates -by her use of the past tense- that she knew she'd once had very confused thoughts.
-
Steve, reading her letter properly has lead me to believe that Sheila's belief in God was not the all consuming obsession that June's appeared to be. I'd have called it within the parameters of balanced. The letter indicates -by her use of the past tense- that she knew she'd once had very confused thoughts.
Yes that's my reading of it as well Jane. I suppose the Defence would have to argue that there was significant deterioration of her though processes in the following four months.
-
There's every possibility that she'd put deep thought into what she had intended to carry out. Timings for instance of farm workers arriving early morning so the " deed " would have to have been done in advance of that thought.
Her dreaded thoughts of the possibility of losing her sons,a nightmare in itself and of course the last night before the twins were due to go away in the next day or two,so the killings had to be that night come what may.
Sheila must also have pondered her own future in her time of desperation.
It's little wonder that there was nothing else left for her to do other than to wipe away all the misery.
Why would she have had thoughts about the possibility of losing the boys? Colin had them already. She had unlimited access. Why would their going away be any different from when they were with Colin during the week?
-
Why would she have had thoughts about the possibility of losing the boys? Colin had them already. She had unlimited access. Why would their going away be any different from when they were with Colin during the week?
Colin had been very worried about leaving the boys in the sole company of Sheila----hence the letter pleading with Nevill that he,Colin,has 100% guardianship of them.
Why was this do you think because in my book it's unusual for a mother not to have full custody of her children ?
-
Colin had been very worried about leaving the boys in the sole company of Sheila----hence the letter pleading with Nevill that he,Colin,has 100% guardianship of them.
Why was this do you think because in my book it's unusual for a mother not to have full custody of her children ?
But that wasn't his main concern in that last letter, but June's influence over them.
-
Colin had been very worried about leaving the boys in the sole company of Sheila----hence the letter pleading with Nevill that he,Colin,has 100% guardianship of them.
Why was this do you think because in my book it's unusual for a mother not to have full custody of her children ?
Leaving aside her mental state, she was probably -if her various career attempts are anything to go by- psychologically flaky. Possibly because she'd had little experience of running a home and family without outside help. Possibly because she simply wasn't interested. It was certainly more unusual then, than now, for a mother not to have full custody of her children, but I'm willing to bet Sheila wasn't the only such case.
-
But that wasn't his main concern in that last letter, but June's influence over them.
It wasn't June he was most concerned about.
-
I asked you the reason why Colin asked for sole control of his sons. Why was that ?
-
It wasn't June he was most concerned about.
It was certainly concern about June which was the main thrust of his letter to Nevill. Indeed, I think the focus of the letter was about how he wanted them to be treated during their stay with her. I believe he speaks about how good it was to see Sheila's improvement.
-
Leaving aside her mental state, she was probably -if her various career attempts are anything to go by- psychologically flaky. Possibly because she'd had little experience of running a home and family without outside help. Possibly because she simply wasn't interested. It was certainly more unusual then, than now, for a mother not to have full custody of her children, but I'm willing to bet Sheila wasn't the only such case.
" Psychologically flaky " isn't a valid reason for not wanting children being alone with their mother.
Let's have the truth !!
-
Mothers who suffer from depression aren't given such an ultimatum.
-
There had been sheer desperation in Colin's letter-------if you have the ability to read between lines.
-
There's no date on this, but this is the letter. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2762.0.html
-
I asked you the reason why Colin asked for sole control of his sons. Why was that ?
And I told you what I thought it may have been. Being an adoring mother isn't necessarily being a good one. I've called her flaky. Is it impossible that she may have had Short Term Memory Syndrome? I know a single, very loving mother who has this and before she had a partner she had a whole team of social workers helping her to cope with her two boys daily needs.
-
Why would she have had thoughts about the possibility of losing the boys? Colin had them already. She had unlimited access. Why would their going away be any different from when they were with Colin during the week?
Surely no one can answer these questons unless we know the true state of Sheila's mind at that time. A young woman who I have known from a very early age had a child and is now suffering from post partem psychosis, she is 'stabalised' on medication but totally unpredictable and chaotic. Her parents have moved house so both she and her son can live with them because the daughter is unfit to be left alone to care for the child. She does nothing for her son who is now school age and in fact her parents have custody of the boy although she believes they have joint custody. All cases are different but the assumption that Sheila was in any way capable of caring for the boys doesn't mean she was but at the same time the assumption that Sheila was happy with Colin having the boys 100% of the time is also unproven. She may have hated and resented the situation blaming June and Nevill for the situation therefore was easily tipped over the edge by the complete loss of them for 2 weeks. It's a long time to not see your young children at the best of timrs and and Sheila's mental health may have been 'stabalised' but that doesn't mean her reasoning was predictable and responsible by normal standards.
-
There had been sheer desperation in Colin's letter-------if you have the ability to read between lines.
But however much you want it to read that way, it was JUNE -not Sheila- who was the focus of his concern. He was probably aware that Sheila would be unlikely to oppose her. He was more concerned about what effect it would have on the boys that about what it would do to Sheila, I think.
-
Thanks Steve. That man was desperate and very concerned to the point of expressing real fear.
Had he known or had some sort of premonition that something dreadful was going to happen ? I very much think so.
-
Certain things stay in my mind and that was one of them. You do have to fear for him.
-
Surely no one can answer these questons unless we know the true state of Sheila's mind at that time. A young woman who I have known from a very early age had a child and is now suffering from post partem psychosis, she is 'stabalised' on medication but totally unpredictable and chaotic. Her parents have moved house so both she and her son can live with them because the daughter is unfit to be left alone to care for the child. She does nothing for her son who is now school age and in fact her parents have custody of the boy although she believes they have joint custody. All cases are different but the assumption that Sheila was in any way capable of caring for the boys doesn't mean she was but at the same time the assumption that Sheila was happy with Colin having the boys 100% of the time is also unproven. She may have hated and resented the situation blaming June and Nevill for the situation therefore was easily tipped over the edge by the complete loss of them for 2 weeks. It's a long time to not see your young children at the best of timrs and and Sheila's mental health may have been 'stabalised' but that doesn't mean her reasoning was predictable and responsible by normal standards.
I'm assuming nothing of the sort. I suspect she was decidedly INcapable of caring for children.
-
Surely no one can answer these questons unless we know the true state of Sheila's mind at that time. A young woman who I have known from a very early age had a child and is now suffering from post partem psychosis, she is 'stabalised' on medication but totally unpredictable and chaotic. Her parents have moved house so both she and her son can live with them because the daughter is unfit to be left alone to care for the child. She does nothing for her son who is now school age and in fact her parents have custody of the boy although she believes they have joint custody. All cases are different but the assumption that Sheila was in any way capable of caring for the boys doesn't mean she was but at the same time the assumption that Sheila was happy with Colin having the boys 100% of the time is also unproven. She may have hated and resented the situation blaming June and Nevill for the situation therefore was easily tipped over the edge by the complete loss of them for 2 weeks. It's a long time to not see your young children at the best of timrs and and Sheila's mental health may have been 'stabalised' but that doesn't mean her reasoning was predictable and responsible by normal standards.
But was she guilty of neglect or was she wilfully harming them? My opinion is the former. She had care and control of her sons at weekends and this arrangement seemed to work perfectly fine. It was June who used her weekly trip to London to cajole her grandsons into making unscheduled trips to White House Farm, overriding both Sheila and Colin's wishes on the subject.
-
A few mothers can be deemed " incapable " but it's not to say that with help from the right quarters that these mothers can't make a go of it.
Sheila by the sound of things was beyond help and I would have said a risk particularly as it had been said that her health had deteriorated on her last admission to St Andrews given the mental state she'd been in at that time.
-
Mothers who suffer from depression aren't given such an ultimatum.
Perhaps if you could give us a clear and definitive breakdown of what you believe her to have been suffering from we can debate it from there. I'll give you my opinion. I think, initially, she had the sort of problems regarding who she was and where she fitted which are common to many, both bio and adopted (although that has associated problems), who've been channeled into situations where they don't feel they fit. I believe therapy could have helped her find direction. If there were any other underlying mental problems -such as STMS which MAY explain why she never achieved anything- it wouldn't have been picked up at the sort of schools she attended. The termination and subsequent miscarriages, if she wasn't given space to grieve, very likely resulted in depression. The PS might have been the result of the culmination of the previous emotional trauma.
-
A few mothers can be deemed " incapable " but it's not to say that with help from the right quarters that these mothers can't make a go of it.
Sheila by the sound of things was beyond help and I would have said a risk particularly as it had been said that her health had deteriorated on her last admission to St Andrews given the mental state she'd been in at that time.
Sheila certainly wasn't beyond help. She just wasn't getting the right help. You can't NOT know that the reason her health had deteriorated was because she wasn't taking her medication. It was the reason it was given by injection.
-
But was she guilty of neglect or was she wilfully harming them? My opinion is the former. She had care and control of her sons at weekends and this arrangement seemed to work perfectly fine. It was June who used her weekly trip to London to cajole her grandsons into making unscheduled trips to White House Farm, overriding both Sheila and Colin's wishes on the subject.
Whether 'neglect' or 'wilfully harming' this means little to the child who needs a safe and secure environment. However it's dressed up and whatever name it's given schizophrenia or psychosis the illness Sheila had made her unable to be a safe pair of hands for her boys, that is surely a fact. However much Sheila may have loved her boys she would not have been well enough to keep them safe although she may have believed differently. We have to remember that psychosis whatever the cause is a state of altered consciousness and hardly conducive to caring for 2 little boys. We b3lieve medication solves everything but it dpesnt, medication has side effects and Haloperidol can have side effects which mimic psychosis. Sheila couldn't help her state of mind but even with medication she was not a fit mother because that is the nature of this horrible illness. You always blame June and I agree some of June's quoted behavour is not good however she cared enough to go up to London and see her daughter and grandsons and to take food for them and check how they were. Isn't that normal behavour of a mother who cared? I support my children amd make sure they are coping and can pay their bills. Sheila was ill and couldnt hold down a job what a terrible worry that must have been for June and Nevill, Im sure they spent a fortune trying to help her. Was it not reasonable for June and Nevill to want their grandchildren to go and stay with them? So Colin didn't agree with June's prayers etc and I can see that must have been a difficult problem but in all fairness Colin had done very well out of the Bambers living rent free etc. Sheila was ill and no doubt totally self obsessed as is the nature of her illness and before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish. From a parents point of view the whole situation must have been a nightmare they were constantly trying to solve.
-
Whether 'neglect' or 'wilfully harming' this means little to the child who needs a safe and secure environment. However it's dressed up and whatever name it's given schizophrenia or psychosis the illness Sheila had made her unable to be a safe pair of hands for her boys, that is surely a fact. However much Sheila may have loved her boys she would not have been well enough to keep them safe although she may have believed differently. We have to remember that psychosis whatever the cause is a state of altered consciousness and hardly conducive to caring for 2 little boys. We b3lieve medication solves everything but it dpesnt, medication has side effects and Haloperidol can have side effects which mimic psychosis. Sheila couldn't help her state of mind but even with medication she was not a fit mother because that is the nature of this horrible illness. You always blame June and I agree some of June's quoted behavour is not good however she cared enough to go up to London and see her daughter and grandsons and to take food for them and check how they were. Isn't that normal behavour of a mother who cared? I support my children amd make sure they are coping and can pay their bills. Sheila was ill and couldnt hold down a job what a terrible worry that must have been for June and Nevill, Im sure they spent a fortune trying to help her. Was it not reasonable for June and Nevill to want their grandchildren to go and stay with them? So Colin didn't agree with June's prayers etc and I can see that must have been a difficult problem but in all fairness Colin had done very well out of the Bambers living rent free etc. Sheila was ill and no doubt totally self obsessed as is the nature of her illness and before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish. From a parents point of view the whole situation must have been a nightmare they were constantly trying to solve.
But June made arrangements on the hoof and expected the parents of her grandchildren to fall in with her plans. Colin far from complaining about the burden of caring for two young boys seemed to relish fatherhood and away from the effects of Sheila's behaviour towards him had found a new niche, albeit as a stay at home father, who at times also worked on an antiques stall and threw the odd pot in Herbie's shed.
-
Whether 'neglect' or 'wilfully harming' this means little to the child who needs a safe and secure environment. However it's dressed up and whatever name it's given schizophrenia or psychosis the illness Sheila had made her unable to be a safe pair of hands for her boys, that is surely a fact. However much Sheila may have loved her boys she would not have been well enough to keep them safe although she may have believed differently. We have to remember that psychosis whatever the cause is a state of altered consciousness and hardly conducive to caring for 2 little boys. We b3lieve medication solves everything but it dpesnt, medication has side effects and Haloperidol can have side effects which mimic psychosis. Sheila couldn't help her state of mind but even with medication she was not a fit mother because that is the nature of this horrible illness. You always blame June and I agree some of June's quoted behavour is not good however she cared enough to go up to London and see her daughter and grandsons and to take food for them and check how they were. Isn't that normal behavour of a mother who cared? I support my children amd make sure they are coping and can pay their bills. Sheila was ill and couldnt hold down a job what a terrible worry that must have been for June and Nevill, Im sure they spent a fortune trying to help her. Was it not reasonable for June and Nevill to want their grandchildren to go and stay with them? So Colin didn't agree with June's prayers etc and I can see that must have been a difficult problem but in all fairness Colin had done very well out of the Bambers living rent free etc. Sheila was ill and no doubt totally self obsessed as is the nature of her illness and before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish. From a parents point of view the whole situation must have been a nightmare they were constantly trying to solve.
I concur with that entire "other side of the coin" view................with a few riders. Children don't need to have bucket loads of money thrown at the in order to make them feel loved and safe, but it seems as if June may have been of the opinion that it was all that was required of motherhood. Nor must we forget that whilst they appear to have spent time chasing around after Sheila's needs and lavishing money on her next school/potential career/accommodation/food/utilities/children/ son in law there was a son, probably looking in from the outside and perhaps wondering what he had to do to get their attention. I really don't think it would be a surprise to learn that the so became resentful and may have decided early on that he didn't want to work at something he didn't enjoy to provide his sister and her family with the lifestyle she'd become accustomed to expect.
-
I concur with that entire "other side of the coin" view................with a few riders. Children don't need to have bucket loads of money thrown at the in order to make them feel loved and safe, but it seems as if June may have been of the opinion that it was all that was required of motherhood. Nor must we forget that whilst they appear to have spent time chasing around after Sheila's needs and lavishing money on her next school/potential career/accommodation/food/utilities/children/ son in law there was a son, probably looking in from the outside and perhaps wondering what he had to do to get their attention. I really don't think it would be a surprise to learn that the so became resentful and may have decided early on that he didn't want to work at something he didn't enjoy to provide his sister and her family with the lifestyle she'd become accustomed to expect.
..and of course a damaged Jeremy to whom his parents had barely addressed half a dozen words of comfort all his life except to lay down the law suddenly witnessed them learning from their mistakes and lavishing attention on their grandchildren on those rare opportunities they saw them, reading them stories and attempting to build the trust they never had with their own son, except of course in the back of his mind was the adoption issue, that primal wound of not being his real parents, and really would it make any difference emotionally if none of them was around anymore..
-
Perhaps if you could give us a clear and definitive breakdown of what you believe her to have been suffering from we can debate it from there. I'll give you my opinion. I think, initially, she had the sort of problems regarding who she was and where she fitted which are common to many, both bio and adopted (although that has associated problems), who've been channeled into situations where they don't feel they fit. I believe therapy could have helped her find direction. If there were any other underlying mental problems -such as STMS which MAY explain why she never achieved anything- it wouldn't have been picked up at the sort of schools she attended. The termination and subsequent miscarriages, if she wasn't given space to grieve, very likely resulted in depression. The PS might have been the result of the culmination of the previous emotional trauma.
In a nutshell,
A Personality Disorder.
-
..and of course a damaged Jeremy to whom his parents had barely addressed half a dozen words of comfort all his life except to lay down the law suddenly witnessed his parents learning from their mistakes and lavishing attention on their grandchildren on those rare opportunities they saw them, reading them stories and attempting to build the trust they never had with their own son, except of course in the back of his mind was the adoption issue, that primal wound of not being his real parents, and really would it make any difference emotionally if none of them was around anymore..
Oh yes, Steve. We're hearing more and more of modern day slavery. It's not impossible that Jeremy felt trapped, albeit in a more comfortable prison.
-
In a nutshell,
A Personality Disorder.
And who of us, on a scale of 1 to 10, can't be said to have one of those?
-
This disorder may have been initially borderline but without the knowledge of it having been a personality disorder would have manifested itself into a full-blown mental illness.
One cause being from a childhood point of view when stability had been at a premium as June had to undergo treatment herself and Sheila was " passed around " various carers.
School years were fraught with behavioural problems when she'd been excluded/expelled then as a young teenager found herself pregnant.
Later it was drug abuse which she probably used to stem the anxiety that had gripped her and so it went on.
I would say that it's a lot more difficult to tread PD than it is a paranoid schizophrenic. With PD there are far more issues in which to deal with though if left untreated can cause schizophrenia.
-
Oh yes, Steve. We're hearing more and more of modern day slavery. It's not impossible that Jeremy felt trapped, albeit in a more comfortable prison.
Slavery ? Jeremy and Slavery don't gel.
-
Slavery ? Jeremy and Slavery don't gel.
ANYONE who feels themselves to be trapped is enslaved.
-
This disorder may have been initially borderline but without the knowledge of it having been a personality disorder would have manifested itself into a full-blown mental illness.
One cause being from a childhood point of view when stability had been at a premium as June had to undergo treatment herself and Sheila was " passed around " various carers.
School years were fraught with behavioural problems when she'd been excluded/expelled then as a young teenager found herself pregnant.
Later it was drug abuse which she probably used to stem the anxiety that had gripped her and so it went on.
I would say that it's a lot more difficult to tread PD than it is a paranoid schizophrenic. With PD there are far more issues in which to deal with though if left untreated can cause schizophrenia.
But her whole brief life was characterized by powerlessness: she had no control over her parents, no control over her choice of school, no say in her dress code, no close friends to turn to who could save her from the bullying, the manipulation by her employers on the modelling assignment to Japan, coupled with that lonely existence in Moreshead Mansions akin to the lifestyle that drove Cecil Parkinson's daughter to suicide. Was there a hankering for some power as she baited Colin and drove him away into the arms of another woman, or was she by this stage too sick to feel as a sentient human being drifting from one day to the next, her sons realizing this was far from normal yet still fiercely loyal towards their mother and her brief periods of lucidity on Paddington Recreation Ground as they played as children should high on the swings, returning to their fragile mother for the sleepover until their father collected then on Sunday evening ready for the new school week and safe in his care?
-
I'm just reading about an incident which occurred last year involving a young male,21,who was shouting " Everyone must die ". This happened in a train station when the man went on a rampage with a sharp piece of metal and a bag of spanners ( not a gun ) and the guard on the train kept all the passengers locked in their carriages until police arrived.
Nobody went near him !! He'd told the Merseyrail staff not to go near him and he wouldn't go near them.
Once the police arrived,Tasers at the ready,they withdrew them and the man sank to his knees before being taken to hospital. He had no legal representation as he'd admitted what he'd done and told police he no longer wanted to carry out his threat.
However,it came about that he'd been previously jailed for a savage attack on his mother who was severely injured. Fractured skull,bleed on the brain,multiple lacerations to her head and body.
The station offence had been committed a day after having been released for a different offence.
His defendant stated that he remains to pose a danger and that " clearly this young man has got problems "???.
He was jailed for 8 months with a restraining order to stay away from his mother.
Not once was any given mental illness mentioned,only that he was now taking his medication ? For what?
My argument here is : 1 young man--no gun and some burly rail staff not to mention the public,couldn't contain this man who was sailing close to the wind being near to live rails holding a bag of spanners and a piece of metal ?
It's only by reading something like this that it stands to sense that Sheila,armed with a gun against just 2 adults could have easily overpowered them no problem.
-
Whether 'neglect' or 'wilfully harming' this means little to the child who needs a safe and secure environment. However it's dressed up and whatever name it's given schizophrenia or psychosis the illness Sheila had made her unable to be a safe pair of hands for her boys, that is surely a fact. However much Sheila may have loved her boys she would not have been well enough to keep them safe although she may have believed differently. We have to remember that psychosis whatever the cause is a state of altered consciousness and hardly conducive to caring for 2 little boys. We b3lieve medication solves everything but it dpesnt, medication has side effects and Haloperidol can have side effects which mimic psychosis. Sheila couldn't help her state of mind but even with medication she was not a fit mother because that is the nature of this horrible illness. You always blame June and I agree some of June's quoted behavour is not good however she cared enough to go up to London and see her daughter and grandsons and to take food for them and check how they were. Isn't that normal behavour of a mother who cared? I support my children amd make sure they are coping and can pay their bills. Sheila was ill and couldnt hold down a job what a terrible worry that must have been for June and Nevill, Im sure they spent a fortune trying to help her. Was it not reasonable for June and Nevill to want their grandchildren to go and stay with them? So Colin didn't agree with June's prayers etc and I can see that must have been a difficult problem but in all fairness Colin had done very well out of the Bambers living rent free etc. Sheila was ill and no doubt totally self obsessed as is the nature of her illness and before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish. From a parents point of view the whole situation must have been a nightmare they were constantly trying to solve.
"Before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish". I'd like to look at this claim a bit closer. If we look at it from the aspect of men SHOULDN'T impregnate women who they're not married to, I expect he was. If we believe that having done so they SHOULD marry them, I guess he did his bit, there. If we expect that for ever after he SHOULD keep her, only, to himself, he certainly did act selfishly. But making babies takes two people. Did Sheila seek to keep him by becoming pregnant? Might he have been losing interest already, having decided that the relationship wasn't for the long haul? It was, undoubtedly not a match made for duration much past immediacy but as he was being pressured by Sheila's parents who, it seems, were prepared to offer him anything to marry her, I guess he decided to make the best of a bad situation. If he thought he was getting a domestic goddess he was probably sadly mistaken. I don't imagine Sheila had picked up the fine art of house keeping, and was probably more about care taking than care giving. For a married woman, supposed to be capable of standing on her own feet, I think she'd have been pretty hopeless, still relying on her parents to fund impossible career opportunities and pay bills, and hurling pans at Colin out of frustration. Life must have gone downhill rapidly for both of them. OK. He SHOULD have stayed. He SHOULD have taken on the responsibility for making the marriage work -he SHOULDN'T have made her pregnant. Some might say it was his punishment for doing so- but he obviously couldn't give her what she wanted and she probably knew this. He may have been able to do. It would have been his inability to feel that would have caused the problems. He adored the boys he seems to have taken full responsibility for. He didn't adore their mother. For a girl who may have felt as if she'd never been loved it probably felt like a kick in the teeth. It may even have exacerbated whatever condition ailed her. It was possibly as toxic a match as the one she experienced with June.
-
"Before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish". I'd like to look at this claim a bit closer. If we look at it from the aspect of men SHOULDN'T impregnate women who they're not married to, I expect he was. If we believe that having done so they SHOULD marry them, I guess he did his bit, there. If we expect that for ever after he SHOULD keep her, only, to himself, he certainly did act selfishly. But making babies takes two people. Did Sheila seek to keep him by becoming pregnant? Might he have been losing interest already, having decided that the relationship wasn't for the long haul? It was, undoubtedly not a match made for duration much past immediacy but as he was being pressured by Sheila's parents who, it seems, were prepared to offer him anything to marry her, I guess he decided to make the best of a bad situation. If he thought he was getting a domestic goddess he was probably sadly mistaken. I don't imagine Sheila had picked up the fine art of house keeping, and was probably more about care taking than care giving. For a married woman, supposed to be capable of standing on her own feet, I think she'd have been pretty hopeless, still relying on her parents to fund impossible career opportunities and pay bills, and hurling pans at Colin out of frustration. Life must have gone downhill rapidly for both of them. OK. He SHOULD have stayed. He SHOULD have taken on the responsibility for making the marriage work -he SHOULDN'T have made her pregnant. Some might say it was his punishment for doing so- but he obviously couldn't give her what she wanted and she probably knew this. He may have been able to do. It would have been his inability to feel that would have caused the problems. He adored the boys he seems to have taken full responsibility for. He didn't adore their mother. For a girl who may have felt as if she'd never been loved it probably felt like a kick in the teeth. It may even have exacerbated whatever condition ailed her. It was possibly as toxic a match as the one she experienced with June.
..are we really expected to believe Sheila was so consumed with hate that she would extirpate her boys just to get back at Colin? I can't believe it..
-
..are we really expected to believe Sheila was so consumed with hate that she would extirpate her boys just to get back at Colin? I can't believe it..
STEVE!!! Is that how my post came across?!!! NO, no, no! Not for a moment was I suggesting such.
-
Mothers kill their children out of Love not Hate.
-
STEVE!!! Is that how my post came across?!!! NO, no, no! Not for a moment was I suggesting such.
No that's fine Jane; it did not.
-
Mothers kill their children out of Love not Hate.
But "all people are bad and should be killed" suggests some grievance, I would have thought.
-
But "all people are bad and should be killed" suggests some grievance, I would have thought.
Yes it does but in Sheila's mind her statement was meant or directed toward those who she couldn't stand up to and not necessarily aimed at her children or anyone else's. She lacked assertion and had preferred to put her feelings in writing rather than verbal confrontation.
-
But "all people are bad and should be killed" suggests some grievance, I would have thought.
Steve,it does. On it's own. But this is one of the many 'mantras' arising from the case. We're told by BW? the house keeper? that the words were said in her presence. However, did she hear the words which preceded them? Did she describe the tone in which the words were said? The words sound remarkably childlike and immature, don't you think? Considering how I might say the words, IF I were to say them, I'd express them rather differently.
-
"Before the tragedy Colin was totally selfish". I'd like to look at this claim a bit closer. If we look at it from the aspect of men SHOULDN'T impregnate women who they're not married to, I expect he was. If we believe that having done so they SHOULD marry them, I guess he did his bit, there. If we expect that for ever after he SHOULD keep her, only, to himself, he certainly did act selfishly. But making babies takes two people. Did Sheila seek to keep him by becoming pregnant? Might he have been losing interest already, having decided that the relationship wasn't for the long haul? It was, undoubtedly not a match made for duration much past immediacy but as he was being pressured by Sheila's parents who, it seems, were prepared to offer him anything to marry her, I guess he decided to make the best of a bad situation. If he thought he was getting a domestic goddess he was probably sadly mistaken. I don't imagine Sheila had picked up the fine art of house keeping, and was probably more about care taking than care giving. For a married woman, supposed to be capable of standing on her own feet, I think she'd have been pretty hopeless, still relying on her parents to fund impossible career opportunities and pay bills, and hurling pans at Colin out of frustration. Life must have gone downhill rapidly for both of them. OK. He SHOULD have stayed. He SHOULD have taken on the responsibility for making the marriage work -he SHOULDN'T have made her pregnant. Some might say it was his punishment for doing so- but he obviously couldn't give her what she wanted and she probably knew this. He may have been able to do. It would have been his inability to feel that would have caused the problems. He adored the boys he seems to have taken full responsibility for. He didn't adore their mother. For a girl who may have felt as if she'd never been loved it probably felt like a kick in the teeth. It may even have exacerbated whatever condition ailed her. It was possibly as toxic a match as the one she experienced with June.
I think he admitted himself that he didn't behave well. I think having sex with someone else at your wedding is a little bit hard to believe and he was doing exactly what he wanted to do maybe apart from marrying Sheila. We cannot judge him on today's culture, life and attitudes were very different back then and it's not the least surprising that the Bambers expected him to marry Sheila and look after her. I'm not into knocking Colin as he was young, probavly naïve however the relationship seems to have been a disaster from start to finish and I cannot see how people can blame the Bambers when all they tried to do was help them as much as possible. I have great respect for Colin and how he coped after such an appalling tragedy but those two were not equipped for a stable relationship when they married. It was a common enough disaster of a marriage in those days except most didn't end in such appalling circumstances. Of course it's not payback, imo Sheila was probably already showing signs of mental illness. Paranoid Schizophrenic's tend to have out of control anger such as Sheila had. She was probably hell to live with and however much he may have tried it was always going to end badly. Very happy that Colin has found peace and mean to go to his gallery sometime ASAP as I love his work shown online. 6
-
'Interbreeding', that's the message that I got from Speaking to Jeremy during the early days of my involvement in his case, that area of Tolleshunt D'Arcy was a hot bed for various families in the farming communities to all be related in some way by blood!
I also do not believe that Marsham is Jeremy Bambers paternal father, I believe its more likely to be Prince Phillip...
-
Jeremy looks too much like his bio-father Mike and also has a look of his sister Sophie.
-
Also his brother has a look of Jeremy as he's got older too,so there's no doubting who the father is.
-
Also his brother has a look of Jeremy as he's got older too,so there's no doubting who the father is.
Distasteful as the suggestion was, Lookout, I doubt there's any chance of it being taken seriously.
-
..are we really expected to believe Sheila was so consumed with hate that she would extirpate her boys just to get back at Colin? I can't believe it..
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-equation/201209/is-why-i-killed-your-kids (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-equation/201209/is-why-i-killed-your-kids)
-
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-equation/201209/is-why-i-killed-your-kids (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-human-equation/201209/is-why-i-killed-your-kids)
Their relationship wasn't similar to those you quote.
-
I would hate to think that Sheila killed her boys in an act of revenge but unfortunately you have to look at her situation with Colin having wanted to care for them in a full-time capacity then her mother was speaking of fostering them out. Did anyone consider Sheila or even the children themselves ? I don't think so. Then of course it would have been a case of " if I can't have my sons nobody else is having them ".
Dr Ferguson did say that if fostering was mentioned Sheila would have taken it badly.
-
I would hate to think that Sheila killed her boys in an act of revenge but unfortunately you have to look at her situation with Colin having wanted to care for them in a full-time capacity then her mother was speaking of fostering them out. Did anyone consider Sheila or even the children themselves ? I don't think so. Then of course it would have been a case of " if I can't have my sons nobody else is having them ".
Dr Ferguson did say that if fostering was mentioned Sheila would have taken it badly.
The note found inside the house that Romeo done a good job on deciphering might hold some clues.
MUMMY DARLING,
STOP LOOKING AT MY PICTURE YOU WILL BREAK YOUR HEART
? ? JUST REMEMBER I AM YOUR DAUGHTER BAMBI. ? ? BORN 3. 3. 57.
AND NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT AWAY FROM YOU AND I.
THE SUN NEWSPAPER & THE POLICE ARE GOING TO BE IN TOUCH SOON AND GET THIS ? DIRTY MESS CLEARED UP AND I MUST SAY IT IS A ? DIRTY MESSY BUSINESS. AS I SAID BEFORE TURN OVER THE STONE & A LOT A DIRTY BUGS WILL CRAWL OUT. OH MUMMY DON’T YOU THINK I HAVE FEELINGS ALSO ON THIS FLOATING SPACE I AM IN. AS SOON AS THE DIRT IS DUG UP AND THE PUBLIC NO, THEN MY DARLING MUMMY WELL ( will) MY BABYS AND I GO TO (our) MY REST.
WE NO (what) AWFUL STRAIN YOU’RE GOING THROUGH ? ALL THE TEARS AND PAIN I WOULD DEARLY …….
? MUMMY, PLEASE DON’T BREAK YOUR HEART YOU WILL BE OK
SYC IS LOOKING AFTER YOU. THESE PEOPLE IN AUTHORITY WILL BE ROUND FARM
WHY DO YOU THINK I (WE? )COME TO YOU BECAUSE GOD TOLD ME I HAD TO CALM you NOW. MUMMY CALM. WE ARE BOTH HERE WITH YOU
BLESS VINCENT MUMMY DON’T LET HIM SEE YOU SO HURT
I DON’T EXPECT HIM BEING HERE WHILE I CALM YOU. SYC IS ALSO GIVING YOU STRENGTH SO YOU ARE READY WHEN THE SUN AND POLICE CALL BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO.
MY DEAREST MOTHER, I NO YOU WERE UPSET VINCENT I SMACKED YOU ROTTEN AND ROBUST TWINS RE LAUGHING TWO THEY LEFT UPSET
-
The note found inside the house that Romeo done a good job on deciphering might hold some clues.
MUMMY DARLING,
STOP LOOKING AT MY PICTURE YOU WILL BREAK YOUR HEART
? ? JUST REMEMBER I AM YOUR DAUGHTER BAMBI. ? ? BORN 3. 3. 57.
AND NO ONE CAN TAKE THAT AWAY FROM YOU AND I.
THE SUN NEWSPAPER & THE POLICE ARE GOING TO BE IN TOUCH SOON AND GET THIS ? DIRTY MESS CLEARED UP AND I MUST SAY IT IS A ? DIRTY MESSY BUSINESS. AS I SAID BEFORE TURN OVER THE STONE & A LOT A DIRTY BUGS WILL CRAWL OUT. OH MUMMY DON’T YOU THINK I HAVE FEELINGS ALSO ON THIS FLOATING SPACE I AM IN. AS SOON AS THE DIRT IS DUG UP AND THE PUBLIC NO, THEN MY DARLING MUMMY WELL ( will) MY BABYS AND I GO TO (our) MY REST.
WE NO (what) AWFUL STRAIN YOU’RE GOING THROUGH ? ALL THE TEARS AND PAIN I WOULD DEARLY …….
? MUMMY, PLEASE DON’T BREAK YOUR HEART YOU WILL BE OK
SYC IS LOOKING AFTER YOU. THESE PEOPLE IN AUTHORITY WILL BE ROUND FARM
WHY DO YOU THINK I (WE? )COME TO YOU BECAUSE GOD TOLD ME I HAD TO CALM you NOW. MUMMY CALM. WE ARE BOTH HERE WITH YOU
BLESS VINCENT MUMMY DON’T LET HIM SEE YOU SO HURT
I DON’T EXPECT HIM BEING HERE WHILE I CALM YOU. SYC IS ALSO GIVING YOU STRENGTH SO YOU ARE READY WHEN THE SUN AND POLICE CALL BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO.
MY DEAREST MOTHER, I NO YOU WERE UPSET VINCENT I SMACKED YOU ROTTEN AND ROBUST TWINS RE LAUGHING TWO THEY LEFT UPSET
I think it must be a forgery or surely the Defence would have flogged this for all it was worth. She was born in July so there's at least one inaccuracy there.
-
Steve it's not meant to make sense Sheila was rambling. The 3.3.57 possibly held some significance as whoever it was will now be 61 ? Maybe a friend ?
It's not a forgery as the original letter needs a bit of deciphering written by the hand of a disturbed person.
The letter didn't turn up until later because EP hadn't attached any interest in it besides them not having any knowledge of mental health issues. I believe that the person ( EP ) who originally found it just shoved it in his pocket and because nobody could understand head nor tail of it was then bunged in with other paperwork and forgotten/ignored.
It would have then been sent with other documents that JB had requested.
-
I think it must be a forgery or surely the Defence would have flogged this for all it was worth. She was born in July so there's at least one inaccuracy there.
And I think, Steve, You're entirely correct. Like much else here, it's yet another fakery/forgery/figment of imagination put out in attempt to convince us of Jeremy's innocence -and another reason I changed to guilty- surely innocence is innocence so why is the truth not sufficient, indeed, the more lies put out there in attempt to make him appear innocent, the more guilty supporters make him appear.
-
Steve it's not meant to make sense Sheila was rambling. The 3.3.57 possibly held some significance as whoever it was will now be 61 ? Maybe a friend ?
It's not a forgery as the original letter needs a bit of deciphering written by the hand of a disturbed person.
The letter didn't turn up until later because EP hadn't attached any interest in it besides them not having any knowledge of mental health issues. I believe that the person ( EP ) who originally found it just shoved it in his pocket and because nobody could understand head nor tail of it was then bunged in with other paperwork and forgotten/ignored.
It would have then been sent with other documents that JB had requested.
And of course, it's impossible for anyone to fake the writings of the disturbed. NOT!!
-
Studies of suicides found that " love " was a feature in the note/letter. The person was usually divorced and who lived alone. Wasn't under any medical supervision,hadn't visited a GP recently and less often under psychiatric care. The writers were often in psychological distress but not angry,sad or withdrawn. Less often confused or psychotic but more often hypochondriacs.
Writers killed themselves more often when in interpersonal conflict with others and use gas,firearms and poison as a method. It seems that those who wrote a note and were in conflict had more need to communicate with others
In contrast those who don't leave a note tend to be more medically ill and under psychiatric care making it obvious to others that their decision was significant.
Dr Ferguson hadn't taken Sheila's problem as seriously as he should when she'd said she could kill her sons. If he knew about her relationship with her mother then far more should have been done which could have avoided what happened.
Besides a handwriting expert there is also need for someone trained in suicidology to confirm that the notes really are genuine before adding them to any submission.
-
And I think, Steve, You're entirely correct. Like much else here, it's yet another fakery/forgery/figment of imagination put out in attempt to convince us of Jeremy's innocence -and another reason I changed to guilty- surely innocence is innocence so why is the truth not sufficient, indeed, the more lies put out there in attempt to make him appear innocent, the more guilty supporters make him appear.
Can you say who wrote it ?
-
And of course, it's impossible for anyone to fake the writings of the disturbed. NOT!!
The wording of a note is key and someone who's conversant with such would know if it was a fake or genuine.
-
And I think, Steve, You're entirely correct. Like much else here, it's yet another fakery/forgery/figment of imagination put out in attempt to convince us of Jeremy's innocence -and another reason I changed to guilty- surely innocence is innocence so why is the truth not sufficient, indeed, the more lies put out there in attempt to make him appear innocent, the more guilty supporters make him appear.
And the more guilty he's made to appear------the more innocent he is !! Works both ways.
-
There's far more documentation proving his innocence than there is his guilt.
-
The wording of a note is key and someone who's conversant with such would know if it was a fake or genuine.
I have never paid too much attention to notes and logs as they are usually ambiguous and prove nothing. I must say if this note is a fake the writer has a gift because in the context of the story of 'an adoption gone wrong' the content is heartbreaking, imo.
-
And the more guilty he's made to appear------the more innocent he is !! Works both ways.
IF he's innocent, untruthful claims aren't necessary.
-
I have never paid too much attention to notes and logs as they are usually ambiguous and prove nothing. I must say if this note is a fake the writer has a gift because in the context of the story of 'an adoption gone wrong' the content is heartbreaking, imo.
I think enough is known about it to make it possible to do, for anyone with an interest in making Sheila appear the culprit.
-
There's far more documentation proving his innocence than there is his guilt.
There absolutely isn't. There is NOTHING which "proves" his innocence.
-
I have never paid too much attention to notes and logs as they are usually ambiguous and prove nothing. I must say if this note is a fake the writer has a gift because in the context of the story of 'an adoption gone wrong' the content is heartbreaking, imo.
It is heartbreaking Maggie and to my mind a real mixture of emotions. Very sad.
-
IF he's innocent, untruthful claims aren't necessary.
Can you elaborate on " untruthful claims ?"
-
There absolutely isn't. There is NOTHING which "proves" his innocence.
Describe this " NOTHING " that you speak of.
-
Studies of suicides found that " love " was a feature in the note/letter. The person was usually divorced and who lived alone. Wasn't under any medical supervision,hadn't visited a GP recently and less often under psychiatric care. The writers were often in psychological distress but not angry,sad or withdrawn. Less often confused or psychotic but more often hypochondriacs.
Writers killed themselves more often when in interpersonal conflict with others and use gas,firearms and poison as a method. It seems that those who wrote a note and were in conflict had more need to communicate with others
In contrast those who don't leave a note tend to be more medically ill and under psychiatric care making it obvious to others that their decision was significant.
Dr Ferguson hadn't taken Sheila's problem as seriously as he should when she'd said she could kill her sons. If he knew about her relationship with her mother then far more should have been done which could have avoided what happened.
Besides a handwriting expert there is also need for someone trained in suicidology to confirm that the notes really are genuine before adding them to any submission.
All of which is generic and none of which means Sheila was responsible. During her second stay in St Andrew's, Sheila had clearly not given him any reason to feel immediate concern for the safety of her children. The ONLY thing which MAY have upset the apple cart is what Jeremy would have us believe transpired at supper on the last evening. Like much else he's said, it's questionable. As it's always likely to be when there's no one to corroborate.
I'm amused by the complacent claim that anything said by Sheila isn't required to make sense to us for it to have made sense to her. There is HUGE indignation that the prosecution didn't have to prove Jeremy did it, only that he COULD have.
-
Can you elaborate on " untruthful claims ?"
Yes, I can. But I won't. Bet you can too. But you won't, either. You might be daft but you're not stupid.
-
Describe this " NOTHING " that you speak of.
Describe those "certainties" that 'prove' his innocence.
-
Look,instead of picking holes in ALL my posts would it be beyond your own capability to write about the guilty side of the case for a change which you support as in debating--------putting your own argument across like you do on the other forum.
Just take a look at your posts-------there's no substance in them, they're all negative views which is not the norm when supporting someone's guilt.
You must have a list as long as your arm in which to discuss otherwise it's just boring reading " he did it,he's guilty,it's fake etc etc where are the explanations to back what you say ?
-
Look,instead of picking holes in ALL my posts would it be beyond your own capability to write about the guilty side of the case for a change which you support as in debating--------putting your own argument across like you do on the other forum.
Just take a look at your posts-------there's no substance in them, they're all negative views which is not the norm when supporting someone's guilt.
You must have a list as long as your arm in which to discuss otherwise it's just boring reading " he did it,he's guilty,it's fake etc etc where are the explanations to back what you say ?
Oi! Get off your high horse. It's NOT picking holes in, it's giving my point of view. It's called debate. Something I note you did precious little of when there was no opposition. Life got boring, didn't it? Oh, and whilst I'm at it, perhaps you'd like to share what I've posted "on the other forum" coz I'm damned if I can recall the last time I did.
It's rich, coming from someone whose opinion has no more substance to it than gut feeling, that you complain that my posts have no substance. Naturally, my views are negative. Why would they be otherwise about someone I believe guilty of the most heinous crime?
-
Oi! Get off your high horse. It's NOT picking holes in, it's giving my point of view. It's called debate. Something I note you did precious little of when there was no opposition. Life got boring, didn't it? Oh, and whilst I'm at it, perhaps you'd like to share what I've posted "on the other forum" coz I'm damned if I can recall the last time I did.
It's rich, coming from someone whose opinion has no more substance to it than gut feeling, that you complain that my posts have no substance. Naturally, my views are negative. Why would they be otherwise about someone I believe guilty of the most heinous crime?
Even a " gut feeling " explains more than you'd imagine. Didn't SJ say he also had a gut feeling about his guilt and look at the case he made out of it ? He was entitled to his conclusion as he was the police !!
-
PS No horse here high or otherwise.
-
I think enough is known about it to make it possible to do, for anyone with an interest in making Sheila appear the culprit.
I donthink dis agree however it would be easy to over do the content whereas this to me hits the right note and brought tears to my eyes. If it is false the author should be commended for their ability to empathise so deeply with a situation which is so difficult for an outsider to understand. However, I am making a comment not trying to prove anything.
-
I donthink dis agree however it would be easy to over do the content whereas this to me hits the right note and brought tears to my eyes. If it is false the author should be commended for their ability to empathise so deeply with a situation which is so difficult for an outsider to understand. However, I am making a comment not trying to prove anything.
Maggie, your post caused me to go back and read the letter -if letter it is- thoroughly, as I did with the actual letter Sheila sent Ann from hospital which revealed NOT -as we all seemed to cling to- that she was still having confused and muddled thoughts re God and her place in the world, and that her friend was the Devil, but that she'd once HAD those thoughts which were now in the past. Possibly, when I originally read them, at a time I believed Jeremy innocent, I did no more than glance at the overall content.
This letter -and I, too, shed tears when I first read it, appears to me, now, to be particularly ambiguous. Rather like sham clairvoyants pull generic information from the 'spirit world'. A mix of very tiny parts the possible with padded out by vast amounts of waffle. You choose to put the ambiguity down to Sheila's mental state. I choose rather to see it as possibly being the brainchild of someone with vested interest in the case in general, and Jeremy's release in particular. Enough is known of her mental state to know that it wasn't balanced, that her thought processes weren't always clear. Cleverly? it's not made entirely clear to which 'mother' she's writing. The absence of anything which might clarify can, of course, be put down to her mental state -the mental state we're being encouraged to believe she was possessed of. References to the "Sun"? I can't imagine that the Bambers would have used it in their outside loo and I'm confident that it wouldn't have been the paper of choice read by Sheila's friends. It was, however, the paper Jeremy chose to try to off load those indecent pictures of Sheila after she was dead.
Personally, I don't believe it would be too arduous a task -if one was so inclined- to search a library or the internet to find examples of the behaviours due to mental disorders and personalize them.
-
I think those letters would have been discounted by now if it was found that they'd been written by som eone else other than Sheila.
Why,when they'd been found,weren't they investigated there and then when everything else which was found went under the microscope.
No negative report has come from the CT re. their handwriting expert saying that they weren't Sheila's in fact the notes have been repeatedly mentioned on Bambertweets which wouldn't be the case if they'd been fake. Besides, JB hadn't known the full extent of Sheila's problem until he'd studied it in the prison library where he probably got the answers he was looking for-------hence his guilt when he said he'd wished he'd known then he'd have supported her more and gone to visit while she was in hospital.
Why would it have to be JB if they'd been written by somebody else ? There were others who had a vested interest and also a grudge against Nevill.
Anyway patience is a virtue ( though try telling that to JB ) so we'll have to wait and see what transpires if any information is given out after submission .
-
I think it must be a forgery or surely the Defence would have flogged this for all it was worth. She was born in July so there's at least one inaccuracy there.
Nope it’s genuine. It was not available to the defence at trial however.
-
What about the note that June left------to be read after her death ?. It's almost like a " pact " between her and Sheila. Neither notes were dated. It's always seemed odd to me. It was signed off as " Mummy " which some said Sheila's bio-mother was known as mummy to Sheila and with June it was Mother ?
-
I think those letters would have been discounted by now if it was found that they'd been written by som eone else other than Sheila.
Why,when they'd been found,weren't they investigated there and then when everything else which was found went under the microscope.
No negative report has come from the CT re. their handwriting expert saying that they weren't Sheila's in fact the notes have been repeatedly mentioned on Bambertweets which wouldn't be the case if they'd been fake. Besides, JB hadn't known the full extent of Sheila's problem until he'd studied it in the prison library where he probably got the answers he was looking for-------hence his guilt when he said he'd wished he'd known then he'd have supported her more and gone to visit while she was in hospital.
Why would it have to be JB if they'd been written by somebody else ? There were others who had a vested interest and also a grudge against Nevill.
Anyway patience is a virtue ( though try telling that to JB ) so we'll have to wait and see what transpires if any information is given out after submission .
Well, to be honest, Lookout, given that none of the other scribblings have been allocated to a named source, I fail to see how one in particular can. As for the CT NOT saying something because it's been found to be true, I'd say exactly the reverse would be so. It also occurs to, me that only yesterday, when I questioned something being in the press, didn't you seem to believe everything found it's way into print? We don't know, of course, that the 'letter' was even found at the time -I can't imagine the press wouldn't have had a field day with it- it seems to have made an appearance out of nowhere. I concur though, that Jeremy probably had access to as many psychology text books in prison as had I, in college. I'll bet he never had to pay for the privilege, either.
-
What about the note that June left------to be read after her death ?. It's almost like a " pact " between her and Sheila. Neither notes were dated. It's always seemed odd to me. It was signed off as " Mummy " which some said Sheila's bio-mother was known as mummy to Sheila and with June it was Mother ?
Given that it was addressed to Nevill, Sheila, and Jeremy, there was hardly anything ambiguous about it origins.
-
Well, to be honest, Lookout, given that none of the other scribblings have been allocated to a named source, I fail to see how one in particular can. As for the CT NOT saying something because it's been found to be true, I'd say exactly the reverse would be so. It also occurs to, me that only yesterday, when I questioned something being in the press, didn't you seem to believe everything found it's way into print? We don't know, of course, that the 'letter' was even found at the time -I can't imagine the press wouldn't have had a field day with it- it seems to have made an appearance out of nowhere. I concur though, that Jeremy probably had access to as many psychology text books in prison as had I, in college. I'll bet he never had to pay for the privilege, either.
What other " scribblings " are they ?
The reason the press didn't get hold of the notes is that they were probably promptly buried in the annals of some police station's strong room------purposely out of sight in case anyone twigged anything.
EP's excuse of not being able to read/understand was just that----an excuse.
-
What other " scribblings " are they ?
The reason the press didn't get hold of the notes is that they were probably promptly buried in the annals of some police station's strong room------purposely out of sight in case anyone twigged anything.
EP's excuse of not being able to read/understand was just that----an excuse.
Did you not know about the 'coded' note? Children's scribble, messages Sheila was being given? The inserts in the Bible? They probably were June's. How about "I HATE THIS PLACE" on the wardrobe door? We're back to same old, same old here. Something appears which has no provenance and the only answer is that it's been squirreled away purposely but has miraculously found it's way into a supporter's hands and turned up here. If only a fraction of those things, which had mysteriously turned up here, had been taken somewhere which, HAD they been valid, would undoubtedly have taken up Jeremy's cause, I suspect by now, there WOULD have been a public outcry. He may even have been free.
-
Nope it’s genuine. It was not available to the defence at trial however.
There are several possibilities and even if it's a genuine letter written in her hand it does not confirm that Sheila is the killer.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/707781/Jeremy-Bamber-supporters-claim-police-ignored-sister-suicide-note-white-farm-essex
-
Police did ignore it----------probably because it didn't say that " Jeremy made her do it ".
-
Police did ignore it----------probably because it didn't say that " Jeremy made her do it ".
So you say. However, I believe it was you who introduced the 'letter' to the forum telling us what you believe the contents to have been but without giving us a source for the information. Even if we're to accept that such a letter ever existed, where would be the proof that it was written at WHF. I'd be more inclined to go with Jeremy having preempted the need for a 'suicide confession' that it coming from Sheila's hand.
-
Maggie, your post caused me to go back and read the letter -if letter it is- thoroughly, as I did with the actual letter Sheila sent Ann from hospital which revealed NOT -as we all seemed to cling to- that she was still having confused and muddled thoughts re God and her place in the world, and that her friend was the Devil, but that she'd once HAD those thoughts which were now in the past. Possibly, when I originally read them, at a time I believed Jeremy innocent, I did no more than glance at the overall content.
This letter -and I, too, shed tears when I first read it, appears to me, now, to be particularly ambiguous. Rather like sham clairvoyants pull generic information from the 'spirit world'. A mix of very tiny parts the possible with padded out by vast amounts of waffle. You choose to put the ambiguity down to Sheila's mental state. I choose rather to see it as possibly being the brainchild of someone with vested interest in the case in general, and Jeremy's release in particular. Enough is known of her mental state to know that it wasn't balanced, that her thought processes weren't always clear. Cleverly? it's not made entirely clear to which 'mother' she's writing. The absence of anything which might clarify can, of course, be put down to her mental state -the mental state we're being encouraged to believe she was possessed of. References to the "Sun"? I can't imagine that the Bambers would have used it in their outside loo and I'm confident that it wouldn't have been the paper of choice read by Sheila's friends. It was, however, the paper Jeremy chose to try to off load those indecent pictures of Sheila after she was dead.
Personally, I don't believe it would be too arduous a task -if one was so inclined- to search a library or the internet to find examples of the behaviours due to mental disorders and personalize them.
Can't disagree with you Jane, all you say is possible. I was surprised at the mention of that paper but it was the 80s and it was riding high as the most notorious scandalmonger so I'm sure Sheila knew the name very well. I don't know, David insists it true and it may or may not be. I also barely red it before but it was very touching in a particular way which made me wonder... not too heavy handed or overly sentimental, so difficult to explain why it felt real and vulnerable but that doesn't mean it is.
-
So you say. However, I believe it was you who introduced the 'letter' to the forum telling us what you believe the contents to have been but without giving us a source for the information. Even if we're to accept that such a letter ever existed, where would be the proof that it was written at WHF. I'd be more inclined to go with Jeremy having preempted the need for a 'suicide confession' that it coming from Sheila's hand.
Did you also note that it was genuine too ?
If you'd taken off your blinkers for a while you'd have found this out years ago if you'd studied the case .
-
You'll also see that reference to the notes was entered on the list of exhibits.
-
Did you also note that it was genuine too ?
If you'd taken off your blinkers for a while you'd have found this out years ago if you'd studied the case .
Why would Jeremy having written it prevent it from being genuine?
-
Why would Jeremy having written it prevent it from being genuine?
You tell me.
-
You're the one who doubts him,not me.
-
You tell me.
You seemed at pains to point out that it was genuine.
-
You seemed at pains to point out that it was genuine.
I'd already said it was,today and 2 years ago how many times do you need convincing ?
It's you who's struggling with the thought that it is,not me------no pain just confidence.
-
I'd already said it was,today and 2 years ago how many times do you need convincing ?
It's you who's struggling with the thought that it is,not me------no pain just confidence.
Like I'd remember what you said 2 years ago. ::) And make no mistake, I don't struggle. I'm quite clear that I don't believe it's from Sheila's hand, freely.
-
Can't disagree with you Jane, all you say is possible. I was surprised at the mention of that paper but it was the 80s and it was riding high as the most notorious scandalmonger so I'm sure Sheila knew the name very well. I don't know, David insists it true and it may or may not be. I also barely red it before but it was very touching in a particular way which made me wonder... not too heavy handed or overly sentimental, so difficult to explain why it felt real and vulnerable but that doesn't mean it is.
I have demonstrated this to be authentic all ready. This letter and examples of Sheila's handwritimg were kept in the same box during the COLP investigation. I have also compared the writing myself and it is indeed Sheila's handwriting.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48864)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48865)
-
I have demonstrated this to be authentic all ready. This letter and examples of Sheila's handwritimg were kept in the same box during the COLP investigation. I have also compared the writing myself and it is indeed Sheila's handwriting.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48864)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48865)
I am not disbelieving you David, I seem to have missed your info on the letter due to not being on the forum much lately. As I said the translation of the letter rang true to me.
-
Like I'd remember what you said 2 years ago. ::) And make no mistake, I don't struggle. I'm quite clear that I don't believe it's from Sheila's hand, freely.
It's comforting that you know more than the experts then. You're always telling me that I know it all so that makes two of us.
I'd like to know who you think wrote it.
-
I have demonstrated this to be authentic all ready. This letter and examples of Sheila's handwritimg were kept in the same box during the COLP investigation. I have also compared the writing myself and it is indeed Sheila's handwriting.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48864)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48865)
The "y", "b" and "l" are different.
-
The "y", "b" and "l" are different.
The both have Sheila's name on. They are both authentic and written by the same hand. Both kept in the same Police evidence box. Its irrefutable.
-
It's comforting that you know more than the experts then. You're always telling me that I know it all so that makes two of us.
I'd like to know who you think wrote it.
I've obviously missed the "Eureka" moment when this stupendous, Jeremy releasing, breakthrough was announced. It stands to reason it was written by someone, but by whom? The comparisons posted appear to show different hands. The claim, of a poster, that the hand writing is Sheila's, is, I believe, like many other of his claims, spurious.
-
It's comforting that you know more than the experts then. You're always telling me that I know it all so that makes two of us.
I'd like to know who you think wrote it.
Just to clarify. I'm NOT saying that I know more than "the experts" because I don't actually know what "the experts" have said. I only know what you've told me they've said. It's you who are claiming to 'know'. I'm saying I don't believe. Rather different from 'knowing'.
-
I've obviously missed the "Eureka" moment when this stupendous, Jeremy releasing, breakthrough was announced. It stands to reason it was written by someone, but by whom? The comparisons posted appear to show different hands. The claim, of a poster, that the hand writing is Sheila's, is, I believe, like many other of his claims, spurious.
It's not just JB's " claims ". Remember ? What he says is all " rubbish,piffle and lies ". So can we say the same about the years training of the experts ? Are they spurious ? Or do you admit to knowing more ?
-
Just to clarify. I'm NOT saying that I know more than "the experts" because I don't actually know what "the experts" have said. I only know what you've told me they've said. It's you who are claiming to 'know'. I'm saying I don't believe. Rather different from 'knowing'.
Not believing is final in your mind and nothing to do with " knowing or not ".
-
The "y", "b" and "l" are different.
The " difference " is dictated by her state of mind when writing her final notes. If you can imagine writing after having had a couple of drinks it's not going to look the same as when you're sober,though there would still be similarities in style to know that it was your writing.
-
Not believing is final in your mind and nothing to do with " knowing or not ".
AS I SAID, "the experts" haven't actually issued any public statement to the effect that the hand writing is categorically that of Sheila. Thank you for being "know all" enough to tell me what's going on in my mind.
-
AS I SAID, "the experts" haven't actually issued any public statement to the effect that the hand writing is categorically that of Sheila. Thank you for being "know all" enough to tell me what's going on in my mind.
Eventually it will become public knowledge. It's been on the Bambertweets site many times and as I've said umpteen times that information will become public after a submission has been made when everyone's made sense of the thousands of " dormant " documents.
-
I have demonstrated this to be authentic all ready. This letter and examples of Sheila's handwritimg were kept in the same box during the COLP investigation. I have also compared the writing myself and it is indeed Sheila's handwriting.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48864)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=8369.0;attach=48865)
I have several documents with the number 57 stamped on them, all are to do with the logs. The other is your attempt at handwriting analysis which you aren't qualified to do and your conclusion is laughable! It isn't even the slightest bit relevant. You were told this last time you posted it!
-
The both have Sheila's name on. They are both authentic and written by the same hand. Both kept in the same Police evidence box. Its irrefutable.
No it isn't!
-
Did you also note that it was genuine too ?
If you'd taken off your blinkers for a while you'd have found this out years ago if you'd studied the case .
Who said it's genuine? David? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
The " difference " is dictated by her state of mind when writing her final notes. If you can imagine writing after having had a couple of drinks it's not going to look the same as when you're sober,though there would still be similarities in style to know that it was your writing.
Yet we are supposed to believe she shot with a steady hand and none of the bullets missing their target.
-
Yet we are supposed to believe she shot with a steady hand and none of the bullets missing their target.
The shooting was frenzied-------she couldn't miss ! From 2 feet away.
-
The shooting was frenzied-------she couldn't miss ! From 2 feet away.
No, but it would have been easy to get the off her from that distance!
-
Still wondering why Luke 12 was mentioned at the beginning of the thread?
-
No idea. I know that Luke 11 contains the Lord's Prayer.
-
No idea. I know that Luke 11 contains the Lord's Prayer.
I can't think why it would be necessary to read the Lord's Prayer from a Bible/Prayer Book. Both June and Sheila probably knew it before they went to school.
-
I can't think why it would be necessary to read the Lord's Prayer from a Bible/Prayer Book. Both June and Sheila probably knew it before they went to school.
Who said they were reading the Lord's Prayer ? ::) I only mentioned it because it happens to be in chapter 11. I've no idea about chapter 12.
-
I don't doubt that June could have memorised the Bible from cover to cover too.
-
Who said they were reading the Lord's Prayer ? ::) I only mentioned it because it happens to be in chapter 11. I've no idea about chapter 12.
I only mentioned it because you did. Possibly it's irrelevant.
-
It has got me thinking whether there was any conversation between brother and sister those last few minutes, given that she was unable or unwilling a couple of hours earlier on the telephone with Auntie Pam. Did Jeremy enter her bedchamber on the pretext of a bible reading, thenceforward cajoling his sister into penning the rambling note, which remained in that room along with Nevill's brown slippers, undisclosed and dismissed as insignificant all these years until the most diehard of supporters resurrected these artefacts to bolster their languishing case.
-
It has got me thinking whether there was any conversation between brother and sister those last few minutes, given that she was unable or unwilling a couple of hours earlier on the telephone with Auntie Pam. Did Jeremy enter her bedchamber on the pretext of a bible reading, thenceforward cajoling his sister into penning the rambling note, which remained in that room along with Nevill's brown slippers, undisclosed and dismissed as insignificant all these years until the most diehard of supporters resurrected these artefacts to bolster their languishing case.
I don't think so somehow. More like he couldn't get away quick enough.
-
It has got me thinking whether there was any conversation between brother and sister those last few minutes, given that she was unable or unwilling a couple of hours earlier on the telephone with Auntie Pam. Did Jeremy enter her bedchamber on the pretext of a bible reading, thenceforward cajoling his sister into penning the rambling note, which remained in that room along with Nevill's brown slippers, undisclosed and dismissed as insignificant all these years until the most diehard of supporters resurrected these artefacts to bolster their languishing case.
Now you are playing let’s make it fit.
-
Now you are playing let’s make it fit.
But you want a confused Sheila when it suits your case that she wrote a suicide note, then a calm and collected individual whilst handling the rifle.
-
Sheila was neither calm nor collected when she wrote the notes and least of all when she was in a frenzy with the rifle shooting ad-lib at areas over the adult bodies. What a mess and a sight it must have been.
-
But you want a confused Sheila when it suits your case that she wrote a suicide note, then a calm and collected individual whilst handling the rifle.
A person who fires 23 bullets at four people is not calm and collected. If the shooter was calm and collected it would be one shot one kill precision.
-
Now you are playing let’s make it fit.
You played 'lets make it fit' when you boasted you proved the letters were written by Sheila- you have no qualifications to make such claims. 'SOME' letters are similar but no where near the same, Can't refute it? Yes, you bloody well can! ....... Oh and Sheila would never call herself Bami according to Colin - she hated it.
-
You played 'lets make it fit' when you boasted you proved the letters were written by Sheila- you have no qualifications to make such claims. 'SOME' letters are similar but no where near the same, Can't refute it? Yes, you bloody well can! ....... Oh and Sheila would never call herself Bami according to Colin - she hated it.
Yes she liked to be called Bambs.
-
You played 'lets make it fit' when you boasted you proved the letters were written by Sheila- you have no qualifications to make such claims. 'SOME' letters are similar but no where near the same, Can't refute it? Yes, you bloody well can! ....... Oh and Sheila would never call herself Bami according to Colin - she hated it.
Then who wrote it?
-
Then who wrote it?
Who is this mysterious Bambi who has the similar handwriting as Sheila who wrote a letter that just so happened to fall into COLP box 57 along with another Letter from Sheila?
-
Who is this mysterious Bambi who has the similar handwriting as Sheila who wrote a letter that just so happened to fall into COLP box 57 along with another Letter from Sheila?
The letters aren't the same - those in the right are looped The l, the t, the y, where as on the left, they are not. The word 'to' in Sheila's writing has the t crossing over the top of the o and she repeats this method throughout the letter to Peter - the word to on the right is completely different. USA looks nothing like Sheila's nor does 'people' and the m pn the right is much higher than Sheila's. There are more differences than similarities. I very much doubt they were written by the same person.
Who has confirmed that the word below reads 'Bambi'? Doesn't look anything like Bambi to me.
-
By the way, Sheila wasn't born on 03/03/1957, she was born on 18/03/1957 - now who's trying to make it fit?
-
By the way, Sheila wasn't born on 03/03/1957, she was born on 18/03/1957 - now who's trying to make it fit?
Heehee! I won the prize for spotting yesterday's deliberate mistake!!! She was Cancer, not Pisces ;D ;D
-
It was probably Sheila's forgetfulness.Don't forget,she wasn't in her right mind. There's no ulterior motive behind it that I can see. Sheila had the rest of it right.
-
The letters aren't the same - those in the right are looped The l, the t, the y, where as on the left, they are not. The word 'to' in Sheila's writing has the t crossing over the top of the o and she repeats this method throughout the letter to Peter - the word to on the right is completely different. USA looks nothing like Sheila's nor does 'people' and the m pn the right is much higher than Sheila's. There are more differences than similarities. I very much doubt they were written by the same person.
Who has confirmed that the word below reads 'Bambi'? Doesn't look anything like Bambi to me.
Looks like Pamela.
-
It was probably Sheila's forgetfulness.Don't forget,she wasn't in her right mind. There's no ulterior motive behind it that I can see. Sheila had the rest of it right.
FGS Lookout, you don't forget the day you were born. You're also just trying to make thing fit!
-
Looks like Pamela.
No it doesn't - look for the right pieces - you've got your sky mixed with the trees.
-
FGS Lookout, you don't forget the day you were born. You're also just trying to make thing fit!
You do if your mind's addled like Sheila's was--------don't kid yourself.
-
No it doesn't - look for the right pieces - you've got your sky mixed with the trees.
I only said it looked like " Pamela "--------no need to be abrupt !
I SUGGESTED it because of Pam being on the phone that night and would have been on Sheila's mind.
-
I'll annoy you a bit more by saying that I can also see " Bambi ",with emphasis on the last " i " that curls up like a j but with an opposite curl.
-
I'll annoy you a bit more by saying that I can also see " Bambi ",with emphasis on the last " i " that curls up like a j but with an opposite curl.
I'm not annoyed, I'm amused ;D ;D There is no Bambi, you're making it fit - it certainly can't look like Bambi and Pamela ;D ;D ;D ;D. The two sets of writing are different for the reasons I posted previously but also .....
-
West Log was also in box 57 (see below). The top copy of the file tells us nothing other than the handwriting sample was in box 57 (because that it the top copy relating to THAT document ONLY - see link below), as was the scribbled letter as was Wests log. We don't know why the scribbled letter was there but there is nothing to indicate it was there because it was suspected to be a suicide letter unless (as above), they also thought West's log was a suicide note? ::). We haven't seen what the item description of the scribbled note indicates, so those jumping to conclusions need to take a cold shower! 8)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56390.html#msg56390
-
It's you who's getting het up nobody else. I couldn't give a hang. I've got my own mystery to solve !
-
It's you who's getting het up nobody else. I couldn't give a hang. I've got my own mystery to solve !
Ha, ha! I guess you have now realised that the excitement is over and David's claims are once again over-blown. Of course this has happened before and back then you agreed the writings looked different. Read this thread, it's all been said before and the claim that it's "irrefutable" is frankly very silly. It was refuted - last year.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8369.msg398433.html#msg398433
-
It's you who's getting het up nobody else. I couldn't give a hang. I've got my own mystery to solve !
You couldn't give a hang??? Who do you think you're kidding? No one who doesn't "give a hang" would have spent as long making it clear -as do you- that you VERY much give one.
-
You couldn't give a hang??? Who do you think you're kidding? No one who doesn't "give a hang" would have spent as long making it clear -as do you- that you VERY much give one.
As soon as David posted how the is genuine (because he analysed it), the whole thing went into over-drive. A simple search would have shown that he'd tried this before, when it was shown that the two letters were kept in the same box, with many other documents (including West's log), he just got personal. Maybe one day people will question things and not take such claims on face value? ???
-
I have something interesting to post about Luke 12 but need to know why Mike posted it in the first place. It's something 'new' - beats going over all this old ground every few years!
-
As soon as David posted how the is genuine (because he analysed it), the whole thing went into over-drive. A simple search would have shown that he'd tried this before, when it was shown that the two letters were kept in the same box, with many other documents (including West's log), he just got personal. Maybe one day people will question things and not take such claims on face value? ???
Caroline, I wasn't aware that David was a forensic handwriting analyst! He's changed career so many times, it's hard to keep up with him. I feel sure he was something to do with psychology? Well, he seemed to think he knew something about it. Didn't he hint at being attached to the police at one time, or was that when he said he was working with Jeremy's solicitors?..................but I thought he said he was an IT specialist?
-
Caroline, I wasn't aware that David was a forensic handwriting analyst! He's changed career so many times, it's hard to keep up with him. I feel sure he was something to do with psychology? Well, he seemed to think he knew something about it. Didn't he hint at being attached to the police at one time, or was that when he said he was working with Jeremy's solicitors?..................but I thought he said he was an IT specialist?
Depends which hat he pulls out of the box ;D ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgVo2cozClE
-
You couldn't give a hang??? Who do you think you're kidding? No one who doesn't "give a hang" would have spent as long making it clear -as do you- that you VERY much give one.
For someone who finds him guilty you've got more than enough to say considering it was done and dusted in 1986 and he's been behind bars ever since so what have you got to argue about ? Case Closed isn't it ?? ::)
People in glass houses.
-
For someone who finds him guilty you've got more than enough to say considering it was done and dusted in 1986 and he's been behind bars ever since so what have you got to argue about ? Case Closed isn't it ?? ::)
People in glass houses.
They way you keep complaining about other peoples' views, I don't think it's quite clear to you that this is a debating site and if there are no opposing views, then there's no debate...................and the only valuable thing about talking to yourself is that you give yourself the answer you want to hear. And that's ends the conversation
-
They way you keep complaining about other peoples' views, I don't think it's quite clear to you that this is a debating site and if there are no opposing views, then there's no debate...................and the only valuable thing about talking to yourself is that you give yourself the answer you want to hear. And that's ends the conversation
Full of excuses aren't you ? ::)
-
For someone who finds him guilty you've got more than enough to say considering it was done and dusted in 1986 and he's been behind bars ever since so what have you got to argue about ? Case Closed isn't it ?? ::)
People in glass houses.
It's been at leat a month this this old chestnut - it usually comes after the excitement wears off ;D
-
Full of excuses aren't you ? ::)
No, just reasons.
-
Full of excuses aren't you ? ::)
I don't need to excuse myself, Lookout. My response to your emotional post was objective and reasoned.
-
You two are like an echo.
-
You two are like an echo.
Your posts extract a similar response.
-
Your posts extract a similar response.
How can they when I don't have a side-kick ?
-
How can they when I don't have a side-kick ?
Well, that's really not true, it's just your online friends don't post as much but there are also lots of supporters who don't backup your posts and maybe you should ask yourself why? Of course, you're not really bothered one way or the other so might be better to just drop the spat and get back on with the debate? Wadda you think? ;)
-
You two are like an echo.
What did you say, say, say, say? ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Well, that's really not true, it's just your online friends don't post as much but there are also lots of supporters who don't backup your posts and maybe you should ask yourself why? Of course, you're not really bothered one way or the other so might be better to just drop the spat and get back on with the debate? Wadda you think? ;)
Go on, go on, go on. You know you want to. You know Caroline and I will always be here for you ;D ;D ;D
-
By the way, Sheila wasn't born on 03/03/1957, she was born on 18/03/1957 - now who's trying to make it fit?
Romeo clearly got a number wrong. Nice try thou ;D
-
West Log was also in box 57 (see below). The top copy of the file tells us nothing other than the handwriting sample was in box 57 (because that it the top copy relating to THAT document ONLY - see link below), as was the scribbled letter as was Wests log. We don't know why the scribbled letter was there but there is nothing to indicate it was there because it was suspected to be a suicide letter unless (as above), they also thought West's log was a suicide note? ::). We haven't seen what the item description of the scribbled note indicates, so those jumping to conclusions need to take a cold shower! 8)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56390.html#msg56390
Box 57 only establishes that the letter is an authentic case exhibit. Not some crap somebody made up. Saying that my claim is to argue that the entire contents of the box are suicide notes is just a strawman argument on your part.
-
Box 57 only establishes that the letter is an authentic case exhibit. Not some crap somebody made up. Saying that my claim is to argue that the entire contents of the box are suicide notes is just a strawman argument on your part.
No, it shoes it was something that was found and added to box 57, not that it was an important exhibit or anything relevant to the case. Oh and yesterday you claimed this .....
I have demonstrated this to be authentic all ready. This letter and examples of Sheila's handwritimg were kept in the same box during the COLP investigation. I have also compared the writing myself and it is indeed Sheila's handwriting.
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Does anyone know if the letter is part of any upcoming submissions? What further work has been done to establish who wrote it etc.?
Whatever your stance these are significant questions which could potentially support either side. That the letter was found at the scene appears accepted by all. If it is found to have been written by Sheila then it clearly goes some way in establishing her state of mind and suicidal thoughts.
If, on the other hand, it is found to be not written by Sheila then it begs the question; who did write it?
If not Sheila then surely someone attempting to frame Sheila which inevitably would point to Jeremy. You would imagine that since this letter has come to light that anyone convinced of their position would support efforts to establish who the writer was.
-
I believe there are a few more pages of these notes which include words to a song which had been altered. The song in question is one of Marianne Faithfull's but I don't know which one.
I imagine that the notes will be included in the submission.
-
Does anyone know if the letter is part of any upcoming submissions? What further work has been done to establish who wrote it etc.?
Whatever your stance these are significant questions which could potentially support either side. That the letter was found at the scene appears accepted by all. If it is found to have been written by Sheila then it clearly goes some way in establishing her state of mind and suicidal thoughts.
If, on the other hand, it is found to be not written by Sheila then it begs the question; who did write it?
If not Sheila then surely someone attempting to frame Sheila which inevitably would point to Jeremy. You would imagine that since this letter has come to light that anyone convinced of their position would support efforts to establish who the writer was.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is a problem with having a debate about the letters, but the claims that have been made over the past few days are just silly. They haven't just come to light, they have been debated here for quite some time. On the subject of who wrote them, no one here is qualified to determine that. The CT were supposed to have them analysed but were forthcoming with the results.
-
I believe there are a few more pages of these notes which include words to a song which had been altered. The song in question is one of Marianne Faithfull's but I don't know which one.
I imagine that the notes will be included in the submission.
Everyone with an interest in the case should be interested in getting answers to the obvious questions raised by this letter. Unseen by anyone defending JB for 25 years and filed away as illegible, surely it's discovery and legibility, at the very least, should provoke the following questions:
1) When, where and by whom was it found?
2) Who wrote it and left it wherever it was found?
-
I believe there are a few more pages of these notes which include words to a song which had been altered. The song in question is one of Marianne Faithfull's but I don't know which one.
I imagine that the notes will be included in the submission.
No, the Marianne Faithfull connection comes from something else which Sheila wrote. She wrote down the lyrics to a song incorrectly (like who hasn't done THAT before?). The song is called Broken English and instead of writing “Could have come through anytime,” she wrote “Put a gun through anytime" She didn't change the lyrics - she simply got them wrong. The song was from 1979 so she could have written them anytime between then and her death.
To me it sounds like 'Put a gun through' also. Terrible song, sounds like someone is breaking wind!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsyBEv1dbLo
-
Everyone with an interest in the case should be interested in getting answers to the obvious questions raised by this letter. Unseen by anyone defending JB for 25 years and filed away as illegible, surely it's discovery and legibility, at the very least, should provoke the following questions:
1) When, where and by whom was it found?
2) Who wrote it and left it wherever it was found?
This isn't the letter that was filed away as 'illegible'.
-
It was this one!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9045.msg428228.html#msg428228
-
It was this one!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9045.msg428228.html#msg428228
Well that really is illegible. The point is firstly her state of mind and secondly where she found the strength to execute her thoughts.
-
Well that really is illegible. The point is firstly her state of mind and secondly where she found the strength to execute her thoughts.
Some of us were silly enough to spend hours trying to force it to mean something.
-
Well that really is illegible. The point is firstly her state of mind and secondly where she found the strength to execute her thoughts.
The same strength she used to speak on the phone to pam that night.
-
This was a letter intended for Sheila's biological mother. It makes no implicit mention of suicide but it does say "I cannot give her this from the after world"
Not only is the handwriting similar but the letters also mention twin boys. So its rather futile to dispute the author IMO. Who else could it possibly be? Good luck finding a plausible alternative. ;D
-
The same strength she used to speak on the phone to pam that night.
Well there you go then..no obscenity, meekness personified..
-
This was a letter intended for Sheila's biological mother. It makes no implicit mention of suicide but it does say "I cannot give her this from the after world"
Not only is the handwriting similar but the letters also mention twin boys. So its rather futile to dispute the author IMO. Who else could it possibly be? Good luck finding a plausible alternative. ;D
..as if after all the newspaper coverage Uncle Tom Cobley and all didn't know..
-
No, the Marianne Faithfull connection comes from something else which Sheila wrote. She wrote down the lyrics to a song incorrectly (like who hasn't done THAT before?). The song is called Broken English and instead of writing “Could have come through anytime,” she wrote “Put a gun through anytime" She didn't change the lyrics - she simply got them wrong. The song was from 1979 so she could have written them anytime between then and her death.
To me it sounds like 'Put a gun through' also. Terrible song, sounds like someone is breaking wind!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsyBEv1dbLo
There's novel !
-
Well that really is illegible. The point is firstly her state of mind and secondly where she found the strength to execute her thoughts.
One or two of the officers wrote like that------particularly the one who wrote about the 06.09 call.
-
This was a letter intended for Sheila's biological mother. It makes no implicit mention of suicide but it does say "I cannot give her this from the after world"
Not only is the handwriting similar but the letters also mention twin boys. So its rather futile to dispute the author IMO. Who else could it possibly be? Good luck finding a plausible alternative. ;D
But it's not similar David - you have no idea who it was to, from or about. You're just making massive assumptions and your own inflated self belief has convinced you that you have the ability to analyse handwriting.
Where does it mention twin 'boys'? It also mentions 'Vincent' - so who's that? According to you she had mentioned her birth date but that turned out to be BS!
So far Sheila's suicide note was in the bible, it wasn't disclosed to the jury and had gone missing. As it turned out the note was written by June, hadn't gone missing and was returned to the family.
Then the letters and numbers note was a 'coded' suicide note - this was never called a suicide note anywhere other than here and was the note found on the bedside table and given the reference DRH/42 and described as 'illegible'.
Then there is this note; now this is a suicide note (which the CT claim was found on the dressing table and given a reference - think they are confused again!).
With all this note writing, Sheila wouldn't have had time to shoot anyone one! ::)___
-
There's novel !
What?
-
What?
Breaking wind to a tune.
-
Breaking wind to a tune.
Ha, ha! Well, it does sound like that ;D ;D ;D
-
One or two of the officers wrote like that------particularly the one who wrote about the 06.09 call.
Is that an observation, a suggestion, or an accusation? Is the alleged 6.09 call the one in which an allegedly live Sheila/Nevill? called 999 for an ambulance?
-
Is that an observation, a suggestion, or an accusation? Is the alleged 6.09 call the one in which an allegedly live Sheila/Nevill? called 999 for an ambulance?
If you go onto Bambertweets you'll see a " snippet " of that call and the state of the writing of the officer who'd logged it. It does at least register the said 06.09 call but the scribble is difficult to make out.
It's neither an observation suggestion or an accusation but an actual 999 call.
-
If you go onto Bambertweets you'll see a " snippet " of that call and the state of the writing of the officer who'd logged it. It does at least register the said 06.09 call but the scribble is difficult to make out.
It's neither an observation suggestion or an accusation but an actual 999 call.
I believe it's been ascertained that it was switched to an internal 999 system at police HQ. The call didn't come from WHF.
-
I believe it's been ascertained that it was switched to an internal 999 system at police HQ. The call didn't come from WHF.
Where did your " belief " come from ?
-
Where did your " belief " come from ?
Because that's what the log indicates!
-
Because that's what the log indicates!
Depends which log you're looking at ?.
-
If you go onto Bambertweets you'll see a " snippet " of that call and the state of the writing of the officer who'd logged it. It does at least register the said 06.09 call but the scribble is difficult to make out.
It's neither an observation suggestion or an accusation but an actual 999 call.
Why do you believe these idiots Lookout? It's not a 999 call at all and the log in no way indicates that, in fact, in brackets, it makes it clear that they are talking about the open line to the house!
-
Depends which log you're looking at ?.
Errrrrr - the same one!
-
Where there's never been any dispute about what's written/entered who am I to argue otherwise ?
If someone of " authority " had come along and stated that what had been said had been untrue,then I would probably/possibly believe them if there was no other motive behind their statement.
Bambertweets is open to dispute and argument but nobody to my knowledge has ever doubted what's been stated-----------it's up to the reader how they view what's there.
-
Where there's never been any dispute about what's written/entered who am I to argue otherwise ?
If someone of " authority " had come along and stated that what had been said had been untrue,then I would probably/possibly believe them if there was no other motive behind their statement.
Bambertweets is open to dispute and argument but nobody to my knowledge has ever doubted what's been stated-----------it's up to the reader how they view what's there.
Who in 'authority' is claiming this BS other the CT? They twist what is written and it would NEVER stand up to any kind of scrutiny. There was no 999 call - the log makes it clear they are talking about the open line. Nowhere does it mention any conversation took place, but because those three numbers are mentioned, the CT have jumped on it like a fly on ****.
-
There are people on that site from all walks of life and I'm sure all wouldn't be taken in about every aspect of the case if they thought it wasn't right.
It is apparently known who the officer concerned was at the time of 06.09. Why this particular time ?
-
There are people on that site from all walks of life and I'm sure all wouldn't be taken in about every aspect of the case if they thought it wasn't right.
It is apparently known who the officer concerned was at the time of 06.09. Why this particular time ?
Because that is when the police took over the open line monitoring and they have either been taken in or are trying to play a fast one! There was NO 999 call! Not even David believes that!
-
Because that is when the police took over the open line monitoring and they have either been taken in or are trying to play a fast one! There was NO 999 call! Not even David believes that!
I think the alleged 999 call was introduced here relatively recently. I believe it was argued then that 999 calls don't automatically go through to police, the caller being asked which service they require. Why would the dead be requiring any service?
-
Because that is when the police took over the open line monitoring and they have either been taken in or are trying to play a fast one! There was NO 999 call! Not even David believes that!
Just because David doesn't believe something doesn't mean that I don't.
Have you approached the CT to tell them of their " mistake ?".
-
Just because David doesn't believe something doesn't mean that I don't.
Have you approached the CT to tell them of their " mistake ?".
Don't need to, at least one of the reads the forum regularly.
-
Don't need to, at least one of the reads the forum regularly.
One ?
-
Have the anti Bamber brigade found their alternative author to the four pages of erratic writing yet or have they fallen back on Sheila the author but coerced under Jeremy’s orders?
-
Have the anti Bamber brigade found their alternative author to the four pages of erratic writing yet or have they fallen back on Sheila the author but coerced under Jeremy’s orders?
Neither, it's not a suicide note and could have been written at any time, by any one. It certainly wasn't written on the night of the murders unless you think 'Vincent' was an accomplice? Apparently the 'twins' told "Sheila" to pass on a 'god bless' message to 'mummy' - they were six years old ::). I see even you have stopped calling it a suicide note! ;D
-
One ?
At least.
-
Have the anti Bamber brigade found their alternative author to the four pages of erratic writing yet or have they fallen back on Sheila the author but coerced under Jeremy’s orders?
There are many possibilities concerning the note. Even if it was written by her it doesn't automatically follow that she enacted what is alleged it meant.
-
There are many possibilities concerning the note. Even if it was written by her it doesn't automatically follow that she enacted what is alleged it meant.
But what did it mean Steve?
-
But what did it mean Steve?
I'm coming to the view that if it's genuine Jeremy was somehow involved and inveigled her to write it. It would be too obvious to leave it in the master bedroom because the prime exhibit there was the bible, but left in her bedroom it would serve its purpose to buttress Jeremy's story.
-
I'm coming to the view that if it's genuine Jeremy was somehow involved and inveigled her to write it. It would be too obvious to leave it in the master bedroom because the prime exhibit there was the bible, but left in her bedroom it would serve its purpose to buttress Jeremy's story.
It could have been written away from WHF -unless Sheila chose to change the style of her writing radically, for the purpose of disguising her writing, and why would she, I don't believe the writing to be hers- and placed conveniently in situ, for effect.
-
It could have been written away from WHF -unless Sheila chose to change the style of her writing radically, for the purpose of disguising her writing, and why would she, I don't believe the writing to be hers- and placed conveniently in situ, for effect.
Ever seen the writing of someone who's mentally ill ?
-
It could have been written away from WHF -unless Sheila chose to change the style of her writing radically, for the purpose of disguising her writing, and why would she, I don't believe the writing to be hers- and placed conveniently in situ, for effect.
There is a similarity between the letter she wrote to her friend from Maida Vale in November 1982 and the alleged suicide note so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. We don't know her state of mind in the early hours of 7 August 1985 and it may well be she wrote it in the master bedroom under psychosis with Jeremy looking on and the deceased body of her mother a few feet away.
-
Sheila could only express herself through writing and drawing.
-
I'm coming to the view that if it's genuine Jeremy was somehow involved and inveigled her to write it. It would be too obvious to leave it in the master bedroom because the prime exhibit there was the bible, but left in her bedroom it would serve its purpose to buttress Jeremy's story.
OK but that isn't the note that was found in her bedroom Steve.
-
Ever seen the writing of someone who's mentally ill ?
Yes and a suicide note to boot! It was the same!
-
There is a similarity between the letter she wrote to her friend from Maida Vale in November 1982 and the alleged suicide note so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. We don't know her state of mind in the early hours of 7 August 1985 and it may well be she wrote it in the master bedroom under psychosis with Jeremy looking on and the deceased body of her mother a few feet away.
The letters are different Steve - there are some similarities but more differences.
-
Sheila could only express herself through writing and drawing.
Says who?
-
There is a similarity between the letter she wrote to her friend from Maida Vale in November 1982 and the alleged suicide note so I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. We don't know her state of mind in the early hours of 7 August 1985 and it may well be she wrote it in the master bedroom under psychosis with Jeremy looking on and the deceased body of her mother a few feet away.
So in between the killings Jeremy paused to help Sheila write her notes and tell her what to say ? While she was in a psychotic state too ?
-
Sheila had had a quick temper without having psychotic turns as well so not someone to be messed about with under that influence as Freddie had found out not even the 2 doctors could pacify her. JB would have run a mile.
-
Yes and a suicide note to boot! It was the same!
Not all people are the same.
-
Says who?
Colin in his book.
-
Sheila had had a quick temper without having psychotic turns as well so not someone to be messed about with under that influence as Freddie had found out not even the 2 doctors could passify her. JB would have run a mile.
I don't think it was a temper, more of a frustration at a loss of control she felt as she surveyed the world around her. She never directly attacked anyone, her disappointment more directed at herself than others, hence the self-harm and lack of any self-esteem.
-
OK but that isn't the note that was found in her bedroom Steve.
There's nothing in the books about these notes. I thought David presented it as the letter found by Police in Sheila's bedroom and put in a box, then dismissed as illegible.
-
I don't think it was a temper, more of a frustration at a loss of control she felt as she surveyed the world around her. She never directly attacked anyone, her disappointment more directed at herself than others, hence the self-harm and lack of any self-esteem.
Frustration can spark off temper.
-
Frustration can spark off temper.
I don't think she knew anything about the death of Nevill or of her sons. We're back to any forensic link between them and there is none.
-
I don't think it was a temper, more of a frustration at a loss of control she felt as she surveyed the world around her. She never directly attacked anyone, her disappointment more directed at herself than others, hence the self-harm and lack of any self-esteem.
To be fair Steve what you think is not proof of anything. Most who suffer from PS are prone to rages however mild mannered they may appear at other times. It is a symptom of the illness.
-
Not all people are the same.
I didn't insinuate they were.
-
To be fair Steve what you think is not proof of anything. Most who suffer from PS are prone to rages however mild mannered they may appear at other times. It is a symptom of the illness.
Maggie she lived for the most part in Maida Vale, and she had lived there and in Hampstead since the age of 16. There's not one report of any violence perpetrated by her in all that time. If you read the chapter in Claire Powell's book entitled "Gorgeous Girls" it will tell you in what a parlous state all those models were, and Sheila seemed just about the most desperate..
-
There's nothing in the books about these notes. I thought David presented it as the letter found by Police in Sheila's bedroom and put in a box, then dismissed as illegible.
I have already posted which note was found in the bedroom and described a 'illegible'. But here it is again. David says a lot of things and generally uses himself as the source!
-
To be fair Steve what you think is not proof of anything. Most who suffer from PS are prone to rages however mild mannered they may appear at other times. It is a symptom of the illness.
I lived my childhood with someone with this illness and they weren't prone to rages.
-
I don't think she knew anything about the death of Nevill or of her sons. We're back to any forensic link between them and there is none.
Her mind was so unbalanced she wouldn't have realised what she'd done. She'd have been in a delusional state and wouldn't have recognised the people inside as her family. They see things entirely different and their thought processes are skewed.
-
Frustration can spark off temper.
And greed can lead to murder.
-
Her mind was so unbalanced she wouldn't have realised what she'd done. She'd have been in a delusional state and wouldn't have recognised the people inside as her family. They see things entirely different and their thought processes are skewed.
This can be true - when they aren't taking their medication!
-
I lived my childhood with someone with this illness and they weren't prone to rages.
As I said,everyone's different and display different behavours.
I'm living near one and have been told not to approach him---------just as if !!
-
And greed can lead to murder.
Greed is also a mental illness---------though in this case it was the mental illness and not the greed.
-
As I said,everyone's different and display different behavours.
I'm living near one and have been told not to approach him---------just as if !!
THAT is the point I am making. Just because Sheila had PS doesn't mean she was aggressive. Everyone gets annoyed - it's part of being a human being.
-
Greed is also a mental illness---------though in this case it was the mental illness and not the greed.
No it isn't ::)
-
No it isn't ::)
It jolly well is with some people.
-
Her mind was so unbalanced she wouldn't have realised what she'd done. She'd have been in a delusional state and wouldn't have recognised the people inside as her family. They see things entirely different and their thought processes are skewed.
That's true but in my limited experience they are not so "with it" in this psychotic state that they can execute four others with pinpoint accuracy.
-
That's true but in my limited experience they are not so "with it" in this psychotic state that they can execute four others with pinpoint accuracy.
Not when they're taking medication.
-
It jolly well is with some people.
I know one! ;D
-
That's true but in my limited experience they are not so "with it" in this psychotic state that they can execute four others with pinpoint accuracy.
Pinpoint accuracy it wasn't. It was a frenzied killing.
-
Pinpoint accuracy it wasn't. It was a frenzied killing.
Nevill was incapacitated by targeted shots to the head.
-
Pinpoint accuracy it wasn't. It was a frenzied killing.
Not according to Venezis;
-
Not according to Venezis;
He was already wrong when he'd said that Sheila would have been able to get up and walk about after the first shot so I'd take what he'd said with a pinch of salt.
-
Mike. You should have an index of the contents of COLP Box57 with a short description of each item. Would you be able to post it on here please if you can find it?
Cheers.
-
Greed is also a mental illness.........................
Ooh! Perhaps you can tell me which psychology textbook you found that in. It's a new one on me.
-
Sheila had had a quick temper without having psychotic turns as well so not someone to be messed about with under that influence as Freddie had found out not even the 2 doctors could pacify her. JB would have run a mile.
"Sheila had a quick temper" is a mantra you must have repeated hundreds of times. Repeating it doesn't make it so. You've accused her of violence. Of self harm. You accuse us of painting the wrong picture of Jeremy. I believe it's exactly what you've done regarding Sheila. I'm guessing that you want us to see a woman who was only ever one breath away from being completely out of control. As back-up, you tell us that Colin says she had a temper. I imagine Colin to have been one of the most laid back characters I've ever come across. To someone like that, a raised voice might signify temper. I imagine any sign of temper shown by Sheila, towards him, was about trying to raise some sort of reaction from him...............and yet on only ONE occasion did she strike him -I believe he may have said in response to him striking her- on ALL other occasions she threw or broke inanimate objects. I'd have said that by doing such she was exhibiting perfect control. I think she knew exactly what she was doing and was doing it to best effect. It also occurs to me that you might be trying to link the "violent temper" you want us to believe she was possessed of in 'real life', to an ability to kill whilst psychotic. To the best of my knowledge, there's no correlation.
-
Ooh! Perhaps you can tell me which psychology textbook you found that in. It's a new one on me.
Greed features throughout the Bible and also in this present century which is the greatest cause of crime. It doesn't surprise me that it isn't in a psychology text book as it omits quite a few diagnoses.
-
Nevill was incapacitated by targeted shots to the head.
Shoulder and arm would have incapacitated him initially leaving only one arm free to try and avoid another hail of bullets. A fit young man would have fought back but Nevill wasn't a fit young man and this was his daughter who was confronting him.
-
Greed features throughout the Bible and also in this present century which is the greatest cause of crime. It doesn't surprise me that it isn't in a psychology text book as it omits quite a few diagnoses.
And at what point on a 1 through 10 scale would you 'diagnose' greed as being a psychological disorder? I've yet to find anyone who has never experienced it at some point.
-
"Sheila had a quick temper" is a mantra you must have repeated hundreds of times. Repeating it doesn't make it so. You've accused her of violence. Of self harm. You accuse us of painting the wrong picture of Jeremy. I believe it's exactly what you've done regarding Sheila. I'm guessing that you want us to see a woman who was only ever one breath away from being completely out of control. As back-up, you tell us that Colin says she had a temper. I imagine Colin to have been one of the most laid back characters I've ever come across. To someone like that, a raised voice might signify temper. I imagine any sign of temper shown by Sheila, towards him, was about trying to raise some sort of reaction from him...............and yet on only ONE occasion did she strike him -I believe he may have said in response to him striking her- on ALL other occasions she threw or broke inanimate objects. I'd have said that by doing such she was exhibiting perfect control. I think she knew exactly what she was doing and was doing it to best effect. It also occurs to me that you might be trying to link the "violent temper" you want us to believe she was possessed of in 'real life', to an ability to kill whilst psychotic. To the best of my knowledge, there's no correlation.
I HAVEN'T accused her of self-harm Sheila did that herself when she put her hand through plate glass. A normal person doesn't do that as they stop and think about the pain it would cause for a start to say nothing of the damage to the hand. Thumping her fists on the wall. Who would hurt themselves in this way ?
I suggest you take off your rose-coloured specs and admit there HAD been a problem. Even throwing pans/dishes shows a destructive streak and these meltdowns AREN'T normal. A child today with such traits is said to be suffering from ADHD wouldn't you agree ? And if they're unlucky they carry that through their lives without the control of the right medication and behavioural therapy.
In your world this was normal behaviour ::) It's those who are like you who would rather see someone struggling in their own misery without the need for intervention.
-
Anyone who can punch walls shove their hand through glass and feel no pain IS capable of anything !!
-
I HAVEN'T accused her of self-harm Sheila did that herself when she put her hand through plate glass. A normal person doesn't do that as they stop and think about the pain it would cause for a start to say nothing of the damage to the hand. Thumping her fists on the wall. Who would hurt themselves in this way ?
I suggest you take off your rose-coloured specs and admit there HAD been a problem. Even throwing pans/dishes shows a destructive streak and these meltdowns AREN'T normal. A child today with such traits is said to be suffering from ADHD wouldn't you agree ? And if they're unlucky they carry that through their lives without the control of the right medication and behavioural therapy.
In your world this was normal behaviour ::) It's those who are like you who would rather see someone struggling in their own misery without the need for intervention.
On many occasions you've claimed her to be a "self harmer". What you actually meant by it, you didn't say. You appear to have very tight parameters regarding your beliefs about what's normal. Frustration, a fairly and reasonable concept of normality, is, I believe, common to us all. Have you never displayed it? I absolutely do NOT believe that a child having the occasional tantrum will be diagnosed as having ADHD. Nor do I believe any of us live in misery because of occasional bouts of frustration.
-
On many occasions you've claimed her to be a "self harmer". What you actually meant by it, you didn't say. You appear to have very tight parameters regarding your beliefs about what's normal. Frustration, a fairly and reasonable concept of normality, is, I believe, common to us all. Have you never displayed it? I absolutely do NOT believe that a child having the occasional tantrum will be diagnosed as having ADHD. Nor do I believe any of us live in misery because of occasional bouts of frustration.
Self-harming in this case is self-explanatory. Would you punch walls or put your hand through plate-glass ? The NORMAL response would be that you WOULDN'T do it-----for more reasons than one.
Are you now saying that this is normal behaviour for a normal reaction ?
Do you know ANYTHING at all about self-harming ??
I'm inclined to think that this kind of behaviour is to draw attention for how a person is feeling which is usually something that they can't deal with themselves,in other words they're crying out for help and they clearly need it. It's an illness.
It would seem that you know very little regarding mental health.
Fortunately I haven't had the kind of life where losing my temper was the norm. Frustration is easy to overcome and although Sheila was prone to bouts of frustration this easily turned to temper because she WASN'T well not having a healthy balanced mind she couldn't work things out as in those who are rational in their thinking.
Sheila wasn't just miserable through being frustrated-------that remark is senseless.
-
Anyone who can punch walls shove their hand through glass and feel no pain IS capable of anything !!
Include me in that then! I'd rather punch a wall than hit someone (although I wouldn't choose the wall every time! I'm more of a door slammer ;D) - how many people do you think I've murdered?
-
Self-harming in this case is self-explanatory. Would you punch walls or put your hand through plate-glass ? The NORMAL response would be that you WOULDN'T do it-----for more reasons than one.
Are you now saying that this is normal behaviour for a normal reaction ?
Do you know ANYTHING at all about self-harming ??
I'm inclined to think that this kind of behaviour is to draw attention for how a person is feeling which is usually something that they can't deal with themselves,in other words they're crying out for help and they clearly need it. It's an illness.
It would seem that you know very little regarding mental health.
Fortunately I haven't had the kind of life where losing my temper was the norm. Frustration is easy to overcome and although Sheila was prone to bouts of frustration this easily turned to temper because she WASN'T well not having a healthy balanced mind she couldn't work things out as in those who are rational in their thinking.
Sheila wasn't just miserable through being frustrated-------that remark is senseless.
I don't know where you get this stuff from Lookout? ::)
-
I don't know where you get this stuff from Lookout? ::)
It's from me-----you can stick your text books !
-
It's from me-----you can stick your text books !
That'll be why it's wrong then. Hitting a wall isn't self-harming and self-harming has nothing to do with having a temper.
-
Nobody gets a manual on how to deal with mental health it's down to the individual and their own individual problem/s which should be treated individually as per the problem and not bunched with others who appear to display the same problems. One man's meat is another man's poison and Sheila's condition was exacerbated by the medication that she was given.
It's easy to dismiss someone by saying they have schizophrenia because of their behaviour then medicating accordingly but-------------if that person hasn't got schizophrenia then the damage has been done by the wrong medication.
A part of Sheila's post-mortem records states quote " We might therefore conclude that the ingestion of Sheila's medication was unmonitored: posing an increasing probability of risk of uncontrolled frenzied behaviour " unquote.
-
Nobody gets a manual on how to deal with mental health it's down to the individual and their own individual problem/s which should be treated individually as per the problem and not bunched with others who appear to display the same problems. One man's meat is another man's poison and Sheila's condition was exacerbated by the medication that she was given.
It's easy to dismiss someone by saying they have schizophrenia because of their behaviour then medicating accordingly but-------------if that person hasn't got schizophrenia then the damage has been done by the wrong medication.
A part of Sheila's post-mortem records states quote " We might therefore conclude that the ingestion of Sheila's medication was unmonitored: posing an increasing probability of risk of uncontrolled frenzied behaviour " unquote.
But you ARE generalising by saying 'normal' people wouldn't punch walls and that anyone who does
Anyone who can punch walls shove their hand through glass and feel no pain IS capable of anything !!
That'd anything but taking individual differences into consideration!
-
But you ARE generalising by saying 'normal' people wouldn't punch walls and that anyone who does
That'd anything but taking individual differences into consideration!
Generalising yes because the majority of people don't punch walls,etc.
-
Generalising yes because the majority of people don't punch walls,etc.
Another generalisation - so much for believing individual differences are important! ;D
-
Another generalisation - so much for believing individual differences are important! ;D
Individual differences are important when it comes to treating illnesses be they mental or physical.
-
Individual differences are important when it comes to treating illnesses be they mental or physical.
Individual differences are important when talking about 'people' - full stop!
-
Individual differences are important when talking about 'people' - full stop!
I've been trying to get that across for years ::)
-
I've been trying to get that across for years ::)
It might help if you stop generalising! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I've said often enough on here that " we're all individuals " and as far as medications go what suits one mightn't suit another----------such as Sheila's treatment which had the opposite effect.
-
I've said often enough on here that " we're all individuals " and as far as medications go what suits one mightn't suit another----------such as Sheila's treatment which had the opposite effect.
We're you involved in the treatment of Sheila?
-
We're you involved in the treatment of Sheila?
No but I've experienced similar where a wrong diagnosis was made therefore giving the wrong treatment.
-
No but I've experienced similar where a wrong diagnosis was made therefore giving the wrong treatment.
So you're generalising from your experience and using it to try and determine another in which you were not involved?
-
So you're generalising from your experience and using it to try and determine another in which you were not involved?
Not at all.
-
Not at all.
You weren't involved in Sheila's treatment but because you're aware of am incident in which you believe someone was misdiagnosed, you're suggesting it happened here. That's generalising.
-
Nobody gets a manual on how to deal with mental health it's down to the individual and their own individual problem/s which should be treated individually as per the problem and not bunched with others who appear to display the same problems. One man's meat is another man's poison and Sheila's condition was exacerbated by the medication that she was given.
It's easy to dismiss someone by saying they have schizophrenia because of their behaviour then medicating accordingly but-------------if that person hasn't got schizophrenia then the damage has been done by the wrong medication.
A part of Sheila's post-mortem records states quote " We might therefore conclude that the ingestion of Sheila's medication was unmonitored: posing an increasing probability of risk of uncontrolled frenzied behaviour " unquote.
But it on says "We MIGHT conclude.............." ie inviting debate? as opposed to MAY or CAN (conclude) instructing decision.
As for "normal" people not doing.....................I've known perfectly rational people to hurl things. A friend once threw a bag of flour at her husband's wet head when he forgot to pick her up from the hairdressers and she had to walk home in the rain. The bag broke! I've seen a rather nervous male raise his hand, in temper, to his father. I know a grown male who used to bite his siblings very hard when he couldn't get his own way -incidentally, there are no recorded incidents of Sheila being spiteful or vicious, because of ill temper, as a child- I know countless women who, out of temper, have put their husbands' dinners into dogs or dustbins. According to you, none of these people are "normal". Still, the more of these non "normals" who turn up, it makes it possible to see Sheila as part of a huge group of people all doing the similar thing from momentary anger/frustration. I'm inclined to think they all fall within the parameters of NORMAL.
-
But it on says "We MIGHT conclude.............." ie inviting debate? as opposed to MAY or CAN (conclude) instructing decision.
As for "normal" people not doing.....................I've known perfectly rational people to hurl things. A friend once threw a bag of flour at her husband's wet head when he forgot to pick her up from the hairdressers and she had to walk home in the rain. The bag broke! I've seen a rather nervous male raise his hand, in temper, to his father. I know a grown male who used to bite his siblings very hard when he couldn't get his own way -incidentally, there are no recorded incidents of Sheila being spiteful or vicious, because of ill temper, as a child- I know countless women who, out of temper, have put their husbands' dinners into dogs or dustbins. According to you, none of these people are "normal". Still, the more of these non "normals" who turn up, it makes it possible to see Sheila as part of a huge group of people all doing the similar thing from momentary anger/frustration. I'm inclined to think they all fall within the parameters of NORMAL.
I still do NOT know why people do such horrible things ? Many of them DO lead to murder because they CAN'T control their emotions. Whatever went amiss/awry in our house mum used to say " it's not the end of the world " and from being old enough to understand I've gone by what mum used to say.
What's the point in doing damage to yourself and others over something so trivial ? It solves nothing.
Not ONCE did I ever see a display of temper in our house.
There is far too much anger out there which is totally unnecessary !! It's NOT normal.
Yes I've been annoyed at times but never to the point of venting my annoyance toward anyone or anything. I also value things too much to throw and smash anything. A deep breath and a good swear to myself is all it takes to relieve tension.
I read an article yesterday which answered what I'd been saying for years and that was about the dangers in some women of PMT. PMP=pre-menstrual psychosis.
In the week during this time women have rages,display violence and can also kill.
Symptoms are akin to patients/women suffering hallucinations/delusions and general characteristics of a schizophrenic.
The onset is sudden and can occur after miscarriages,etc.
Sheila should have been treated with a hormone therapy to balance her hormones to see how or if this treatment solved her problem as I still maintain that her illness was due to this and not the schizophrenia that was diagnosed.
I can appreciate that not a lot was known in that area of gynaecology/mental well-being in the 1980's as now though it's still not fully known 33 years later except for the poor women coming forward now to pour out their symptoms.
A few women had spoken out about their " cruelty " towards their children which had been out of character all because of their hormone imbalance.
We all know what happens when this problem goes untreated.
-
P.S.Most doctors don't recognise the condition 30 odd years on !! What hope for these women ? They're listed as " mentally ill " and it's a disgrace.
-
Nobody gets a manual on how to deal with mental health it's down to the individual and their own individual problem/s which should be treated individually as per the problem and not bunched with others who appear to display the same problems. One man's meat is another man's poison and Sheila's condition was exacerbated by the medication that she was given.
It's easy to dismiss someone by saying they have schizophrenia because of their behaviour then medicating accordingly but-------------if that person hasn't got schizophrenia then the damage has been done by the wrong medication.
A part of Sheila's post-mortem records states quote " We might therefore conclude that the ingestion of Sheila's medication was unmonitored: posing an increasing probability of risk of uncontrolled frenzied behaviour " unquote.
Where did you get this from?
-
Where did you get this from?
It's on the forum headed " Sheila's post-mortem ",I think.
-
Still waiting for the anti Bamber brigade to present their alternative author to the pages of erratic writing kept in COLP Box 57.
-
I still do NOT know why people do such horrible things ? Many of them DO lead to murder because they CAN'T control their emotions. Whatever went amiss/awry in our house mum used to say " it's not the end of the world " and from being old enough to understand I've gone by what mum used to say.
What's the point in doing damage to yourself and others over something so trivial ? It solves nothing.
Not ONCE did I ever see a display of temper in our house.
There is far too much anger out there which is totally unnecessary !! It's NOT normal.
Yes I've been annoyed at times but never to the point of venting my annoyance toward anyone or anything. I also value things too much to throw and smash anything. A deep breath and a good swear to myself is all it takes to relieve tension.
I read an article yesterday which answered what I'd been saying for years and that was about the dangers in some women of PMT. PMP=pre-menstrual psychosis.
In the week during this time women have rages,display violence and can also kill.
Symptoms are akin to patients/women suffering hallucinations/delusions and general characteristics of a schizophrenic.
The onset is sudden and can occur after miscarriages,etc.
Sheila should have been treated with a hormone therapy to balance her hormones to see how or if this treatment solved her problem as I still maintain that her illness was due to this and not the schizophrenia that was diagnosed.
I can appreciate that not a lot was known in that area of gynaecology/mental well-being in the 1980's as now though it's still not fully known 33 years later except for the poor women coming forward now to pour out their symptoms.
A few women had spoken out about their " cruelty " towards their children which had been out of character all because of their hormone imbalance.
We all know what happens when this problem goes untreated.
I was reading a book on Darlie Routier this week and I still can't make her out. Do you have any ideas as to what mental health condition she was suffering from?
-
Still waiting for the anti Bamber brigade to present their alternative author to the pages of erratic writing kept in COLP Box 57.
Already answered you - it could have been written by ANYONE! I also asked you who Vincent was/is? oh an Syc? And why two six year olds would say "god bless" - not really a six year old phrase is it? ::)
-
Syc could have been short for psychiatrist as both mother and daughter had been treated by them.
Vincent in my mind is the song and its wording about Vincent van Gogh and his tragic life of mental anguish which could have featured in Sheila's letters.
-
If you read the lyrics to the song,it's fitting.
-
I hadn't believed the writings were Sheila's until a few years later when I twigged who " syc and Vincent " could be and it made sense ( to me anyway )when I studied it.
-
I still do NOT know why people do such horrible things ? Many of them DO lead to murder because they CAN'T control their emotions. Whatever went amiss/awry in our house mum used to say " it's not the end of the world " and from being old enough to understand I've gone by what mum used to say.
What's the point in doing damage to yourself and others over something so trivial ? It solves nothing.
Not ONCE did I ever see a display of temper in our house.
There is far too much anger out there which is totally unnecessary !! It's NOT normal.
Yes I've been annoyed at times but never to the point of venting my annoyance toward anyone or anything. I also value things too much to throw and smash anything. A deep breath and a good swear to myself is all it takes to relieve tension.
I read an article yesterday which answered what I'd been saying for years and that was about the dangers in some women of PMT. PMP=pre-menstrual psychosis.
In the week during this time women have rages,display violence and can also kill.
Symptoms are akin to patients/women suffering hallucinations/delusions and general characteristics of a schizophrenic.
The onset is sudden and can occur after miscarriages,etc.
Sheila should have been treated with a hormone therapy to balance her hormones to see how or if this treatment solved her problem as I still maintain that her illness was due to this and not the schizophrenia that was diagnosed.
I can appreciate that not a lot was known in that area of gynaecology/mental well-being in the 1980's as now though it's still not fully known 33 years later except for the poor women coming forward now to pour out their symptoms.
A few women had spoken out about their " cruelty " towards their children which had been out of character all because of their hormone imbalance.
We all know what happens when this problem goes untreated.
There is a reason why it's called PMS/PMT - that's because it happens BEFORE menstruation. And given that it was first described in 1931, it wasn't news to doctors in the 1980's. I guess the article wasn't that informative!
-
I hadn't believed the writings were Sheila's until a few years later when I twigged who " syc and Vincent " could be and it made sense ( to me anyway )when I studied it.
Sounds like a cheesy ventriloquist act! I still don't believe she wrote them - I think it's billhooks!
-
There is a reason why it's called PMS/PMT - that's because it happens BEFORE menstruation. And given that it was first described in 1931, it wasn't news to doctors in the 1980's. I guess the article wasn't that informative!
PMP wasn't heard of and neither was PPP.
The article was very informative-----why wouldn't it be ?
In the late 50's anyone suffering from PMT would be put in an asylum------that's how much was known then.
-
Much to my annoyance both PMP and PPP have been classed as mental illnesses.
-
Much to my annoyance both PMP and PPP have been classed as mental illnesses.
But I would have thought that would have to be in combination with other problems confronting the woman in her daily life?
-
Syc could have been short for psychiatrist as both mother and daughter had been treated by them.
Vincent in my mind is the song and its wording about Vincent van Gogh and his tragic life of mental anguish which could have featured in Sheila's letters.
So a psychiatrist was also looking after Christine and the Vincent is Vincent Van Gogh? Really? And these things convinced you that the letters were genuine? :-\
-
If you read the lyrics to the song,it's fitting.
I know the song well - how is it fitting?
-
I know the song well - how is it fitting?
Like I said read the lyrics. Second thoughts,you mightn't understand the connection being as you don't believe Sheila killed herself.
One thing that NONE of us knows is whether or not she heard voices in her head .
-
Like I said read the lyrics. Second thoughts,you mightn't understand the connection being as you don't believe Sheila killed herself.
One thing that NONE of us knows is whether or not she heard voices in her head .
The letter is alleged to be for Christine, so why would a 'Syc' be looking after her and apparently, Vincent smacked someone. The whole things doesn't make any sense and it certainy doesn't read like any kind of suicide note - it's just gibberish.
-
PMP wasn't heard of and neither was PPP.
The article was very informative-----why wouldn't it be ?
In the late 50's anyone suffering from PMT would be put in an asylum------that's how much was known then.
It was heard of in the late 1960's/early 70's. A friend was the first woman to get let off a speeding fine citing PMS as being responsible for erratic behaviour every month.
-
Like I said read the lyrics. Second thoughts,you mightn't understand the connection being as you don't believe Sheila killed herself.
One thing that NONE of us knows is whether or not she heard voices in her head .
She doesn't seem to have spoken about hearing voices in her head.
-
She doesn't seem to have spoken about hearing voices in her head.
So you know then ? How ?
-
The letter is alleged to be for Christine, so why would a 'Syc' be looking after her and apparently, Vincent smacked someone. The whole things doesn't make any sense and it certainy doesn't read like any kind of suicide note - it's just gibberish.
A suicide note doesn't have to read like a suicide note.? ( however a suicide note reads like ) Yes,gibberish is what Sheila's thoughts were so she spoke her thoughts. Obviously quite unwell from where I'm sitting.
-
So you know then ? How ?
A) It's not in her notes
B) I'm not inclined to call Dr Ferguson a liar who rewrote everything pertaining to Sheila's care.
-
Whatever their thoughts are they're real to them and they see what they see and hear what they hear.
-
A suicide note doesn't have to read like a suicide note.? ( however a suicide note reads like ) Yes,gibberish is what Sheila's thoughts were so she spoke her thoughts. Obviously quite unwell from where I'm sitting.
Are you saying that, whatever rational and logical explanation can be put on it, you reckon that what you insist is a suicide note is a win/win for supporters?
-
Are you saying that, whatever rational and logical explanation can be put on it, you reckon that what you insist is a suicide note is a win/win for supporters?
Yes I do. At the bottom of one of the notes is a telephone number which I remember trying to ring a few years back but got a dull tone. However again studying the number there's a small " dash " between the first two digits which tells me that it was an international call which required the code then the number after it so I then came to the conclusion that it was her birth other that she had possibly tried to ring.
-
The number is written as follows : 01-989 4191.
-
A) It's not in her notes
B) I'm not inclined to call Dr Ferguson a liar who rewrote everything pertaining to Sheila's care.
That's debateable.
-
Yes I do. At the bottom of one of the notes is a telephone number which I remember trying to ring a few years back but got a dull tone. However again studying the number there's a small " dash " between the first two digits which tells me that it was an international call which required the code then the number after it so I then came to the conclusion that it was her birth other that she had possibly tried to ring.
So you don't think it strange, having told her that there couldn't be an ongoing relationship because her family didn't know about her, that Christine gives Sheila her phone number?
-
A suicide note doesn't have to read like a suicide note.? ( however a suicide note reads like ) Yes,gibberish is what Sheila's thoughts were so she spoke her thoughts. Obviously quite unwell from where I'm sitting.
Which allows the supporters to claim any old scrap of paper was her suicide note! She was sane enough to load a weapons she'd never used before, chamber a round and fire shots accurate calculated shots at 5 victims!
-
So you don't think it strange, having told her that there couldn't be an ongoing relationship because her family didn't know about her, that Christine gives Sheila her phone number?
The number may have already been given to her from when Christine had been first contacted.
-
Why do you think a birth mother would discontinue contact ? A bit harsh isn't it ?
I thought everything was going well and that acceptance was in progress.
-
Why do you think a birth mother would discontinue contact ? A bit harsh isn't it ?
I thought everything was going well and that acceptance was in progress.
I imagine she was scared of the disruption it would cause withing her 'real' family? I don't know from where you got the idea that all was going swimmingly well. It was my understanding that Christine met Sheila on a stopover enroute to Europe.
-
The number may have already been given to her from when Christine had been first contacted.
Cept it's not a Canadian number!
-
The number may have already been given to her from when Christine had been first contacted.
Why? When she didn't want her family to know of Sheila's existence?
-
I imagine she was scared of the disruption it would cause withing her 'real' family? I don't know from where you got the idea that all was going swimmingly well. It was my understanding that Christine met Sheila on a stopover enroute to Europe.
Yes Heathrow Airport I believe.
-
Which allows the supporters to claim any old scrap of paper was her suicide note! She was sane enough to load a weapons she'd never used before, chamber a round and fire shots accurate calculated shots at 5 victims!
Not forgetting that Sheila had been " sane enough " at other times to watch how a gun was loaded ! You talk as though she'd always been incapable of doing anything and that wasn't the case.
-
Yes Heathrow Airport I believe.
Which rather sounds as if it wasn't a trip arranged to enable her to see the child she'd given up. More, that she could squeeze a meeting into a prearranged trip.
-
Not forgetting that Sheila had been " sane enough " at other times to watch how a gun was loaded ! You talk as though she'd always been incapable of doing anything and that wasn't the case.
She saw a shot gun loaded one and fired it into the air. That really doesn't explain being able to attach a magazine, chamber a shot, re-load etc, while her mind ws in a state mad enough to produce that gibberish.
-
Which rather sounds as if it wasn't a trip arranged to enable her to see the child she'd given up. More, that she could squeeze a meeting into a prearranged trip.
I suppose it would give her a get out if things had proceeded badly.
-
She saw a shot gun loaded one and fired it into the air. That really doesn't explain being able to attach a magazine, chamber a shot, re-load etc, while her mind ws in a state mad enough to produce that gibberish.
The more gibberish the more assertion to continue what she set out to do and do it she did.
Sheila wasn't an idiot and would have known how to chamber and load etc. She'd have seen it done on shoots.
-
Which rather sounds as if it wasn't a trip arranged to enable her to see the child she'd given up. More, that she could squeeze a meeting into a prearranged trip.
Well that would have upset Sheila no end ! It certainly would have left her wondering who she had belonged to.
A mother who was constantly at loggerheads.
A bio-mother who didn't want to know.
An ex-husband who'd found someone else.
Twin sons who'd spent more time with their father.
The mention of her boys being fostered.
How much more could she take ?
-
Sheila's problems would have tested the strongest.
-
Well that would have upset Sheila no end ! It certainly would have left her wondering who she had belonged to.
A mother who was constantly at loggerheads.
A bio-mother who didn't want to know.
An ex-husband who'd found someone else.
Twin sons who'd spent more time with their father.
The mention of her boys being fostered.
How much more could she take ?
Ooops, sorry, Lookout. We all get it wrong sometimes. According to CAL, it seems the meeting went very well. Christine met Sheila at Tora's house in May and they hit it off immediately. She also met Colin and the twins at Sheila's flat and for the rest of her trip they were inseparable. Colin states that for the first time Sheila had hope for the future because they intended to continue the relationship. According to Colin, even Sheila and June were getting along better.
-
Ooops, sorry, Lookout. We all get it wrong sometimes. According to CAL, it seems the meeting went very well. Christine met Sheila at Tora's house in May and they hit it off immediately. She also met Colin and the twins at Sheila's flat and for the rest of her trip they were inseparable. Colin states that for the first time Sheila had hope for the future because they intended to continue the relationship. According to Colin, even Sheila and June were getting along better.
Yes, I have just read this too Jane.
-
Well that would have upset Sheila no end ! It certainly would have left her wondering who she had belonged to.
A mother who was constantly at loggerheads.
A bio-mother who didn't want to know.
An ex-husband who'd found someone else.
Twin sons who'd spent more time with their father.
The mention of her boys being fostered.
How much more could she take ?
No, She and June were apparently getting on much better
She and her bio mother were apparently inseparable
She hadn't been married to Colin for years
She saw her boys often
Only Jeremy mentioned the fostering
-
Well that would have upset Sheila no end ! It certainly would have left her wondering who she had belonged to.
A mother who was constantly at loggerheads.
A bio-mother who didn't want to know.
An ex-husband who'd found someone else.
Twin sons who'd spent more time with their father.
The mention of her boys being fostered.
How much more could she take ?
From the books it seems as if birth mother and daughter hit it off from the word go. Christine was everything June wasn't. Sheila did try to spare June's feelings however by keeping the visit secret and never as far as I read rubbed her nose in it.
-
From the books it seems as if birth mother and daughter hit it off from the word go. Christine was everything June wasn't. Sheila did try to spare June's feelings however by keeping the visit secret and never as far as I read rubbed her nose in it.
Yep, everything to live for!
-
Ooops, sorry, Lookout. We all get it wrong sometimes. According to CAL, it seems the meeting went very well. Christine met Sheila at Tora's house in May and they hit it off immediately. She also met Colin and the twins at Sheila's flat and for the rest of her trip they were inseparable. Colin states that for the first time Sheila had hope for the future because they intended to continue the relationship. According to Colin, even Sheila and June were getting along better.
So everything in the garden was lovely then ? Phew,says you.
-
Therefore the phone number still stands---------but whether that call transpired we don't know either.
-
So everything in the garden was lovely then ? Phew,says you.
No, says Tora and Colin and Christine.
-
Therefore the phone number still stands---------but whether that call transpired we don't know either.
But that's not a Canadian number.
-
So everything in the garden was lovely then ? Phew,says you.
Well, it does seem as if it was heading that way.
-
Ooops, sorry, Lookout. We all get it wrong sometimes. According to CAL, it seems the meeting went very well. Christine met Sheila at Tora's house in May and they hit it off immediately. She also met Colin and the twins at Sheila's flat and for the rest of her trip they were inseparable. Colin states that for the first time Sheila had hope for the future because they intended to continue the relationship. According to Colin, even Sheila and June were getting along better.
Yes and this was the last thing Jeremy wanted, a rapprochement with mother and sister. June also had plans to initiate an allowance for Sheila and there may have been future educational expenditure on the twins.
-
But that's not a Canadian number.
The 01 before the rest of the numbers could have been in the 1980's as all have changed since. I used to have to go through the international operator to phone my daughter in Oz in the 80's.
-
The 01 before the rest of the numbers could have been in the 1980's as all have changed since. I used to have to go through the international operator to phone my daughter in Oz in the 80's.
Not talking about the 01 - I'm talking about the 989
-
Not talking about the 01 - I'm talking about the 989
How do you know ? It could have been 30 years ago.
-
How do you know ? It could have been 30 years ago.
Why would they change all of the city codes? They haven't here.
-
Sheila might have missed a digit out ? She'd written " phone " by the side of the number.
Otherwise if the 01 had been a continuation of all the numbers the area would be Ross-on-Wye.
-
Where is this note again and why has it been dismissed by the Defence?
-
Sheila might have missed a digit out ? She'd written " phone " by the side of the number.
Otherwise if the 01 had been a continuation of all the numbers the area would be Ross-on-Wye.
For starters we don't know she did write it and who on earth would be in Ross-on-Wye? What's the Hereford connection? Did Vincent live there with Syc? ;D ;D ;D
-
Where is this note again and why has it been dismissed by the Defence?
Cos it be silliness.
-
Why would they change all of the city codes? They haven't here.
They did in Australia or here because there became no need to go through the international operator so instead use a different code which is a direct line.
-
They did in Australia or here because there became no need to go through the international operator so instead use a different code which is a direct line.
I'm not talking about the country code Lookout, I'm talking about the city code!
-
Where is this note again and why has it been dismissed by the Defence?
It was never shown to the defence.Nobody knew of its existence until later.There are a few pages of these garbled notes,at least 6.
-
Cos it be silliness.
I wondered what your answer would be.
-
I wondered what your answer would be.
Now you know.
-
I'm not talking about the country code Lookout, I'm talking about the city code!
Country/city same difference.
-
It was never shown to the defence.Nobody knew of its existence until later.There are a few pages of these garbled notes,at least 6.
How do you know it was never shown to the defence? Or that no one knew? They're on the internet - not hidden, not under PII.
-
Now you know.
Yes-------silliness.Because you hadn't dared give the right answer.
-
Country/city same difference.
No, it isn't - the country code for Canada is 001 - the city code is the next three numbers, the numbers after that are the unique telephone number for the address.
-
Yes-------silliness.Because you hadn't dared give the right answer.
Which is?
-
How do you know it was never shown to the defence? Or that no one knew? They're on the internet - not hidden, not under PII.
Not now they're not,but they were kept out of sight originally. The notes/letters didn't go on the forum until 2014 after Mike had found them.
-
Not now they're not,but they were kept out of sight originally. The notes/letters didn't go on the forum until 2014 after Mike had found them.
So if Mike found them them weren't hidden were they? ::)
-
So if Mike found them them weren't hidden were they? ::)
I thought Jeremy gave the box of bits to Mike which means that Jeremy must have had it so how could it have been hidden.
-
So if Mike found them them weren't hidden were they? ::)
They were hidden from the jury etc ! Because EP couldn't make them out which should have told them that the author had been unbalanced at the time of writing them though EP wouldn't have thought of that. ::)
-
They were hidden from the jury etc ! Because EP couldn't make them out which should have told them that the author had been unbalanced at the time of writing them though EP wouldn't have thought of that. ::)
They are NOT the note described as ILLEGIBLE (for the umpteenth time!)
-
They are NOT the note described as ILLEGIBLE (for the umpteenth time!)
The one on the forum of 2014 IS ILLEGIBLE !! I challenge you to read it out------all FOUR of them.
-
The one on the forum of 2014 IS ILLEGIBLE !! I challenge you to read it out------all FOUR of them.
The fact remains, that if it came out of the box given to Mike, by Jeremy, then it had been in Jeremy's possession. Ergo, it was not hidden.
-
The fact remains, that if it came out of the box given to Mike, by Jeremy, then it had been in Jeremy's possession. Ergo, it was not hidden.
Prior to JB's possession of it-------where was it ? He didn't go into prison with any such information.
It certainly wasn't available in the 2002 appeal or it would have been presented.
When JB himself had requested documents from EP they'd acknowledged by sending him those which were obviously " cherry-picked " but according to JB there were a number of documents which had " inadvertently " been amongst those which had been requested of which could well have included the notes written by Sheila.
-
Prior to JB's possession of it-------where was it ? He didn't go into prison with any such information.
It certainly wasn't available in the 2002 appeal or it would have been presented.
When JB himself had requested documents from EP they'd acknowledged by sending him those which were obviously " cherry-picked " but according to JB there were a number of documents which had " inadvertently " been amongst those which had been requested of which could well have included the notes written by Sheila.
If it was in Jeremy's possession, failing a raid on -and theft from- the place where it was allegedly being kept hidden, it was NEVER hidden. It rather suggests, as Caroline has already said, it's a piece of nonsense.
-
The main reason for the notes to have been " ignored " was because nobody could understand what was written and it wouldn't have entered anyone's head to have had them scrutinised by an expert.
Though EP didn't do clues unless it involved JB and its results handed to them on a plate.
-
If it was in Jeremy's possession, failing a raid on -and theft from- the place where it was allegedly being kept hidden, it was NEVER hidden. It rather suggests, as Caroline has already said, it's a piece of nonsense.
Why not look into it before you condemn it ? Read these letters yourself !!
" Taff " Jones originally had the notes.
Go on search for " handwritten notes by Sheila " and decide for yourself,eh ? While you're at it TRANSLATE them for us all !! Seeing as you're so clever and know it all.
-
Why not look into it before you condemn it ? Read these letters yourself !!
" Taff " Jones originally had the notes.
Go on search for " handwritten notes by Sheila " and decide for yourself,eh ? While you're at it TRANSLATE them for us all !! Seeing as you're so clever and know it all.
To the best of my memory, it's already been done. You, I, and several others spent night after night trying to turn them into something we wanted them to be.
-
To the best of my memory, it's already been done. You, I, and several others spent night after night trying to turn them into something we wanted them to be.
So you're not going to do as I do then and go over these things thoroughly ? It's NOT a case of turning ANYTHING into what WE want it to be. A man's life has been at stake for the past 33 years through people like you who won't bother their arses looking into the details of this crime----namely EP and we now have the forensic team being awkward. Rather they DON'T want to look any further into anything in case it throws up something they DON'T want to see or hear ? Is that including you too ??
-
I'm telling you that EP have got it all wrong and have made the biggest mistake in the history of MOJ's !!
-
Some confusion exists about the contents of a handwritten note that cops seized from a top a bedside cabinet in Sheila Caffell's bedroom?
For example, there is still a possibility that the hand written note being spoken about (DRH/42) has not yet been properly or fully disclosed! It's contents must have convinced DCI Jones and the other senior detectives that Sheila had been planning to kill everyone, and then take her own life - a factor which came into play when senior officers restaged Sheila Caffell's death circumstances on the parents bedroom floor after they had shot her dead during the performance of 'informatives'...
-
The one on the forum of 2014 IS ILLEGIBLE !! I challenge you to read it out------all FOUR of them.
I don't care if you can't read it - that is NOT they note THEY were referring to! But keep posting that it is - it won't get you anywhere.
-
Prior to JB's possession of it-------where was it ? He didn't go into prison with any such information.
It certainly wasn't available in the 2002 appeal or it would have been presented.
When JB himself had requested documents from EP they'd acknowledged by sending him those which were obviously " cherry-picked " but according to JB there were a number of documents which had " inadvertently " been amongst those which had been requested of which could well have included the notes written by Sheila.
Why would that note have been presented at an appeal? And why are you keep referring to them as having been written by Sheila when you have no idea who wrote them?
-
The main reason for the notes to have been " ignored " was because nobody could understand what was written and it wouldn't have entered anyone's head to have had them scrutinised by an expert.
Though EP didn't do clues unless it involved JB and its results handed to them on a plate.
Were they ignored or were they hidden? You think because a bunch of amateur sleuths place importance on them, that rather than just being dismissed as nonsense and irrelevant they must have been hidden even though (according to you), you can't read them anyway? Why would someone hide something you can't read?
-
Some confusion exists about the contents of a handwritten note that cops seized from a top a bedside cabinet in Sheila Caffell's bedroom?
For example, there is still a possibility that the hand written note being spoken about (DRH/42) has not yet been properly or fully disclosed! It's contents must have convinced DCI Jones and the other senior detectives that Sheila had been planning to kill everyone, and then take her own life - a factor which came into play when senior officers restaged Sheila Caffell's death circumstances on the parents bedroom floor after they had shot her dead during the performance of 'informatives'...
Mention of a rifle which was captured in a crime scene photograph taken in the kitchen, that no-one was to make mention about when making up their notes, reports, and witness statements was almost certainly the same rifle which was used to shoot Sheila with (bullet PV/20). She survived that shot and the contents of the timed police radio message log entries at 07.35am, 07.37am, 07.38am, 07.42am, 07.45am, and 8.10am confirm the presence of her body downstairs in the kitchen presumed dead, by way of suicide. Everything points to Sheila Caffell's body not being anywhere at all upstairs between 7.35am and 8.10am...
The timing of when the crucial photograph was taken which captured the rifle in the kitchen is vitally important to establish an accurate time line of the events involving the shooting of Sheila once in the kitchen with that rifle, and much later on upstairs on the parents bedroom floor when she received the fatal shot via the semi-automatic anshuzt rifle! I have it on good authority that the second shot was inflicted at precisely 9.13am, at a time when Jeremy Bamber was outside the farmhouse, in particular, he was sat in a police vehicle which was parked up in Pages Lane, close to buildings known as the farm cottages!
Two things of significance here, (1) what happened to the rifle found in the kitchen and captured on one of the crime scene photographs? And (2) How did the anshuzt rifle managed to become transported from its resting place against the inside first floor box room window at about 7.15am (when it mysteriously appeared at this window), and by 9.13am when it ends up with Sheila Caffell's body on her parents bedroom floor?
-
Why not look into it before you condemn it ? Read these letters yourself !!
" Taff " Jones originally had the notes.
Go on search for " handwritten notes by Sheila " and decide for yourself,eh ? While you're at it TRANSLATE them for us all !! Seeing as you're so clever and know it all.
I have read them - why would Taff Jones have them if they were evidence?
-
So you're not going to do as I do then and go over these things thoroughly ? It's NOT a case of turning ANYTHING into what WE want it to be. A man's life has been at stake for the past 33 years through people like you who won't bother their arses looking into the details of this crime----namely EP and we now have the forensic team being awkward. Rather they DON'T want to look any further into anything in case it throws up something they DON'T want to see or hear ? Is that including you too ??
Waste time on something that can't be authenticated one way or another? Fill ya boots and crack on!
-
Some confusion exists about the contents of a handwritten note that cops seized from a top a bedside cabinet in Sheila Caffell's bedroom?
For example, there is still a possibility that the hand written note being spoken about (DRH/42) has not yet been properly or fully disclosed! It's contents must have convinced DCI Jones and the other senior detectives that Sheila had been planning to kill everyone, and then take her own life - a factor which came into play when senior officers restaged Sheila Caffell's death circumstances on the parents bedroom floor after they had shot her dead during the performance of 'informatives'...
But it is the one that contains the letters and numbers and described as 'illegible'.
-
I don't care if you can't read it - that is NOT they note THEY were referring to! But keep posting that it is - it won't get you anywhere.
It's still one of THE notes of interest though whether you like it or not.
-
But it is the one that contains the letters and numbers and described as 'illegible'.
NO it ISN'T !!
-
Waste time on something that can't be authenticated one way or another? Fill ya boots and crack on!
Well you can take a running jump because I won't do as you say so TUFF !!
-
Two things of significance here, (1) what happened to the rifle found in the kitchen and captured on one of the crime scene photographs? And (2) How did the anshuzt rifle managed to become transported from its resting place against the inside first floor box room window at about 7.15am (when it mysteriously appeared at this window), and by 9.13am when it ends up with Sheila Caffell's body on her parents bedroom floor?
Had Sheila Caffell's handwritten note been resting all the while on top of a cabinet at the side of her bed?
And the Bible, how could it have been resting against Sheila's right arm after 9.13am, if in the first instance between 7.35am and 8.10am, there had only been three bodies upstairs, and Sheila's body was not one of these! Where was the Bible when Sheila's body was on the kitchen floor confirmed as being dead, having committed suicide there? How could Sheila's right arm end up slightly underneath the Bible on the parents bedroom floor after 9.13am, when her body was elsewhere downstairs less than two hours previously?
The cops staged Sheila Caffell's death scene as a suicide on the parents bedroom floor after they shot her dead during an 'informatives' blunder...
-
Had Sheila Caffell's handwritten note been resting all the while on top of a cabinet at the side of her bed?
And the Bible, how could it have been resting against Sheila's right arm after 9.13am, if in the first instance between 7.35am and 8.10am, there had only been three bodies upstairs, and Sheila's body was not one of these! Where was the Bible when Sheila's body was on the kitchen floor confirmed as being dead, having committed suicide there? How could Sheila's right arm end up slightly underneath the Bible on the parents bedroom floor after 9.13am, when her body was elsewhere downstairs less than two hours previously?
The cops staged Sheila Caffell's death scene as a suicide on the parents bedroom floor after they shot her dead during an 'informatives' blunder...
Nothing could be any clearer!
-
It's your own fault if you won't bother to read what I've mentioned-------not mine. It wasn't just the page with letters and numbers which could have been written by anyone these are pages of ILLEGIBLE drivel !!6
-
It's your own fault if you won't bother to read what I've mentioned-------not mine. It wasn't just the page with letters and numbers which could have been written by anyone these are pages of ILLEGIBLE drivel !!6
These 6 pages of almost undecipherable thoughts were almost certainly the key handwritten notes referred to as part of the original exhibit DRH/42, which convinced the senior officers that Sheila Caffell had been intending to kill her family, and then herself. The decipherable contents served to support the case which the police originally presented as a 'four murders, and a suicide'...
However, once the nature of the investigation changed and Jeremy Bamber became the focus as the killer, Essex police withheld the handwritten 6 pages, and disclosed in its place the piece of paper with what appeared to be a coded message puzzle written out in printed letters of the alphabet! The 6 pages of handwritten notes were not disclosed as having been found as part and parcel of exhibit DRH/42, because the contents favoured Sheila to have been the killer of the other four victims...
Ask yourselves why there is no accompanying witness statement from any police officer stating where and when he or she seized these significantly important 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten note, that cops referred to as her suicide note?
-
NO it ISN'T !!
This just shows how you don't care about facts, you only care about making things fit or at least trying to. It's on this forum in the archives, it has the reference number attached - don't take my word though. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,887.msg27451.html#msg27451
And here is a post from Mike, stating the same - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,197.msg520.html#msg520
So ....... YES! It is!
-
These 6 pages of almost undecipherable thoughts were almost certainly the key handwritten notes referred to as part of the original exhibit DRH/42, which convinced the senior officers that Sheila Caffell had been intending to kill her family, and then herself. The decipherable contents served to support the case which the police originally presented as a 'four murders, and a suicide'...
However, once the nature of the investigation changed and Jeremy Bamber became the focus as the killer, Essex police withheld the handwritten 6 pages, and disclosed in its place the piece of paper with what appeared to be a coded message puzzle written out in printed letters of the alphabet! The 6 pages of handwritten notes were not disclosed as having been found as part and parcel of exhibit DRH/42, because the contents favoured Sheila to have been the killer of the other four victims...
Ask yourselves why there is no accompanying witness statement from any police officer stating where and when he or she seized these significantly important 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten note, that cops referred to as her suicide note?
Sheila knew that the police would be arriving at the farmhouse, and that the unfolding tragedy would be all over the tabloids, in particular, 'The Sun's newspaper!
Ask yourselves how was it possible for Sheila to know that the police were already on their way to the scene?
She could only have known that the police were on there way because she attacked Neville Bamber downstairs in the kitchen whilst he was speaking to the police at 3.26am, 'Daughter gone BERSERK', and 'My daughter has got hold of one of my guns'. It leaps out of the papers that Sheila must have shot Neville Bamber in the face, in particular, she shot at his mouth and the region of his jaw to prevent him being able to speak to anybody any further, or at all! Sheila knew that the cops were on the way because she must have witnessed Neville Bamber speaking to the police...
-
It's your own fault if you won't bother to read what I've mentioned-------not mine. It wasn't just the page with letters and numbers which could have been written by anyone these are pages of ILLEGIBLE drivel !!6
There is a difference between NOTE and NOTES - the reference states NOTE! They found ONE NOTE on the bedside table, the other stuff could have come from anywhere and until you KNOW where they other notes came from, you're just trying to make things fit!
-
There is a difference between NOTE and NOTES - the reference states NOTE! They found ONE NOTE on the bedside table, the other stuff could have come from anywhere and until you KNOW where they other notes came from, you're just trying to make things fit!
Aren't you too trying to make things not fit ? ::)
-
Aren't you too trying to make things not fit ? ::)
No
-
The 'disclosed' contents of exhibit DRH/42, consists of 2 pages of content...
-
The 'disclosed' contents of exhibit DRH/42, consists of 2 pages of content...
I know.
-
There is a difference between NOTE and NOTES - the reference states NOTE! They found ONE NOTE on the bedside table, the other stuff could have come from anywhere and until you KNOW where they other notes came from, you're just trying to make things fit!
I agree with Caroline, we must wait and see, or find out where these 6 handwritten notes originated from?
For my part, I believe they were part of exhibit DRH/42, but we shall have to wait and see...
-
So where does the "my babies go to their rest" note come from?
-
I agree with Caroline, we must wait and see, or find out where these 6 handwritten notes originated from?
For my part, I believe they were part of exhibit DRH/42, but we shall have to wait and see...
The decipherable contents of the 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten notes appear to me to be representative of her putting pen to paper around the time that this tragedy was unfolding...
-
The decipherable contents of the 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten notes appear to me to be representative of her putting pen to paper around the time that this tragedy was unfolding...
She knew that the police would be arriving at the scene, and she was writing to her paternal mother about the tragedy being mentioned prominently in 'The Sun' newspaper, there is also mention of the after life...
-
I agree with Caroline, we must wait and see, or find out where these 6 handwritten notes originated from?
For my part, I believe they were part of exhibit DRH/42, but we shall have to wait and see...
Thanks Mike. Blowing up the picture of Sheila's room, you can only see one note on the bedside table.
-
There are yet more handwritten notes on this forum under the heading of " Hand written note kept by DCI " Taff " Jones,written by Bambi before death ?". 2014.
-
There are yet more handwritten notes on this forum under the heading of " Hand written note kept by DCI " Taff " Jones,written by Bambi before death ?". 2014.
Not more, the same as the ones.
-
Not more, the same as the ones.
But different to what's posted here !
-
So you're not going to do as I do then and go over these things thoroughly ? It's NOT a case of turning ANYTHING into what WE want it to be. A man's life has been at stake for the past 33 years through people like you who won't bother their arses looking into the details of this crime----namely EP and we now have the forensic team being awkward. Rather they DON'T want to look any further into anything in case it throws up something they DON'T want to see or hear ? Is that including you too ??
I read the above as a mixture of frustration, temper tantrum, and CODSWALLOP. You seem determined that there WILL be something there even if it's only your invention or in your imaginings. Is this about us "now having the forensic team being awkward"? What is it you're accusing them of? Fear of finding something they'd rather not know about? Personally, I'd have said, as an independent scientific agency who remain objective, such would have been a feather in their cap. Are you intimating that they, along with countless others, are part of a conspiracy?
-
But different to what's posted here !
Did you not bother to read the thread you referred to? http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5372.msg233732.html#msg233732 - They are the same letters you've been on about for the past week. Such attention to detail as was never seen! ;D ;D ;D
-
Did you not bother to read the thread you referred to? http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5372.msg233732.html#msg233732 - They are the same letters you've been on about for the past week. Such attention to detail as was never seen! ;D ;D ;D
Notable by the absence of them on here leading people to believe that all there was happened to be one note with letters and numbers. You've surreptitiously covered-up somewhere just as EP did.
-
Notable by the absence of them on here leading people to believe that all there was happened to be one note with letters and numbers. You've surreptitiously covered-up somewhere just as EP did.
THEY ARE ON HERE! You've been banging on about them for years!
HERE! - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5372.0.html - READ the thread!
-
I read the above as a mixture of frustration, temper tantrum, and CODSWALLOP. You seem determined that there WILL be something there even if it's only your invention or in your imaginings. Is this about us "now having the forensic team being awkward"? What is it you're accusing them of? Fear of finding something they'd rather not know about? Personally, I'd have said, as an independent scientific agency who remain objective, such would have been a feather in their cap. Are you intimating that they, along with countless others, are part of a conspiracy?
It's your posts which are codswallop. The imagination you've got would certainly get any innocent into trouble. Half of what you've posted accuses me of saying things that I haven't said and I can only conclude that you're nothing less than a troublemaker.
Firstly I have no frustration nor temper tantrum-----why would I have ??
Why would I invent something which is already there to see ?
Unless you don't know the forensic team have refused to submit their findings to the CT legal team. EP are doing the same.
I didn't mention anything about a conspiracy.
-
It's your posts which are codswallop. The imagination you've got would certainly get any innocent into trouble. Half of what you've posted accuses me of saying things that I haven't said and I can only conclude that you're nothing less than a troublemaker.
Firstly I have no frustration nor temper tantrum-----why would I have ??
Why would I invent something which is already there to see ?
Unless you don't know the forensic team have refused to submit their findings to the CT legal team. EP are doing the same.
I didn't mention anything about a conspiracy.
Well now, if you don't wish to be accused of saying things you haven't, perhaps you should make it very clear what you are saying rather than implying it.
In answer to your question. I have no idea. I'm not a mind reader. I can only tell you how your post came across. You appear to see meanings others don't. I didn't know the forensic team were refusing to.............................I see no reason why they would. However, I can see every reason why the CT might say they would. I'm fully aware you didn't make any claims of a conspiracy. I was just checking.
-
Knew there was something familiar about the signature at the end of the 'so called' suicide note.
I have also added a copy of Sheila's signature at the end of her letter to Peter Jay,
-
Knew there was something familiar about the signature at the end of the 'so called' suicide note.
I have also added a copy of Sheila's signature at the end of her letter to Peter Jay,
Could we see this in the context of the whole note?
-
Could we see this in the context of the whole note?
Which note?
-
Thanks Mike. Blowing up the picture of Sheila's room, you can only see one note on the bedside table.
Yes, but which SOC team took the photograph you have posted up?
What time was this photograph taken, and what is the negative number / reference to this photograph?
The first SOCO team, consisting of DC Henderson and DC Oakey, or the 2nd SOCO team consisting of DI Ron Cook, DS Davidson, DC Hammersley and PC Bird?
-
Yes, but which SOC team took the photograph you have posted up?
What time was this photograph taken, and what is the negative number / reference to this photograph?
The first SOCO team, consisting of DC Henderson and DC Oakey, or the 2nd SOCO team consisting of DI Ron Cook, DS Davidson, DC Hammersley and PC Bird?
The item on top of the bedside cabinet looks more like a calculator that a solitary piece of notepaper, but I am prepared to be proven wrong...
-
Knew there was something familiar about the signature at the end of the 'so called' suicide note.
I have also added a copy of Sheila's signature at the end of her letter to Peter Jay,
Both versions of the notes were written by Sheila Caffell, she simply signed them differently at the bottom of each....
The letter she wrote to Ann and Peter Eaton was signed off as 'Sheila', whereas the distressed note that she composed around the time of the tragedy was signed off by her as 'Bambi', or as 'Bambs'..
-
Both versions of the notes were written by Sheila caffell, she simply signed them differently at the bottom of each....
The letter she wrote to Ann and Peter Eaton was signed off as 'Sheila', whereas the distressed note that she composed around the time of the tragedy was signed off by her as 'Bambi'..
Sorry Mike, I don't believe that those notes were written by Sheila and she didn't like being called Bambi. The signature looks like Jeremy's.
-
When would JB have signed/written the letter ?
-
Yes, but which SOC team took the photograph you have posted up?
What time was this photograph taken, and what is the negative number / reference to this photograph?
The first SOCO team, consisting of DC Henderson and DC Oakey, or the 2nd SOCO team consisting of DI Ron Cook, DS Davidson, DC Hammersley and PC Bird?
I thought PC Bird was the only one taking photographs?
-
I thought PC Bird was the only one taking photographs?
If there were 2 SOC teams -I don't recall being made aware of this, previously- can any of us really be amazed about the confusion? After all, it's hard enough to get the members of one group/team to arrive at a mutual conclusion/see the same scenario. Just imagine the confusion when there are two!!!
-
When would JB have signed/written the letter ?
Anytime.
-
Yes, but which SOC team took the photograph you have posted up?
What time was this photograph taken, and what is the negative number / reference to this photograph?
The first SOCO team, consisting of DC Henderson and DC Oakey, or the 2nd SOCO team consisting of DI Ron Cook, DS Davidson, DC Hammersley and PC Bird?
Bird took the pictures and the picture is in the archives.
-
Anytime.
How would JB have known what to write ?
-
How would JB have known what to write ?
Known what to write, it's just drivel. There is no coherent content, no secrets to reveal. Just a garbled monolog - just as if ....... yeah, just as if someone went crazy!
-
Just done further digging and this not could have been written on prison notepaper which used to look very much this
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5372.0;attach=36544)
Here is a note written by Reggie Kray back in 1992 same type of paper (source - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065325/The-frightening-prison-experience-I-Reggie-Krays-fears-meeting-Charles-Bronson.html)
-
Just done further digging and this not could have been written on prison notepaper which used to look very much this
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5372.0;attach=36544)
Here is a note written by Reggie Kray back in 1992 same type of paper (source - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065325/The-frightening-prison-experience-I-Reggie-Krays-fears-meeting-Charles-Bronson.html)
Now you are just getting desperate ;D
-
Now you are just getting desperate ;D
No, that comment stinks of desperation - I echo your call for the list of box 57! You asked for explanations and I have supplied them. I asked you what the significance Vincent and SYC were (apart from Vincent being an impressionist ........ painter and Mike's middle name). Still no answers from you though? Stuck?
-
Just done further digging and this not could have been written on prison notepaper which used to look very much this
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5372.0;attach=36544)
Here is a note written by Reggie Kray back in 1992 same type of paper (source - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065325/The-frightening-prison-experience-I-Reggie-Krays-fears-meeting-Charles-Bronson.html)
Well, I'm prepared to stake my life on there being no lined paper in the Bamber house. The very least would have been Basildon Bond. At the other end -and more likely- would have been letter headed and plain vellum.
-
No, that comment stinks of desperation - I echo your call for the list of box 57! You asked for explanations and I have supplied them. I asked you what the significance Vincent and SYC were (apart from Vincent being an impressionist ........ painter and Mike's middle name). Still no answers from you though? Stuck?
Your attempts to muddy the water do not refute the match in handwriting. Your attempts to muddy the water are too pathetic to waste time on to be frank.
-
Just done further digging and this not could have been written on prison notepaper which used to look very much this
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5372.0;attach=36544)
Here is a note written by Reggie Kray back in 1992 same type of paper (source - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2065325/The-frightening-prison-experience-I-Reggie-Krays-fears-meeting-Charles-Bronson.html)
That prison paper has 28 lines. The paper were are talking about has 23 lines. Plus if you look closely they are not one page but they two pages of a notebook type paper photocopied together side by side.
Oh dear.
-
Your attempts to muddy the water do not refute the match in handwriting. Your attempts to muddy the water are too pathetic to waste time on to be frank.
The writing doesn't match, look at the M and the Y! Too pathetic to waste time and yet here you are ;D
-
That prison paper has 28 lines. The paper were are talking about has 23 lines. Plus if you look closely they are not one page but they two pages of a notebook type paper photocopied together side by side.
Oh dear.
Oh dear is right - I have already anticipated this - but you're really scrutinising something you think is a waste of time. No matter.
OK, prison notepaper is like a book, it has a page at the front, two pages in the middle (when opened) and one page at the back. Page 1 and 2 can't be photographed side by side because they are two sides of the same page which is why you have to read down and NOT across. They have simply been cut in half! You can't actually see the bottom of the page so there may be more lines at the end or perhaps the pages simply had less lines. Worked out who Vincent and Syc are yet?
-
Maybe the reason why there is only 23 lines on the paper is because the first page comes with the prison stamp, it is exactly 5 lines long! (source is from the same article above).
-
Or maybe the pages came from this note book? ;D
-
Your attempts to muddy the water do not refute the match in handwriting. Your attempts to muddy the water are too pathetic to waste time on to be frank.
There are some similarities but the "l", "y" and "b" is sometimes written differently.
-
There are some similarities but the "l", "y" and "b" is sometimes written differently.
The M is different also and the Signature is far too bold and looks more like Bambers. They make no sense and unless you van work out who Vincent is and link him to Sheila, they aren't relevant. They could have been written at any time, by anyone one. Lets first ask where they 'originated' from?
-
Both versions of the notes were written by Sheila Caffell, she simply signed them differently at the bottom of each....
The letter she wrote to Ann and Peter Eaton was signed off as 'Sheila', whereas the distressed note that she composed around the time of the tragedy was signed off by her as 'Bambi', or as 'Bambs'..
More notably, is the documentation which accompanied these handwritten notes, that are known to have been written by Sheila Caffell in her own handwriting:-
-
I thought PC Bird was the only one taking photographs?
When he testified during the trial, he let slip that DC Oakey had taken one of the photographs which showed the barrel of the rifle resting against the left hand side of Sheila Caffells neck - also, there were around 358 non disclosed photographs which PC Bird did not take....
-
More notably, is the documentation which accompanied these handwritten notes, that are known to have been written by Sheila Caffell in her own handwriting:-
So because " no useful information contained " it was dismissed ?
-
The notes had been found in Sheila's bedroom--------JB wasn't in prison until 12 months later so how could her notes have been written on " prison paper ?"
-
Sheila hadn't been mentally capable of making sense in what she wrote--------she'd completely shut-off from the real world which can happen to ANYONE who's suffered traumas or on-going problems. Sheila's main problem being the separation from those she loved,her husband and her children.
-
The notes had been found in Sheila's bedroom--------JB wasn't in prison until 12 months later so how could her notes have been written on " prison paper ?"
So Sheila, who'd probably never, like her parents, had lined paper, went out and bought some specifically to write a 'suicide' note on?
-
So because " no useful information contained " it was dismissed ?
As, I guess, is ALL "no useful information contained" material pertaining to every case. Just multiply the Bamber case by thousands and you get a mountain of "no useful................"
-
As, I guess, is ALL "no useful information contained" material pertaining to every case. Just multiply the Bamber case by thousands and you get a mountain of "no useful................"
Yes,and I understand that mountains of " useless information " hasn't seen daylight ! Are we to believe that because it's deemed " useless " is the reason it hasn't been destroyed ?
-
Yes,and I understand that mountains of " useless information " hasn't seen daylight ! Are we to believe that because it's deemed " useless " is the reason it hasn't been destroyed ?
More likely it's because it's always been done that way. Eventually, it MAY be transferred to computer files, but just imagine how many decades of this 'non information' exists, balanced against -because of cuts in man power- the limited number of available personnel to do it..................and please DON'T tell me what 'they' SHOULD have. The facts remain that they either did or didn't and we're left with what IS.
-
More likely it's because it's always been done that way. Eventually, it MAY be transferred to computer files, but just imagine how many decades of this 'non information' exists, balanced against -because of cuts in man power- the limited number of available personnel to do it..................and please DON'T tell me what 'they' SHOULD have. The facts remain that they either did or didn't and we're left with what IS.
I'm supposing that which was transferred to computer files namely Holmes still unobtainable is yet more of your " useless information?"
Nothing to do with lack of man-power but re to do with the blatant withholding of something that EP know would disturb a hornets nest and open up a huge can of worms.
I'm convinced that EP thought it was the end of the case and JB in 1986 because their " prisoner " had no family to speak of and nobody who'd been particularly interested at that stage until years later people started to ask questions. How wrong they were !!
-
I'm supposing that which was transferred to computer files namely Holmes still unobtainable is yet more of your " useless information?"
Nothing to do with lack of man-power but re to do with the blatant withholding of something that EP know would disturb a hornets nest and open up a huge can of worms.
I'm convinced that EP thought it was the end of the case and JB in 1986 because their " prisoner " had no family to speak of and nobody who'd been particularly interested at that stage until years later people started to ask questions. How wrong they were !!
Why is it 'MY' UI? All I'm doing is trying to provide a rationale for the way in which ALL UI is stored. Actually, I think you are probably correct in assuming that, as far as police were concerned, the case was done and dusted. Not for a moment do I believe UI is stored -or not- according to whether -or not- there is family who, at a later date might want further investigations done...................anymore than I believe they set Jeremy up to cover up for the fact that 'they' shot Sheila TWICE!!!!
-
Why is it 'MY' UI? All I'm doing is trying to provide a rationale for the way in which ALL UI is stored. Actually, I think you are probably correct in assuming that, as far as police were concerned, the case was done and dusted. Not for a moment do I believe UI is stored -or not- according to whether -or not- there is family who, at a later date might want further investigations done...................anymore than I believe they set Jeremy up to cover up for the fact that 'they' shot Sheila TWICE!!!!
What is mystifying me is that most if not all guilters don't recognise that there's anything wrong in the way the case had been investigated/handled----------yet we remain to have all these unanswered questions ? Surely if the case had been conducted with the transparency including ALL information presented to appropriate recipients during trial then there'd be no need for questions emerging at a later date. Why are there still questions and doubts ??
In other words the whole investigation had been a sham because it was botched from the start and 33 years on is still smouldering and will continue to do so until the REAL truth is heard.
-
Forensics worked with EP.Why have forensics joined EP in refusing to disclose evidence ?
I find this suspicious does anyone else ?
-
What is mystifying me is that most if not all guilters don't recognise that there's anything wrong in the way the case had been investigated/handled----------yet we remain to have all these unanswered questions ? Surely if the case had been conducted with the transparency including ALL information presented to appropriate recipients during trial then there'd be no need for questions emerging at a later date. Why are there still questions and doubts ??
In other words the whole investigation had been a sham because it was botched from the start and 33 years on is still smouldering and will continue to do so until the REAL truth is heard.
I find it equally mystifying as to why supporters fail to see the glaring reason behind the botched investigation. It can't fail to be noticed that, from the moment they were gathered, en famille, until their deaths, only one of them remained living -under all other circumstances, that person would have been the first suspect- and from there on put himself in a hugely powerful place by taking control of the way the investigation went. You 'feel' that he's innocent -although you have know idea why- and you take everything he says as being gospel truth. I, whilst believing that he used some of the truth, question everything he said. I can't get passed that he had ultimate control, and in my opinion, used it cleverly, by handing it to Nevill during an alleged telephone conversation. Certainly, at a later date, his actions/behaviours could be questioned, but during those first, vital hours, it wouldn't have occurred to anyone to go down that road.
-
I find it equally mystifying as to why supporters fail to see the glaring reason behind the botched investigation. It can't fail to be noticed that, from the moment they were gathered, en famille, until their deaths, only one of them remained living -under all other circumstances, that person would have been the first suspect- and from there on put himself in a hugely powerful place by taking control of the way the investigation went. You 'feel' that he's innocent -although you have know idea why- and you take everything he says as being gospel truth. I, whilst believing that he used some of the truth, question everything he said. I can't get passed that he had ultimate control, and in my opinion, used it cleverly, by handing it to Nevill during an alleged telephone conversation. Certainly, at a later date, his actions/behaviours could be questioned, but during those first, vital hours, it wouldn't have occurred to anyone to go down that road.
It's obviously too late to look back on how things could have been done but life itself was a lot different back then than it is now as we're more accepting and above all more aware if and when things go wrong.
What hasn't changed much is the hostility which is displayed by some police officers. Contrary to belief a stigma still remains such as those who are coloured and the gay members of the community.
Their brains become " fixed " and they tend to focus on the colour black when a crime is committed.
In 1985 wealth was a dirty word among a lot of workers who had left-wing tendencies,such as the police and Government workers in general under the Thatcher " regime " and anyone with a thriving business or who owned property were singled out because of that deadly sin jealousy as for some unknown fact it was classed as greed !
Instead of thinking how hard someone had worked to gain what they had their one-tracked minds took them into this" fixed " direction of taking great delight in convicting this " rich kid " out of sheer bitterness and envy from " claiming all before him ".The relatives and JM were the salvation to EP
Take a look at what envy did to AE initially. Tearing wallpaper and no doubt damaging the Aga surround with a metal object still bearing anger and envy. With this in mind it's of no surprise that her actions in seeking out those who would be on her side namely EP who looked no further than nailing JB himself.
" Taff " knew it wasn't him so how after 12 months until being arrested did they,EP, know it was ??
-
It's obviously too late to look back on how things could have been done but life itself was a lot different back then than it is now as we're more accepting and above all more aware if and when things go wrong.
What hasn't changed much is the hostility which is displayed by some police officers. Contrary to belief a stigma still remains such as those who are coloured and the gay members of the community.
Their brains become " fixed " and they tend to focus on the colour black when a crime is committed.
In 1985 wealth was a dirty word among a lot of workers who had left-wing tendencies,such as the police and Government workers in general under the Thatcher " regime " and anyone with a thriving business or who owned property were singled out because of that deadly sin jealousy as for some unknown fact it was classed as greed !
Instead of thinking how hard someone had worked to gain what they had their one-tracked minds took them into this" fixed " direction of taking great delight in convicting this " rich kid " out of sheer bitterness and envy from " claiming all before him ".The relatives and JM were the salvation to EP
Take a look at what envy did to AE initially. Tearing wallpaper and no doubt damaging the Aga surround with a metal object still bearing anger and envy. With this in mind it's of no surprise that her actions in seeking out those who would be on her side namely EP who looked no further than nailing JB himself.
" Taff " knew it wasn't him so how after 12 months until being arrested did they,EP, know it was ??
You're changing what you perceive to be the motive, but I fail to see Ann's behaviour, ie being destructive, as being any different from Sheila's, occurring at a time when both were probably feeling frustrated and unheard. However little Ann may have seen of Jeremy when he was growing up, I believe it's perfectly possible that she could have formed an accurate opinion of him. She may have been aware of a side to him that others -especially Nevill and June- weren't. Why should "Taff's" word be final? It was just his opinion. My friend's late husband was there from the off. He never shifted from his belief in Jeremy's guilt. It was just his opinion. In the grand scheme of things, individual opinions count for nothing.
Of course the police, en masse, aren't perfect, but hardly are those they serve. My friend's late husband wore a scar which ran from a shoulder blade on his back to the middle of his chest, 'given' him in the late 1950's. These people -men and women- in general, don't join the force to enable them to "duff up"/do over/screw as many of us as they can. They join because they want to make a difference to society. Sadly, not all of society wants a difference to be made and fight against it.
There was much social change -and a HUGE North/South divide- during the 1980's. Some were able to make vast and indecent amounts of money very quickly, whilst others, equally quickly, were losing jobs, homes, families, maybe even lives. If there was friction, I suspect it was more between the newly impoverished and the newly wealthy. I'm not certain it touched those who had "old money" and a sense of obligation and philanthropy, but some of their children -partly because of the way education was starting to highlight differences in class- seemed to take on a Sires and surfs stance. I'm not certain that any one thing in particular, during the early 1980's, contributed to what happened at WHF.
-
More notably, is the documentation which accompanied these handwritten notes, that are known to have been written by Sheila Caffell in her own handwriting:-
There were two notes on the bedside table, the letters and numbers and the scribbled sheets that went with it. The documentation is clearly for these two notes given they were described as illegible. There is clearly confusion over what note was on the bedside table and it was the note below, not the one being discussed in this thread.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4514)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4515)
-
The notes had been found in Sheila's bedroom--------JB wasn't in prison until 12 months later so how could her notes have been written on " prison paper ?"
Bamber was remanded and in prison a month after the murders, not 12 months later but that isn't relevant.
Because those aren't the notes found in the bedroom. Mike himself has previously stated which notes were on the bedside table - now we're being told it was this note! I know which note was labeled DRH/42 and described as illegible but you can believe what you like. This happens all of the time and it won't help Jeremy because it's not what happened. The note on the bedside table depends on which way the wind is blowing with some, however, it won't alter the fact that the notes below were the notes found on the bedside table.
To be honest, I don't know who wrote the garbled nonsense or where it was written or found. But neither do the rest of you but you have jumped all over it because of one sentence about 'going to rest. You have never bothered asking the significance of 'Vincent' or Syc (cept for Lookout) - it just suits your agenda to call it a suicide note and claim (without ANY evidence) that it was written by Sheila. The writing looks nothing like hers but the signature DOES resemble Bamber's and it does look like prison notepaper and has the same amount of lines minus the prison stamp. I would bet that EP has never even seen these notes!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,197.msg520.html#msg520
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4514)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4515)
-
You're right,opinions count for nothing but----------I'd have expected/demanded a thorough investigation whether JB had been hated/loathed or not and he was never given a chance. Investigating murder a mass murder at that is NEVER about opinions or shouldn't be and I also expect that someone who'd been high-up in the force for 30 years as well as having received 10 commendations to give more than just his opinion.
Not once did I hear the sound of" fair-play " coming from the direction of the relatives or any demands other than nailing him for the crime. Was it also their opinion that it was him ? Nothing about a " guilty until innocent " from their camp was there ?
They all had 12 months to get their heads together in a trumped-up version of guilt !! It took " Taff " less than half an hour to do his summing up. He'd seen and dealt with it all before during his reign. This is what proper policing is or should be all about to avoid any cost-cutting or loss of officers. Stop dithering and get the job done.
I'm not changing any" motive " at all as I didn't suggest a motive seeing as I don't believe he did it. It's you and others who carry a motive.
You can't compare AE with Sheila,ever as there's no comparison between either. Sheila's behaviour was brought on through illness. AE's was sheer unadulterated and deliberate spite-----a huge difference and if you can't see that there's nothing down for you.
How can anyone form an impression of someone they don't see from one year to the next ? It's impossible unless you were close to that person, which wasn't the case here. They thought they knew all about Sheila but again they didn't have a clue and the little they did see of her would probably have given them the impression that she was this " normal " young woman.
Impressions are NOTHING to go by as I'd mentioned last week about a poor chap living near me who was a schizophrenic and who we'd been told not to approach. Well as it happened he stopped at my gate and was talking to me about the lovely weather we were having------quite rational. His appearance was dirty and dishevelled but I ignored his appearance and carried on with the conversation-----pleasant,calm.
That was on the Friday,next day I learned he'd been taken to hospital for sectioning and nobody has ventured into his home as yet ! It could be smashed to smithereens because by all accounts he's violent. Mental health staff will never discuss their patients,the warning was from the police.
Now if I hadn't known who he was or anything about him I'd have just thought he'd fallen on hard times. Impressions,see what I mean ??
I was probably the only person who spoke to him that day.
-
Bamber was remanded and in prison a month after the murders, not 12 months later but that isn't relevant.
Because those aren't the notes found in the bedroom. Mike himself has previously stated which notes were on the bedside table - now we're being told it was this note! I know which note was labeled DRH/42 and described as illegible but you can believe what you like. This happens all of the time and it won't help Jeremy because it's not what happened. The note on the bedside table depends on which way the wind is blowing with some, however, it won't alter the fact that the notes below were the notes found on the bedside table.
To be honest, I don't know who wrote the garbled nonsense or where it was written or found. But neither do the rest of you but you have jumped all over it because of one sentence about 'going to rest. You have never bothered asking the significance of 'Vincent' or Syc (cept for Lookout) - it just suits your agenda to call it a suicide note and claim (without ANY evidence) that it was written by Sheila. The writing looks nothing like hers but the signature DOES resemble Bamber's and it does look like prison notepaper and has the same amount of lines minus the prison stamp. I would bet that EP has never even seen these notes!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,197.msg520.html#msg520
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4514)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4515)
I don't mean those notes------I'm talking letters.
-
Bamber was remanded and in prison a month after the murders, not 12 months later but that isn't relevant.
Because those aren't the notes found in the bedroom. Mike himself has previously stated which notes were on the bedside table - now we're being told it was this note! I know which note was labeled DRH/42 and described as illegible but you can believe what you like. This happens all of the time and it won't help Jeremy because it's not what happened. The note on the bedside table depends on which way the wind is blowing with some, however, it won't alter the fact that the notes below were the notes found on the bedside table.
To be honest, I don't know who wrote the garbled nonsense or where it was written or found. But neither do the rest of you but you have jumped all over it because of one sentence about 'going to rest. You have never bothered asking the significance of 'Vincent' or Syc (cept for Lookout) - it just suits your agenda to call it a suicide note and claim (without ANY evidence) that it was written by Sheila. The writing looks nothing like hers but the signature DOES resemble Bamber's and it does look like prison notepaper and has the same amount of lines minus the prison stamp. I would bet that EP has never even seen these notes!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,197.msg520.html#msg520
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4514)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4515)
It also occurs to me that the signature "Bambs/Bambi" is incredibly like -and as close as makes no difference to simply being a diminutive of the Bamber part of Jeremy's own signature.
-
" Like " but isn't.
-
Guilters also will fit or not whichever suits their agenda so there's little point in forever picking up supporters for doing the same ?
-
" Like " but isn't.
Least you admit it. OK, I would be willing (as a group - both innocent supporters and guilty supporters) to contribute finacially, to have the writing analysed by a professional. Between us it wouldn't cost that much and we'd find out one way or the other? Who else is willing to put their money where their mouth is?
Also Lookout, did you say that the 'Forensic team' won't hand over info to the CT?
-
Least you admit it. OK, I would be willing (as a group - both innocent supporters and guilty supporters) to contribute finacially, to have the writing analysed by a professional. Between us it wouldn't cost that much and we'd find out one way or the other? Who else is willing to put their money where their mouth is?
Also Lookout, did you say that the 'Forensic team' won't hand over info to the CT?
I haven't admitted anything. I was inferring to Jane's post when she said " like ".
Yes,I'll contribute.
Yes again to the forensic team not handing over info.
-
You're right,opinions count for nothing but----------I'd have expected/demanded a thorough investigation whether JB had been hated/loathed or not and he was never given a chance. Investigating murder a mass murder at that is NEVER about opinions or shouldn't be and I also expect that someone who'd been high-up in the force for 30 years as well as having received 10 commendations to give more than just his opinion.
Not once did I hear the sound of" fair-play " coming from the direction of the relatives or any demands other than nailing him for the crime. Was it also their opinion that it was him ? Nothing about a " guilty until innocent " from their camp was there ?
They all had 12 months to get their heads together in a trumped-up version of guilt !! It took " Taff " less than half an hour to do his summing up. He'd seen and dealt with it all before during his reign. This is what proper policing is or should be all about to avoid any cost-cutting or loss of officers. Stop dithering and get the job done.
I'm not changing any" motive " at all as I didn't suggest a motive seeing as I don't believe he did it. It's you and others who carry a motive.
You can't compare AE with Sheila,ever as there's no comparison between either. Sheila's behaviour was brought on through illness. AE's was sheer unadulterated and deliberate spite-----a huge difference and if you can't see that there's nothing down for you.
How can anyone form an impression of someone they don't see from one year to the next ? It's impossible unless you were close to that person, which wasn't the case here. They thought they knew all about Sheila but again they didn't have a clue and the little they did see of her would probably have given them the impression that she was this " normal " young woman.
Impressions are NOTHING to go by as I'd mentioned last week about a poor chap living near me who was a schizophrenic and who we'd been told not to approach. Well as it happened he stopped at my gate and was talking to me about the lovely weather we were having------quite rational. His appearance was dirty and dishevelled but I ignored his appearance and carried on with the conversation-----pleasant,calm.
That was on the Friday,next day I learned he'd been taken to hospital for sectioning and nobody has ventured into his home as yet ! It could be smashed to smithereens because by all accounts he's violent. Mental health staff will never discuss their patients,the warning was from the police.
Now if I hadn't known who he was or anything about him I'd have just thought he'd fallen on hard times. Impressions,see what I mean ??
I was probably the only person who spoke to him that day.
HANG ON!! It's YOU who labours the point about Sheila's alleged quick temper and her alleged violence. NOW you're saying it was all down to an illness which in other posts you've said you don't believe she had. You can't have it both ways. You took very similar behaviours using jealousy as the motive for one and anger as motivation for the other.
Back to what you believe "they" should!!! have done. "Taff" wasn't God. He was as fallible as the rest of us. Perhaps you might try putting yourself in the position of someone who's a certain in their opinions as are you, but doesn't feel that they're being heard when they insist that someone is guilty. I'm damned certain you'd move heaven and earth, to get your message across, whatever anyone thought of you for doing it. You ask how can anyone form an impression of someone they don't see from one year to the next yet you fail to see the irony in that you formed an opinion about someone you'd NEVER met and seem to think you know him better than his relatives.
If you want to do personal experiences, I overheard a troubling conversation between a couple of 9 year old's as they walked past my house. I informed the grandmother of one of them of my concerns, which turned out to be justified. He's now in his 30's. Has been in court more times than I've had hot dinners and has done several "stretches". I THINK, now, it maybe the result of frontal lobe injury sustained in childhood, but if it IS the case, there's no reason I should know.
-
" Like " but isn't.
So do you imagine a psychotic Sheila snuck out to find a copy of Jeremy's signature so she could fit him up for the murders?
-
Least you admit it. OK, I would be willing (as a group - both innocent supporters and guilty supporters) to contribute finacially, to have the writing analysed by a professional. Between us it wouldn't cost that much and we'd find out one way or the other? Who else is willing to put their money where their mouth is?
Also Lookout, did you say that the 'Forensic team' won't hand over info to the CT?
You can count me in on that, Caroline.
-
I haven't admitted anything. I was inferring to Jane's post when she said " like ".
Yes,I'll contribute.
Yes again to the forensic team not handing over info.
OK, I will organise something and if NGB will agree to oversee things, perhaps we can get to the bottom of this ourselves. I will PM NGB later today or he may see this post and let me know beforehand?
Do you know why they won't hand the stuff over? That's weird as the CT paid for it?
-
You can count me in on that, Caroline.
Excellent! - Perhaps we as a group can do something positive for a change!
-
HANG ON!! It's YOU who labours the point about Sheila's alleged quick temper and her alleged violence. NOW you're saying it was all down to an illness which in other posts you've said you don't believe she had. You can't have it both ways. You took very similar behaviours using jealousy as the motive for one and anger as motivation for the other.
Back to what you believe "they" should!!! have done. "Taff" wasn't God. He was as fallible as the rest of us. Perhaps you might try putting yourself in the position of someone who's a certain in their opinions as are you, but doesn't feel that they're being heard when they insist that someone is guilty. I'm damned certain you'd move heaven and earth, to get your message across, whatever anyone thought of you for doing it. You ask how can anyone form an impression of someone they don't see from one year to the next yet you fail to see the irony in that you formed an opinion about someone you'd NEVER met and seem to think you know him better than his relatives.
If you want to do personal experiences, I overheard a troubling conversation between a couple of 9 year old's as they walked past my house. I informed the grandmother of one of them of my concerns, which turned out to be justified. He's now in his 30's. Has been in court more times than I've had hot dinners and has done several "stretches". I THINK, now, it maybe the result of frontal lobe injury sustained in childhood, but if it IS the case, there's no reason I should know.
Does that mean that Stan Jones was fallible too ?
No I don't know JB personally but the relatives were at an advantage to get to know the family better than they had done but seemingly didn't bother visiting very often. I wonder why that was ? They weren't a million miles apart.
My own reason for " knowing " JB was by simply bothering to find out which again is more than what the relatives did with both siblings so perhaps yes,I probably do now know him better than they ever did.
Only Pam ever kept in touch,mainly by phone I fear but nevertheless she'd have been kept up to speed although from a guarded June of what went on in the household. Pam being the one who went against the grain as she'd enquired after JB. I did note that she was the only one who hadn't said anything detrimental against JB so therefore any conversation that she'd had with June hadn't included any problems with him.
-
OK, I will organise something and if NGB will agree to oversee things, perhaps we can get to the bottom of this ourselves. I will PM NGB later today or he may see this post and let me know beforehand?
Do you know why they won't hand the stuff over? That's weird as the CT paid for it?
My suspicions tell me the reason that they won't comply with the CT's legal team is that they were working in conjunction with EP who we know won't hand over either ? So your guess is as good as mine------if you're honest that is.
The public are paying for these tests by donation. It was a sudden out of the blue decision by the forensics.
-
Strange how JB is complying yet in this case both the police and forensics aren't !
When you finally send off the note for analysis you'd be wise not to say anything.
-
Does that mean that Stan Jones was fallible too ?
No I don't know JB personally but the relatives were at an advantage to get to know the family better than they had done but seemingly didn't bother visiting very often. I wonder why that was ? They weren't a million miles apart.
My own reason for " knowing " JB was by simply bothering to find out which again is more than what the relatives did with both siblings so perhaps yes,I probably do now know him better than they ever did.
Only Pam ever kept in touch,mainly by phone I fear but nevertheless she'd have been kept up to speed although from a guarded June of what went on in the household. Pam being the one who went against the grain as she'd enquired after JB. I did note that she was the only one who hadn't said anything detrimental against JB so therefore any conversation that she'd had with June hadn't included any problems with him.
So the relatives are to blame for not making an effort, are they? Isn't there something about joint responsibility about visits? I have no idea how long it eventually took you in your search to 'find out' but you've previously said you 'knew' when you first saw his picture.
Pam was June's sister. Unless there'd been a falling out, it was natural, especially as June appeared reticent by nature, that they'd have regular contact. Her children were an average of 12 years senior to their cousins. There would hardly have been any interest there. I'm sure they'd have met at family gatherings. It may have been at these that Jeremy's behaviour was noted? You make wild leaps to conclusions. That Pamela said nothing "detrimental against JB" in public, doesn't signify that she had nothing to say regarding him to her sister.
Regarding SJ being fallible? Who, in this life, isn't?
-
So the relatives are to blame for not making an effort, are they? Isn't there something about joint responsibility about visits? I have no idea how long it eventually took you in your search to 'find out' but you've previously said you 'knew' when you first saw his picture.
Pam was June's sister. Unless there'd been a falling out, it was natural, especially as June appeared reticent by nature, that they'd have regular contact. Her children were an average of 12 years senior to their cousins. There would hardly have been any interest there. I'm sure they'd have met at family gatherings. It may have been at these that Jeremy's behaviour was noted? You make wild leaps to conclusions. That Pamela said nothing "detrimental against JB" in public, doesn't signify that she had nothing to say regarding him to her sister.
Regarding SJ being fallible? Who, in this life, isn't?
I did indeed know he was innocent when I first saw the news and picture back in 1985. I could tell the way he was behaving,smug,sure of himself and his overall confidence of not having done anything which he was probably thinking that others would also see . It was all down to his body language with me------nothing else until I came onto the forum and learnt more.
There was no sign of agitation or the usual cries of " I didn't do it " nor struggling with the handcuffs or obscenities thrown at the police. He took it all in his stride probably knowing in his own mind that he was not going to end up behind bars.
Unfortunately his behaviour had the complete opposite effect to many including the police as they'd wrongly based his attitude on others and this was from the very beginning before any investigation took place. How wrong to make comparisons when everyone is different.
Because a psychopath acts in this way it was naturally assumed that JB was one--------but nobody even stopped to think that " hey,this chap could be telling the truth ". The family were on the case like a ton of bricks which put paid to SJ's words of " we haven't got anything on him ". The rest as they say,is history.
-
I did indeed know he was innocent when I first saw the news and picture back in 1985. I could tell the way he was behaving,smug,sure of himself and his overall confidence of not having done anything which he was probably thinking that others would also see . It was all down to his body language with me------nothing else until I came onto the forum and learnt more.
There was no sign of agitation or the usual cries of " I didn't do it " nor struggling with the handcuffs or obscenities thrown at the police. He took it all in his stride probably knowing in his own mind that he was not going to end up behind bars.
Unfortunately his behaviour had the complete opposite effect to many including the police as they'd wrongly based his attitude on others and this was from the very beginning before any investigation took place. How wrong to make comparisons when everyone is different.
Because a psychopath acts in this way it was naturally assumed that JB was one--------but nobody even stopped to think that " hey,this chap could be telling the truth ". The family were on the case like a ton of bricks which put paid to SJ's words of " we haven't got anything on him ". The rest as they say,is history.
But you're overlooking that despite some believing him guilty from the start, no one went down that road for a month. Until then, he was 'innocent'. Of course his behaviour went against the grain. It was the complete antithesis of grief -he even seemed to take his arrest as a joke- that he was behaving like a cocky b*****d MIGHT have been overlooked. It was his total lack of respect for his family which showed up in many ways. Even when he chose to put on a show of grieving it appeared to be a mockery.
-
But you're overlooking that despite some believing him guilty from the start, no one went down that road for a month. Until then, he was 'innocent'. Of course his behaviour went against the grain. It was the complete antithesis of grief -he even seemed to take his arrest as a joke- that he was behaving like a cocky b*****d MIGHT have been overlooked. It was his total lack of respect for his family which showed up in many ways. Even when he chose to put on a show of grieving it appeared to be a mockery.
Try displaying grief with the lens of a camera inches away from your face !
If JB had acted like the Philpott's of this world,then I'd definitely have doubted his innocence.
How do you know he lacked respect for his family ? Just because others said so ? The same as you saying his grief was a mockery------just like everyone else.
To me his pain showed through which is more than can be said for others around him who were too busy looking at JB ready to " report to headquarters " !
Thank God I have a mind of my own and don't have to rely on others.
-
Try displaying grief with the lens of a camera inches away from your face !
If JB had acted like the Philpott's of this world,then I'd definitely have doubted his innocence.
How do you know he lacked respect for his family ? Just because others said so ? The same as you saying his grief was a mockery------just like everyone else.
To me his pain showed through which is more than can be said for others around him who were too busy looking at JB ready to " report to headquarters " !
Thank God I have a mind of my own and don't have to rely on others.
I'm certain you can't have failed to notice certain marked physical differences between Philpott and Bamber? Speech/dress/bearing? I wonder how much of a difference this might have made?
You must remember that back then I believed Jeremy was innocent so his behaviour at the funeral shook me. I found it shockingly false -in a way which seemed to suggest he was enjoying the performance and milking it because the cameras were there. Many there were embarrassed by it.
-
I'm certain you can't have failed to notice certain marked physical differences between Philpott and Bamber? Speech/dress/bearing? I wonder how much of a difference this might have made?
You must remember that back then I believed Jeremy was innocent so his behaviour at the funeral shook me. I found it shockingly false -in a way which seemed to suggest he was enjoying the performance and milking it because the cameras were there. Many there were embarrassed by it.
You're making comparisons again. This isn't about comparisons it's about behaviour regardless of the person or how he looks.
And I was embarrassed looking at JM and her " put-on " performance for the camera. Her true colours came out later whereas JB hasn't faltered in all these years and has remained the same with no other side to him.
-
You're making comparisons again. This isn't about comparisons it's about behaviour regardless of the person or how he looks.
And I was embarrassed looking at JM and her " put-on " performance for the camera. Her true colours came out later whereas JB hasn't faltered in all these years and has remained the same with no other side to him.
No, I was just following you you'd implied. It was you, I believe who remarked on Philpott, comparing his behaviour to Jeremy's?
I wonder what embarrassed you about Julie's behaviour? I recall her doing little other than looking at Jeremy. Her face was a mask. Perhaps that's what you mean by "her "put on" performance for the camera"?
-
No, I was just following you you'd implied. It was you, I believe who remarked on Philpott, comparing his behaviour to Jeremy's?
I wonder what embarrassed you about Julie's behaviour? I recall her doing little other than looking at Jeremy. Her face was a mask. Perhaps that's what you mean by "her "put on" performance for the camera"?
Philpott was blubbering,for effect,but alas it was crocodile tears.His wife followed suit. I probably wasn't the only one who saw through that fiasco.
As for JM,the only time she looked almost human was in those seedy pics after she'd been presented with her cheque. Other than that she was as false as Victoria Beckham.
-
My suspicions tell me the reason that they won't comply with the CT's legal team is that they were working in conjunction with EP who we know won't hand over either ? So your guess is as good as mine------if you're honest that is.
The public are paying for these tests by donation. It was a sudden out of the blue decision by the forensics.
I don't get this Lookout - where did you get this info from, was it the CT? You can PM me the answer if you like.
-
Philpott was blubbering,for effect,but alas it was crocodile tears.His wife followed suit. I probably wasn't the only one who saw through that fiasco.
As for JM,the only time she looked almost human was in those seedy pics after she'd been presented with her cheque. Other than that she was as false as Victoria Beckham.
Lookout, stop moving the parameters. I'm speaking about one occasion. The funeral. At which Jeremy was playing to camera and Julie's expression appeared to be fixed on Jeremy. Perhaps she, too, at that point, was embarrassed by the overacting. My feelings regarding JM's behaviour re the NOTW debacle echo your own, so there's no point in goading.
-
I don't get this Lookout - where did you get this info from, was it the CT? You can PM me the answer if you like.
There's no need for me to PM you Caroline as it was on a public forum,that of the CT's some time ago.
No reason was given only that they weren't going to present the legal team with what they wanted. The only way of finding out would be to contact Trudi.
More court orders would be futile.
-
There's no need for me to PM you Caroline as it was on a public forum,that of the CT's some time ago.
No reason was given only that they weren't going to present the legal team with what they wanted. The only way of finding out would be to contact Trudi.
More court orders would be futile.
OK, thanks Lookout - just one more question :). Did they forensic lab do the tests and refuse to hand over the results OR, did they just refuse to do the tests?
-
OK, thanks Lookout - just one more question :). Did they forensic lab do the tests and refuse to hand over the results OR, did they just refuse to do the tests?
They just refused--------possibly when they knew what and who it was for even though there'd have been different staff working there. I don't know.
It certainly wasn't about payment as donations were sufficient at the time and still are.
-
So far as I now understand,forensics can't/won't continue until EP have released evidence that's needed.
-
The partly undecipherable handwritten note was recovered from the bedside cabinet as I understand it, by DC Henderson / DC Oakey (1st SOCO team), along with the coded message involving letters of the alphabet! The key to establishing the truth regarding this, was that it was given to DCI Jones when he was head of the investigation, which he was demoted from during the first week of September 1985 when DCS Mick Ainsley took over the case! It was convenient for Essex police to arguably transfer these notes to DCI Jones when the case was being treated as 'four murders and a suicide', but once the nature of the case altered, its existence would have been damaging to the prospects of the case which the prosecution brought against Jeremy Bamber!
The handwritten notes found on the cabinet at the side of Sheila Caffell's bed, were not originally found by DC Hammersley, they were found by DC Henderson / DC Oakey and were a contributing factor in the decision taken by senior officers at the scene between 9 and 10am, to re-stage Sheila Caffell's death as a suicide whilst performing 'informatives' where the bodies of the three adult victims were moved and key exhibits were either removed from the scene altogether, or as the case may be, added into the crime scene..
Here is the proof that the undecipherable notes were handed to DCI Jones, and that a decision to take no further action (NFA)...
-
The partly undecipherable handwritten note was recovered from the bedside cabinet as I understand it, by DC Henderson / DC Oakey (1st SOCO team), along with the coded message involving letters of the alphabet! The key to establishing the truth regarding this, was that it was given to DCI Jones when he was head of the investigation, which he was demoted from during the first week of September 1985 when DCS Mick Ainsley took over the case! It was convenient for Essex police to arguably transfer these notes to DCI Jones when the case was being treated as 'four murders and a suicide', but once the nature of the case altered, its existence would have been damaging to the prospects of the case which the prosecution brought against Jeremy Bamber!
The handwritten notes found on the cabinet at the side of Sheila Caffell's bed, were not originally found by DC Hammersley, they were found by DC Henderson / DC Oakey and were a contributing factor in the decision taken by senior officers at the scene between 9 and 10am, to re-stage Sheila Caffell's death as a suicide whilst performing 'informatives' where the bodies of the three adult victims were moved and key exhibits were either removed from the scene altogether, or as the case may be, added into the crime scene..
Here is the proof that the undecipherable notes were handed to DCI Jones, and that a decision to take no further action (NFA)...
Did the Prosecution mention the letter? I can't see how this particular note is damaging as it can't be linked exclusively to Sheila, it's more of a doodle and unintelligible anyway and could to my mind partly have been written by the twins.
-
Did the Prosecution mention the letter? I can't see how this particular note is damaging as it can't be linked exclusively to Sheila, it's more of a doodle and unintelligible anyway and could to my mind partly have been written by the twins.
No, these notes were hand written by Sheila herself on at the time of the tragedy - DC Oakey and DC Henderson seized them, and the contents persuaded senior officers to stage Sheila's death on the parents bedroom floor as a suicide!
DCI Jones had these notes in his possession throughout the first month of the police investigation which convinced him that Sheila had shot and killed the other four victims! However, when the nature of the case altered and DCI Jones was demoted, the contents of all these handwritten notes were suppressed because the prosecution and Essex police knew that the contents of them might significantly effect the juries verdict!
-
Apparently, Sheila Caffell's paternal mother who she called 'Mummy' was supposedly on a European tour at the time of the tragedy, and may have actually been in a hotel in the UK on the evening of the tragedy! Yes, I make no bones about it, Christine Jay is understood to have been in the UK when the tragedy occurred! Some people have suggested that she visited Sheila at the farmhouse after midnight on the morning of the shootings, but my investigation indicates that there was a telephone conversation between Christine Jay and Sheila Caffell', and that during this telephone conversation, Christine Jay refused to get involved between Sheila and the Bamber parents regarding the issue of foster caring of Sheila's two young children. Furthermore, as a result of this telephone conversation, that Sheila recorded the telephone number at the bottom of one of these handwritten notes, this telephone number belonged to the hotel where Christine Jay had been staying on the 6th August 1985, until the following day!
By a strange coincidence, Essex police were contacted by an informant, who informed them that a woman who he refused to name, had been staying at a hotel, but that on the morning when the news broke about the tragedy at whf, that this woman fled the UK to the USA, leaving all her property and belongings behind in the hotel room - this unnamed woman is believed to have been none other than Christine Jay...
If true, then her presence in the uK at such a pivotal moment in the tragedy, must have significantly impacted upon the reason why Sheila shot and killed the other four victims!
019894191
-
Some decipherable words, phrases and sentences:-
'Oh Mummy please don't break your heart, you will be okay'...
'SYC is looking after you'..
'Those people in authority will be round soon'..
'Why do you think I've come to you, because god told me I had to calm you Mummy. Calm'..
'We are both here with you'..
'Bless Vincent Mummy, don't let him see you so hurt'...
'I don't mind him being here while I calm you'..
'SYC is also giving you strength, so you are ready when the Sun & the police call because their going to my dearest Mother. I no you were upset'...
'I am sorry you were poorly with your lungs'...
'But SYC is watching you he will not let anything happen'..
'Yes Mummy I have got your eyes'..
'Have you looked at my picture in the papers, but you will be. I gave a lovely portrait of myself and the twins both'...
'Darling'...
'I suppose you are trying to calm your mother last'...
'She is'...
'that you should give her a rest now so I'..
'Mummy please put the paper away'..
'And stop crying please, everything is going to'..
-
The partly undecipherable handwritten note was recovered from the bedside cabinet as I understand it, by DC Henderson / DC Oakey (1st SOCO team), along with the coded message involving letters of the alphabet! The key to establishing the truth regarding this, was that it was given to DCI Jones when he was head of the investigation, which he was demoted from during the first week of September 1985 when DCS Mick Ainsley took over the case! It was convenient for Essex police to arguably transfer these notes to DCI Jones when the case was being treated as 'four murders and a suicide', but once the nature of the case altered, its existence would have been damaging to the prospects of the case which the prosecution brought against Jeremy Bamber!
The handwritten notes found on the cabinet at the side of Sheila Caffell's bed, were not originally found by DC Hammersley, they were found by DC Henderson / DC Oakey and were a contributing factor in the decision taken by senior officers at the scene between 9 and 10am, to re-stage Sheila Caffell's death as a suicide whilst performing 'informatives' where the bodies of the three adult victims were moved and key exhibits were either removed from the scene altogether, or as the case may be, added into the crime scene..
Here is the proof that the undecipherable notes were handed to DCI Jones, and that a decision to take no further action (NFA)...
We're going to have it analysed.
-
(1) ' to test like to ex husband is him told to do'..
(2) 'How dare he say not to bring my sons with me'..
(3) 'thats where they belong with me'..
(4) ' He never loved them'..
(5) 'Oh so sure Mummy'..
(6) 'He is going getting away,..
(7) 'But he was never any good'...
(8) 'It was a mistake'..
-
(9) 'Mummy Darling'..
(10) 'Stop looking at my picture'...
(11) 'You will break your heart'..
(12) 'Next just remember I am your daughter Bambi'..
(13) '(born 3 - 3 - 59)'..
(14) 'and no one can take that away from you and I'..
(15) 'The Sun Newspaper'..
(16) 'the police are going to be in touch soon and get this whole dirty mess cleared up''...
(17) 'and I must say it is a long dirty business as I said before there gone'..
(18) 'Dirty bugs will crawl out'..
(19) 'oh Mummy don't you think I have feelings also in this false space I am in, as soon as the dirt is dug up and the public no, then my Darling Mummy will I belong and if I go to my rest, we no the awful strain your going through that we are feeling all of the time'..
(20) 'feelings'..
(21) 'and they would dearly'..
-
(22) 'Love to make it look like he was such a good man'..
(23) 'But he is NO GOOD, NO GOOD'..
(24) 'He can make himself look cool to them'..
(25) 'Possible if your gone he loves publicity'..
(26) 'You only'...
(27) 'So I put it due'..
(28) 'they the police from Chelmsford and the Sun will understand you talk to yourself'..
'(29) I was in....., shy then, no disrepect, police from Chelmsford will make this link to my blood mother'..
(30) 'did, dig, dig'..
(31) 'and a lot of dirt will send'..
(32) 'you from this case'..
(33) 'But please help my mother she has gone through hells fire'..
(34) 'and is still'..
(35) 'and'..
(36) 'help to give her the strength, she is so poorly'..
(37) 'and all they told us'..
(38) 'I understand not to phone you and gave'..
-
A very troubled mind.
-
(39) 'She was and is not my blood mother'..
(40) 'So please'...
(41) 'Yet understand this'..
(42) 'you will cause wars', more than you bargained for'..
(43) 'My mother was brought up by the law'..
(44) 'She was loved by us all of her life'..
(45) 'Help her'..
(46) 'She needs so much comfort and I can't give her this help in the other world'..
(47) 'I am going to finish this now, as my mother's strength is slipping'..
(48) 'Help her Please'
(49) 'Bambs'..
(50) '01989 4191'
(51) 'phone'..
-
A deeply troubled mind, none more so because this note was undoubtedly hand written by Sheila Caffell at different stages of the tragedy that night / morning! Of particular significance is the term 'WAS' when she refers to her Mother (June Bamber), she refers to her in the past tense as if she is no longer of this earth, and she appears to be pleading for someone to help her mother, because she herself cannot help her in the other world, the afterlife..
-
A deeply troubled mind, none more so because this note was undoubtedly hand written by Sheila Caffell at different stages of the tragedy that night / morning! Of particular significance is the term 'WAS' when she refers to her Mother (June Bamber), she refers to her in the past tense as if she is no longer of this earth, and she appears to be pleading for someone to help her mother, because she herself cannot help her in the other world, the afterlife..
Sheila shot and killed her mother, at least shot her prior to completing thase handwritten notes!
-
(1) ' to test like to ex husband is him told to do'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(2) 'How dare he say not to bring my sons with me'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(3) 'thats where they belong with me'.. (referring to custody of her children)
(4) ' He never loved them'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(5) 'Oh so sure Mummy'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(6) 'He is going getting away,.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(7) 'But he was never any good'... (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(8) 'It was a mistake'. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
-
(22) 'Love to make it look like he was such a good man'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(23) 'But he is NO GOOD, NO GOOD'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(24) 'He can make himself look cool to them'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(25) 'Possible if your gone he loves publicity'.. (reference to Colin Caffell)?
(26) 'You only'... (reference to Christine Jay)
(27) 'So I put it due'..
(28) 'they the police from Chelmsford and the Sun will understand you talk to yourself'..
'(29) I was in....., shy then, no disrepect, police from Chelmsford will make this link to my blood mother'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(30) 'did, dig, dig'..
(31) 'and a lot of dirt will send'..
(32) 'you from this case'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(33) 'But please help my mother she has gone through hells fire'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(34) 'and is still'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(35) 'and'..
(36) 'help to give her the strength, she is so poorly'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(37) 'and all they told us'.. (adoptive parents)
(38) 'I understand not to phone you and gave'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
-
(9) 'Mummy Darling'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(10) 'Stop looking at my picture'...
(11) 'You will break your heart'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(12) 'Next just remember I am your daughter Bambi'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(13) '(born 3 - 3 - 59)'..
(14) 'and no one can take that away from you and I'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(15) 'The Sun Newspaper'..
(16) 'the police are going to be in touch soon and get this whole dirty mess cleared up"..
(17) 'and I must say it is a long dirty business as I said before there gone'..
(18) 'Dirty bugs will crawl out'..
(19) 'oh Mummy don't you think I have feelings also in this false space I am in, as soon as the dirt is dug up and the public no, then my Darling Mummy will I belong and if I go to my rest, we no the awful strain your going through that we are feeling all of the time'.. (reference to Christine Jay)
(20) 'feelings'..
(21) 'and they would dearly'..
-
(39) 'She was and is not my blood mother'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(40) 'So please'...
(41) 'Yet understand this'..
(42) 'you will cause wars', more than you bargained for'..
(43) 'My mother was brought up by the law'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(44) 'She was loved by us all of her life'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(45) 'Help her'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(46) 'She needs so much comfort and I can't give her this help in the other world'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(47) 'I am going to finish this now, as my mother's strength is slipping'.. (reference to June Bamber)
(48) 'Help her Please' (reference to June Bamber)
(49) 'Bambs'..
(50) '01989 4191'
(51) 'phone'..
-
N M D
Near Midnight Deadline
Nicholas Mother Daniel
Now Make Dad
G D
Go Downstairs
Get
-
Bedroom Phone Lead Unplugged
-
Notice the repeated usage of the word 'PLEASE'...
-
Box 57 is the key to solving this mystery, and by mystery I mean who really was responsible for shooting and killing four of the five victims!
By a somewhat mysterious coincidence, I have not yet come across the documentation which relates to the COLP orientated Box 57 contents, but there is still a chance that a copy is lurking somewhere in my possession!
-
Box 57 is the key to solving this mystery, and by mystery I mean who really was responsible for shooting and killing four of the five victims!
By a somewhat mysterious coincidence, I have not yet come across the documentation which relates to the COLP orientated Box 57 contents, but there is still a chance that a copy is lurking somewhere in my possession!
The almost undecipherable 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten note belonged to Box 57, this can be established by the number 57 printed on the corner of each of its pages!
-
We now know a great deal more about these handwritten notes, who wrote them, and that when the police investigation was being treated as a case of 'four murders and a suicide' that the contents of these notes were believed to support that scenario. Indeed, these notes found there way into the possession of DCI Jones when he was head of the Essex police investigating four murders and a suicide! He could not have been given these handwritten notes once his tenure as head of the investigation was terminated at the end of the 1st week in September 1985...
-
We now know a great deal more about these handwritten notes, who wrote them, and that when the police investigation was being treated as a case of 'four murders and a suicide' that the contents of these notes were believed to support that scenario. Indeed, these notes found there way into the possession of DCI Jones when he was head of the Essex police investigating four murders and a suicide! He could not have been given these handwritten notes once his tenure as head of the investigation was terminated at the end of the 1st week in September 1985...
I will now keep an eye out for anything to do with the contents of box 57 which are in my possession, because it seems to me that's where the cops put everything they seized or gathered or collected when they thought Sheila had been responsible for killing the other four victims!
-
That would be handy Mike.
-
I contacted Essex police some years ago - I sent an email to 'Kim Perks' requesting information about the two silencers seized at the scene and used to help to dishonestly convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders of the five victims, including the shooting and staging of his sister's body?
She responded negatively, offering the answer that the defence had received all the evidence in connection with both silencers!
PARDON?
Two silencers?
I don't think so Madam...
-
I contacted Essex police some years ago - I sent an email to 'Kim Perks' requesting information about the two silencers seized at the scene and used to help to dishonestly convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders of the five victims, including the shooting and staging of his sister's body?
She responded negatively, offering the answer that the defence had received all the evidence in connection with both silencers!
PARDON?
Two silencers?
I don't think so Madam...
Essex police, are scum bags, in the same elk as Essex police, The City of London Police, and Nottinghamshire police!
-
Kim Perks dishonestly tried to lead me astray by claiming that the defence had all the information used to help prosecute and convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders involving the two silencers!
If there were two silencers to the knowledge of Kim Perks and Essex police, how come during the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial that those representing Jeremy Bamber, the trial judge Drake, and the jury, and the general public at large, were not made aware of this fact?
-
Kim Perks dishonestly tried to lead me astray by claiming that the defence had all the information used to help prosecute and convict Jeremy Bamber of the murders involving the two silencers!
If there were two silencers to the knowledge of Kim Perks and Essex police, how come during the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial that those representing Jeremy Bamber, the trial judge Drake, and the jury, and the general public at large, were not made aware of this fact?
Let's get the facts correct - the cops, experts at the Lab' and those involved in transporting the two silencers from Essex police to the Last ab' at Huntingdon, and Kim Perks knew that two silencers lay at the heart of the case brought against Jeremy Bamber, but...
'no-one else did'..
-
Let us examine the true facts, and discover who the dishonest people are in this dishonest prosecution?
-
Let us examine the true facts, and discover who the dishonest people are in this dishonest prosecution?
Were Essex police dishonest?
Were the individual relatives dishonest?
Were the Lab' experts dishonest?
-
Were Essex police dishonest?
Were the individual relatives dishonest?
Were the Lab' experts dishonest?
What is meant by the term that I use as being dishonest?
-
Let's get the facts correct - the cops, experts at the Lab' and those involved in transporting the two silencers from Essex police to the Last ab' at Huntingdon, and Kim Perks knew that two silencers lay at the heart of the case brought against Jeremy Bamber, but...
'no-one else did'..
She doesn't say that she knew about two silencers, she said she couldn't give you the information you requested but that those involved HAD been given the necessary details. She was just a press officer.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56802.html#msg56802
-
Why is the information "not for public consumption"?
-
She doesn't say that she knew about two silencers, she said she couldn't give you the information you requested but that those involved HAD been given the necessary details. She was just a press officer.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1721.msg56802.html#msg56802
Unfortunately, Caroline you are quoting the contents of the reply from Kim Perks dated the 20th April 2004, to which I am alluding to, but I was talking about the contents of an earlier reply which I received from the very same party, dated the 8th April 2004..
The contents of which state thus:-
'Dear Mr Teskowski, you emailed Essex police on the 6th April with regard to the white House farm murders and questions about the silencers. Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties concerned with the case were aware of the sound moderators, and all the issues surrounding them, but that this detail is not a matter for public disclosure. I am sorry we are unable to assist you any further on this occasion.
Regards
Kim Perks.
-
Unfortunately, Caroline you are quoting the contents of the reply from Kim Perks dated the 20th April 2004, to which I am alluding to, but I was talking about the contents of an earlier reply which I received from the very same party, dated the 8th April 2004..
The contents of which state thus:-
'Dear Mr Teskowski, you emailed Essex police on the 6th April with regard to the white House farm murders and questions about the silencers. Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties concerned with the case were aware of the sound moderators, and all the issues surrounding them, but that this detail is not a matter for public disclosure. I am sorry we are unable to assist you any further on this occasion.
Regards
Kim Perks.
And so, I have it on record, that Essex police had two sound moderators which they claim all parties were aware of, including all the issues concerned with them - but this is a lie because the jury were party to the silencer, blood and paint evidence and they were led to believe that in fact there was only the one sound moderator contains the red paint from the kitchen aga upon it, and the blood belonging to Sheila inside 'it'....
-
I am prepared to make a sworn affidavit in the presence of a solicitor confirming that the above was a response I got from Essex police on the 8th April 2004, in which it was confirmed that the police had two sound moderators in their possession in connection with their ongoing investigation into the shootings at whf...
-
The cops, the relatives, and the lab' experts are guilty of pulling the wool over everybodies eyes, including the trial judge Mr Justice Drake, the jury, Jeremy Bamber and his defence, and the general public at large!
Nothing could be any clearer..
-
The cops, the relatives, and the lab' experts are guilty of pulling the wool over everybodies eyes, including the trial judge Mr Justice Drake, the jury, Jeremy Bamber and his defence, and the general public at large!
Nothing could be any clearer..
Let's put things into perspective, in a response to me dated the 8th April 2004, Kim Perks informs me that she has spoken to the senior officer in the case, etc and that everyone was aware of the two sound moderators and all the issues relating to them, but this was and is not true!
-
Let's put things into perspective, in a response to me dated the 8th April 2004, Kim Perks informs me that she has spoken to the senior officer in the case, etc and that everyone was aware of the two sound moderators and all the issues relating to them, but this was and is not true!
The details of the two sound moderators is not for public disclosure!!!
What?
Not for public disclosure, but if all parties knew about the two sound moderators in the possession of Essex police, why wasn't this mentioned during the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial? Moreover, if the police had two sound moderators in their possession as part of their investigation into these five deaths, why was only one of the silencers mentioned during the trial? Also, since only one of the silencers was tested for DNA as part of the failed 2002 appeal how is it possible to know with certainty that the one checked for DNA belonged to Anthony Pargeters bolt action rifle, of the Bamber family silencer?
-
What we are dealing with here is corruption at its worst!
-
Surely to God, if all parties had known there had been two silencers received by Essex police from the scene, then of course, it makes a complete mockery of the ballistics evidence which found that the two bullets (PV/20 and PV/19) had both been fired from the self same rifle within a split second of one another!
What?
For this to be true, both silencers would have needed to be fitted to the same guns barrel...
Why would Sheila, or any would be killer, fire one shot with one silencer attached on the end of the guns barrel, then remove that silencer,candidate attach the other silencer, and inflict the second shot!
-
Unfortunately, Caroline you are quoting the contents of the reply from Kim Perks dated the 20th April 2004, to which I am alluding to, but I was talking about the contents of an earlier reply which I received from the very same party, dated the 8th April 2004..
The contents of which state thus:-
'Dear Mr Teskowski, you emailed Essex police on the 6th April with regard to the white House farm murders and questions about the silencers. Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties concerned with the case were aware of the sound moderators, and all the issues surrounding them, but that this detail is not a matter for public disclosure. I am sorry we are unable to assist you any further on this occasion.
Regards
Kim Perks.
I received the above response from Kim Perks at precisely, 13:26:16 on Thurs the 8th April 2004..
-
Now, we can take it from the response on that occasion, that not only did the senior officer who supervised the case know that the police had been given two silencers, but so too did the force solicitor, and Kim Perks herself!!!
And yet, none f them have contacted the Home Secretary, or the CCRC to get this case back to the court of appeal?
It's absolutely disgusting!!
-
I would like to know from the horse's mouth upon which silencer was the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga found upon?
Also..
Inside which silencer Sheila's blood was encapsulated?
We already know that the paint and the blood could not possibly have been found upon and inside the same silencer, because the silencer handed to police by Ann Eaton on the 11th September 1985, was fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on the 13th September 1985, and not getting handled at the Lab' until after 20th September 1985 ( a matter of days after the blood had been analysed and confirmed to be the blood of Sheila Caffell..
-
Unfortunately, Caroline you are quoting the contents of the reply from Kim Perks dated the 20th April 2004, to which I am alluding to, but I was talking about the contents of an earlier reply which I received from the very same party, dated the 8th April 2004..
The contents of which state thus:-
'Dear Mr Teskowski, you emailed Essex police on the 6th April with regard to the white House farm murders and questions about the silencers. Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties concerned with the case were aware of the sound moderators, and all the issues surrounding them, but that this detail is not a matter for public disclosure. I am sorry we are unable to assist you any further on this occasion.
Regards
Kim Perks.
Now, bearing this in mind, how come we don't have any police officer making any witness statement confirming that a 2nd silencer was either handed over by a relative, or that an officer recovered the 2nd silencer, and if so when was this seized by Essex police? Instead, we have Essex police officers making comments during police interviews of themselves by the COLP Enquiry team stating emphatically that there was only one silencer, that they never saw or knew about any second silencer.
The relatives also maintain that they only found one silencer at the scene and that they only handed over just the one silencer, and yet police documentation shows that Peter Eaton handed it over to Stan Jones on the evening of 12th August 1985, and that his wife handed a silencer over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985.
Rather somewhat bizzarely, the experts at Huntingdon Lab' claim they only received one silencer which was examined by various experts, including Glynis Howard, Malcolm Fletcher, John Hayward, etc - yet Essex police submitted a silencer to the Lab' in question on at least 2 occasions in which one of the submission dates overlapped, the submission date of the other. In particular that on the 30th August 1985, Essex police submitted a silencer, bearing the identifying mark DB/1 to Huntingdon Lab' to be examined. This silencer was the only silencer at the Lab' from that date, until the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) was received from Essex police on the 20th September 1985. From this date onwards there were 2 identical looking silencers at the Lab'. However, none of the experts state that they examined 2 different silencers even though the 2nd silencer was sent to the Lab' to be checked for blood and fibers...
My research has uncovered the startling fact that the 2nd silencer that Essex police submitted to the Lab' (DRB/1) on the 20th September 1985, to be checked for blood became the sole vehicle upon which red paint from the scratched kitchen aga, and inside which the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell' was introduced and presented at the October 1986 Chelmsford Crown Court trial and the tell tale evidence capable of establishing Jeremy Bambers guilt!
But..
Since the unique blood group activity belonging to Sheila Caffell was found inside the 1st silencer by Malcolm Fletcher at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985, and the additional fact that the blood found on this occasion was analysed on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, it cannot be attributed as having been found inside the 2nd silencer because Essex police did not send the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) to the Lab' to be checked for blood until after the blood had been found and tested from the other one (DB/1)..
It was significantly dishonest, on the part of the prosecution and it's medley of conspirators, to present the 2nd silencer as the only silencer inside which the unique blood group activity belonging to Sheila Caffell was found, when the stark facts establish that premis to be a total fabrication!
Insofar as the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga is concerned, I am satisfied that it was present on the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) which Ann Eaton handed to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, which in turn was fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on the 13th September 1985, until Essex police eventually forwarded 'it' to the Lab' on the 20th September 1985, by which stage both silencers were at Huntingdon Lab' together!
-
Since the unique blood group activity belonging to Sheila Caffell was found inside the 1st silencer by Malcolm Fletcher at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985, and the additional fact that the blood found on this occasion was analysed on the 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, it cannot be attributed as having been found inside the 2nd silencer because Essex police did not send the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) to the Lab' to be checked for blood until after the blood had been found and tested from the other one (DB/1)..
It was significantly dishonest, on the part of the prosecution and it's medley of conspirators, to present the 2nd silencer as the only silencer inside which the unique blood group activity belonging to Sheila Caffell was found, when the stark facts establish that premis to be a total fabrication!
Insofar as the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga is concerned, I am satisfied that it was present on the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) which Ann Eaton handed to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, which in turn was fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on the 13th September 1985, until Essex police eventually forwarded 'it' to the Lab' on the 20th September 1985, by which stage both silencers were at Huntingdon Lab' together!
I have narrowed the evidence concerning the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga, and the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell, as being attributable to one or other of the two different silencers, for example, the unique blood belonging to Sheila Caffell was at some stage found by default inside the 1st silencer, the one bearing the exhibit reference DB/1, Lab' item no.23 which Essex police sent along to Huntingdon Lab' on the 30th August 1985. The red paint from the scratched kitchen aga, however was not present at all upon the 1st silencer (DB/1), the red paint arrived on the outside of the 2nd silencer which Ann Eaton had handed over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, which in turn had been fingerprinted by DS Eastwood and DS Davison on the 13th September 1985 whilst Essex police still had the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) in their possession, at a time when the 1st silencer (DB/1) was already at the Lab' and which had been there continually ever since the 30th August 1985! The red paint from the scratched kitchen aga did not arrive at Huntingdon Lab' until the 20th September 1985, a fact establishable by police documenting not made available until after the failed 2002 appeal.
The worrying thing concerning the presence of Sheila Caffell's unique blood found inside the 1st silencer (DB/1) at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985, and the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga found upon the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) which arrived at Huntingdon Lab' on the 20th September 1985, are the circumstances surrounding exactly how Sheila Caffell's unique blood could be found by Malcolm Fletcher in one of the silencers (DB/1), and how red paint from the scratched kitchen aga found its way onto the other silencer (DRB/1)?
Dealing primarily with the presence of Sheila Caffell's unique blood in the 1st silencer (DB/1) found inside this version of the silencer. It is rather astonishing and somewhat unbelievable and unacceptable that the ballistic expert (Malcolm Fletcher) should be the very first person to see the blood inside the baffle plates after he dismantled it at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985. Since, prior to this, DI Ron Cook (SOCO) had previously dismantled it (DB/1) whilst Essex police still had 'it' in their possession, for example, on the 29th August 1985. On that occasion, Ron Cook had dismantled the very same silencer (DB/1) removing all 17 baffle plates from the outer casing of the silencer, and separating the knurled end cap, top washer, and the following six or seven baffle plates so that there was a distinctive gap between them whilst the remaining baffle plates remained compacted! At this stage Ron Cook had taken a photograph showing the silencer in the aforementioned dismantled stage. Now, my point is this, why didn't Ron Cook find all the blood belonging uniquely to Sheila Caffell there on the dismantled knurled end cap, it's top washer, and on the top and bottom surfaces of any of the first six or seven dismantled baffle plates, which by the 12th September 1985, once Malcolm Fletcher had received the rebuilt silencer from Ron Cook, that Fletcher rather astonishingly finds all the blood which turns out to be Sheila Caffell's blood upon the very same baffle plates which Ron Cook had looked at? How is it possible for the blood belonging to Sheila Caffell to not be on the silencers baffle plates on the 29th August 1985, when Ron Cook tampered with the baffle plates of the silencer (DB/1), yet the blood miraculously appear there in time for the ballistic expert, Fletcher to be the first person to find all that blood there by the 12th September 1985?
Well, not only did Cook tamper with the silencer (DB/1) on the 29th August 1985 by dismantling it, and separating the very self same baffle plates where by 12th September 1985, Sheila's blood would miraculously appear, but upon rebuilding the silencer how he had screwed the rebuilt silencer directly onto the muzzle end of the anshuzt rifles barrell (which he also took a photograph of). On top of all of this, Ron Cook sent a handwritten note to Malcolm Fletcher at the Lab' on the 30th August 1985, along with the photographs he had taken beforehand! So by the time Fletcher came to dismantle the silencer at the Lab' on 12th September 1985, Fletcher must have known that Ron Cook had interfered with the internal mechanism of the 1st silencer (DB/1). In those circumstances the 1st silencer should have been rejected at the Lab' and Fletcher should not have examined it because of a very strong risk that the silencer may have been contaminated by Cook! But Fletcher kept the knowledge about what Ron Cook had been doing with that silencer prior to Fletcher himself becoming embroiled in it. The matter does not end there, because upon discovering Sheila Caffell's blood on the first six or seven baffle plates at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985, he handed over the 1st silencer to blood expert, John Hayward, who during the course of 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, he analysed the blood that was present on these baffle plates and established that the blood belonged uniquely to Sheila Caffell!
-
Well, not only did Cook tamper with the silencer (DB/1) on the 29th August 1985 by dismantling it, and separating the very self same baffle plates where by 12th September 1985, Sheila's blood would miraculously appear, but upon rebuilding the silencer how he had screwed the rebuilt silencer directly onto the muzzle end of the anshuzt rifles barrell (which he also took a photograph of). On top of all of this, Ron Cook sent a handwritten note to Malcolm Fletcher at the Lab' on the 30th August 1985, along with the photographs he had taken beforehand! So by the time Fletcher came to dismantle the silencer at the Lab' on 12th September 1985, Fletcher must have known that Ron Cook had interfered with the internal mechanism of the 1st silencer (DB/1). In those circumstances the 1st silencer should have been rejected at the Lab' and Fletcher should not have examined it because of a very strong risk that the silencer may have been contaminated by Cook! But Fletcher kept the knowledge about what Ron Cook had been doing with that silencer prior to Fletcher himself becoming embroiled in it. The matter does not end there, because upon discovering Sheila Caffell's blood on the first six or seven baffle plates at the Lab' on the 12th September 1985, he handed over the 1st silencer to blood expert, John Hayward, who during the course of 12th, 13th, 18th and 19th September 1985, he analysed the blood that was present on these baffle plates and established that the blood belonged uniquely to Sheila Caffell!
At this stage, (12th to 19th September 1985), Malcolm Fletcher must have known that Ron Cook had deliberately and dishonestly contaminated the baffle plates which Cook had dismantled from the silencer in question (1st one, DB/1) after Cook had dismantled the silencer on the 29th August 1985! Cook must have known that Fletcher knew what he (Cook) had done! The next question which needs an investigation into, concerns whether or not, Malcolm Fletcher told John Hayward what he knew, and whether or not Fletcher produced the photographs taken by Ron Cook regarding how he had dismantled the silencer whilst police had it, separating the baffle plates, as described, without any mention whatsoever of any blood at all having been there?
Did the blood expert John Hayward know that Ron Cook had tampered with the 1st silencer (DB/1)?
Either, he did, or he didn't..
Was it necessary, for Malcolm Fletcher to hand over the damning photographic evidence confirming that which Ron Cook had done with the silencer prior to him rebuilding 'it' and forwarding it to the Lab' on the 30th August 1985? I believe that Fletcher had a moral obligation to provide the blood expert with everything he knew about the 1st silencer (DB/1), including the fact that when Ron Cook had tampered with the 1st silencer (DB/1) on the 29th August 1985, that Cook had photographed the 1st silencer (DB/1) in a dismantled state! It would have also been pertinent, insofar as the blood expert, John Hayward was concerned, to know that Ron Cook had control of the 3 blood samples that were taken from the body of Sheila Caffell during autopsy on the 7th August 1985. Hayward would have known that 3 samples of Sheila Caffell's bloods had been taken, but that only 2 of those 3 samples had been forwarded to the Lab' by Ron Cook!
Let's deal with the 2 blood samples that Essex police forwarded to the Lab' - one of these samples was tested for toxicology and drugs, etc, the other to establish the blood group activity of Sheila Caffell. But the third blood sample (PV/12) seems to have vanished off the face of the earth!
Everything points to the fact that Ron Cook deliberately contaminated the baffle plates of the 1st silencer (DB/1) on the 29th August 1985 when he dismantled 'it', then had rebuilt it, and forwarded it along to the Lab' at Huntingdon in the following day (30th August 1985) for the attention of Malcolm Fletcher accompanied by the photographic evidence spoken about! Fletcher must have known what Ron Cook had done, otherwise, Ron Cook would have been attributed with discovering Sheila Caffell's blood on the baffle plates he had separated previously! If Fletcher knew, it is almost certain that the blood expert John Hayward knew of this fabrication of the blood evidence in that 1st silencer (DB/1). If Fletcher hid the truth from Hayward, then Fletcher was guilty of deceiving Hayward into producing positive blood group results to enable the police and those responsible for prosecuting Jeremy Bamber as the killer, to get a conviction on the 5 counts of murder!
Ron Cook contaminated the 1st silencer with the blood of Sheila Caffell (PV/12), he was able to achieve this when he dismantled the 1st silencer on the 29th August 1985. Malcolm Fletcher was dishonestly attributed as the witness who found the blood in that silencer, after Cook had rebuilt it and forwarded it to the Lab' on the 30th August 1985 for the attention of Fletcher who performed his astonishing feat of discovering the all important blood inside the silencer, upon its baffle plates (12th September 1985). The blood Expert, John Hayward was the witness who would present this dishonest evidence during Bambers trial!
The silencers, and the blood evidence does not confine itself only to the trial of Jeremy Bamber, since a dark shadow hangs over the DNA evidence found upon and inside the silencer (DRB/1) as part of the failed 2002 appeal, to which the CCRC were a petty to - it begs the question whether or not the correct silencer was exposed to the DNA process , in view of the fact that Ron Cook had contaminated the 1st silencer (DB/1), not the 2nd silencer (DRB/1)..
There is little wonder that the appellate court rejected the DNA evidence concerning the 2nd silencer ( DRB/1) stating that there was a risk of contamination, since Sheila Caffell's unique blood could not have been found inside that silencer - no wonder when that silencer was examined for DNA that it was claimed there was no more blood to be found inside it, and that it must have all been tested to destruction beforehand? The were examining the wrong silencer (2nd silencer, DRB/1) which Ann Eaton had handed over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985, and which Essex police retained possession of until the 20th September 1985, at which stage only then did they forward it to the Lab'...
The 1st silencer (DB/1) should have been the silencer that was examined for a presence of Sheila Caffell's DNA, even though it would have been detected, it's discovery there was capable of opening up a can of worms, because the court which had tried and convicted Jeremy Bamber of these murders had been deceived into believing there had only been one silencer in all its disguises, upon which was red paint from the scratched kitchen aga, and inside which contained the unique blood group activity of Sheila Caffell. Blood which had dishonestly been planted in that silencer by Ron Cook, and red paint from the scratched kitchen aga which almost got there (on the 2nd silencer, DRB/1) prior to Ann Eaton handing that 2nd silencer over to DC Oakey on the 11th September 1985...
-
I have gone to great lengths to explain how Ron Cook deliberately and dishonestly had tampered with the 1st silencer (DB/1) by planting the blood from sample PV/20 onto the baffle plates of the silencer so that the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, could take the credit for having discovered it there - everything I have said is absolutely true, it's all documented!
-
I have gone to great lengths to explain how Ron Cook deliberately and dishonestly had tampered with the 1st silencer (DB/1) by planting the blood from sample PV/20 onto the baffle plates of the silencer so that the ballistic expert, Malcolm Fletcher, could take the credit for having discovered it there - everything I have said is absolutely true, it's all documented!
When it comes to the 2nd silencer (DRB/1) being contaminated with the red paint from the scratched kitchen aga, I have the following things to say - firstly controversy surrounds the taking of paint samples (RC/1) and (RWC/1) at the scene on the 8th August 1985, and at scene on the 13th August 1985 by Ron Cook...
In the first instance, Ron Cook denies having taken any paint sample (RC/1) from the kitchen mantle piece on the 8th of August 1985. Whereas, the exhibits officer DS Davidson confirms that on the 8th August 1975 whilst both he and Ron Cook were present at the scene, that Cook handed to him paint sample RC/1, and during the COLP interview of DS Davidson, he told the investigating officers that Cook had given him that paint sample in that occasion because some red paint had been found on the end of a guns barrel, a gun which had been recovered from the kitchen downstairs...
Cook denied any knowledge of these events and continued to deny having taken such a paint sample!
On the other hand, Cook maintained he had only ever taken one paint sample at the scene (RWC/1) and that was on the 13th August 1985, involving the occasion when Ann Eaton had been present, and had been told by the police (which consisted of Ron Cook, Stan Jones, and Big Miller) that if anyone were to ask what the police were doing at the scene she was not to tell them anything and that she was not supposed to have seen what they had done in the vicinity of the kitchen aga on that occasion!
Reference to the paint sample RWC/1 was squeezed into the he pocketbook note of Ron Cook as an afterthought...
-
The bottom line is that it was the 2nd silencer which conveyed the red paint evidence from the scratched kitchen aga, acsilencer (DRB/1) which the relatives had total control over from the time of the shootings until the 11th September 1985, when of course Ann Eaton handed it (2bd silencer, DRB/1) over to DC Oakey!
-
Unfortunately, Caroline you are quoting the contents of the reply from Kim Perks dated the 20th April 2004, to which I am alluding to, but I was talking about the contents of an earlier reply which I received from the very same party, dated the 8th April 2004..
The contents of which state thus:-
'Dear Mr Teskowski, you emailed Essex police on the 6th April with regard to the white House farm murders and questions about the silencers. Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties concerned with the case were aware of the sound moderators, and all the issues surrounding them, but that this detail is not a matter for public disclosure. I am sorry we are unable to assist you any further on this occasion.
Regards
Kim Perks.
Here is the proof that Essex police had two sound moderators!
'Having consulted with both the senior officer who oversaw the latest appeal and our force solicitor all I am able to say is that all parties connected with the case were made aware of the sound moderators and all the issues surrounding them'...
But the truth is and was, THAT EVERYBODY WHO WAS ENTITLED TO KNOW THAT COPS, RELATIVES, AND LAB' EXPERTS HAD TWO SOUND MODERATORS, WAS NOT TOLD, AND DID NOT KNOW OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE 2ND SOUND MODERATOR!
The authorities tell lies like its fresh air, they are all dishonest and will do anything and say anything to protect each other....
-
This brings me on to the matter of the two bibles, DRH/33 and DRH/44...
Only one of these was presented or disclosed to Bambers legal team, and mentioned during the 1986 trial and the 2002 appeal...
-
This brings me on to the matter of the two bibles, DRH/33 and DRH/44...
Only one of these was presented or disclosed to Bambers legal team, and mentioned during the 1986 trial and the 2002 appeal...
Essex police originally said that the bibles no longer existed, that they had been destroyed, but the truth of the matter is that one of them was handed back to the relatives after the trial!
-
Photographs showing one of the two key bibles can be found in the staged death scene of Sheila Caffell - Sheila's right arm appears to be resting on top of the outer edge of the Bible! But how could the Bible have ended up like that if Sheila fell backwards after being shot?
-
According to PS Adams when he viewed the scene in the main bedroom at around 9.00am, and he spoke to other officers who were present there, he said it appeared to them all that June and Sheila had been up reading the bibles, but I can't see how they arrived at that conclusion based upon where one of the bibles ended up!
-
According to PS Adams when he viewed the scene in the main bedroom at around 9.00am, and he spoke to other officers who were present there, he said it appeared to them all that June and Sheila had been up reading the bibles, but I can't see how they arrived at that conclusion based upon where one of the bibles ended up!
It's suspicious that the police never took any photographs of the second Bible (the one they had to destroy)..
-
Photographs showing one of the two key bibles can be found in the staged death scene of Sheila Caffell - Sheila's right arm appears to be resting on top of the outer edge of the Bible! But how could the Bible have ended up like that if Sheila fell backwards after being shot?
HAve you managed to find the document referring to Luke 12 or box 57 yet?
-
The almost undecipherable 6 pages of Sheila Caffell's handwritten note belonged to Box 57, this can be established by the number 57 printed on the corner of each of its pages!
Any luck on finding the Index for the contents of box 57?
What about these?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1989.msg60921.html#msg60921
(https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1989.msg60921.html#msg60921)
-
Any luck on finding the Index for the contents of box 57?
What about these?
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1989.msg60921.html#msg60921
(https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1989.msg60921.html#msg60921)
What about them? You're not suggesting that these contained the 'suicide' letters are you? ::) Peter Jay (Sheila's uncle) RECOGNISED the writing as being from Sheila. The letter on the forum which you have posted as a sample of Sheila's writing was to Peter Jay - I think he might have noticed that her handwriting had changed some if those 'other letters' had been part of the six.
-
Can't see anything my comp is telling me it's an insecure site ::)
-
The left is a "to" written by Jeremy. The centre is a "to" written by Sheila and the right is a "to" on the notes in question
-
The word boys. S is elevated on both.
-
It's the same join on top of the " o ".
-
Knew there was something familiar about the signature at the end of the 'so called' suicide note.
I have also added a copy of Sheila's signature at the end of her letter to Peter Jay,
Nevills signature also has a large B. Its probably a family thing. :-\
-
Can't see anything my comp is telling me it's an insecure site ::)
It's THIS site Lookout ;D
-
Nevills signature also has a large B. Its probably a family thing. :-\
Looks nothing like Jeremy's. You're REALLY trying to make this fit aren't you? Give it up David, you're not qualified.
-
It's the same join on top of the " o ".
Oh yes! :o - Pity the b the y and the s (other than being a bit elevated) is COMPLETELY different ::)
-
It's THIS site Lookout ;D
I know-------tell this stupid computer that after its 2hr " configuration " twaddle :)) :)) :)) :))
-
Oh yes! :o - Pity the b the y and the s (other than being a bit elevated) is COMPLETELY different ::)
Her mind/brain was a bit like being drunk or sober when writing-------a tad different. Thoughts are the same until you turn your thoughts to writing.
-
Nevills signature also has a large B. Its probably a family thing. :-\
Other than both B's are large case, there's no more similarity than there is family connection.
-
It would have seemed that they all wrote/write like doctors ::)
-
Can't see anything my comp is telling me it's an insecure site ::)
Yes mine too.
-
The word boys. S is elevated on both.
But on one the "y" is joined to the "s".
-
Yes mine too.
Go for it Steve,I ignored what it said.
-
Looks nothing like Jeremy's. You're REALLY trying to make this fit aren't you? Give it up David, you're not qualified.
Thomas Edison = No Qualificans but invents lightbulb and motionpicture
Bill Gates = No computing qualificans but creates Microsoft
Albert Einstein = High school drop out but was Nobel Prize-winning physicist
Henry Ford = Not qualified in anything but creates Ford Motor company.
JP Morgan = No banking qualifications but creates banking dynasty.
Are you saying you cant do something if you don't have a sheet of paper with your name on? ;D
-
What about them? You're not suggesting that these contained the 'suicide' letters are you? ::)
No. But if we could see those letters it would help in making comparisons. As they are closer to the event and coincides more with Sheila's deteriorating mental heath.
Peter Jay (Sheila's uncle) RECOGNISED the writing as being from Sheila. The letter on the forum which you have posted as a sample of Sheila's writing was to Peter Jay - I think he might have noticed that her handwriting had changed some if those 'other letters' had been part of the six.
And indeed the handwriting should have changed.
"Many neurological disorders like apraxia and chorea can
affect handwriting. Many psychiatric disorders like Depression, Obsessive
Compulsive Disorder, schizophrenia are also linked with handwriting change.
A unique presentation of major depressive disorder manifesting as chief
complain of handwriting change was observed in a girl who had nice
handwriting before depression. In spite of constant efforts she was not able to
revert back to her original handwriting. Her new handwritings were different
from old one in form of width and height of letters, organization and overall
presentation. She was prescribed antidepressants. Depressive symptoms were
relieved and her handwriting started gradually improving considerably
though previous level had not been achieved."
Handwriting change as a psychiatric symptom (2016) IJMDS January 2016
Dysfuent handwriting in schizophrenia is related to the schizophrenic disorder itself, which may reduce the automatization of movement (Douglas & Sara, 1975). This thesis is justi?able because subtle psychomotor disturbance may be also observed in clinically unafected relatives of patients with schizophrenia, and in unmedicated patients with schizophrenia (Flyckt et al., 1999). Decreased automatization of movement results in dysfuent movement, disturbances in movement and is thought to be associated with neurobiological dispositions in people within schizophrenia spectrum connected with dysfunctional neural connections between cortical and subcortical regions or abnormalities in hemispheric specialization (Gallucci et al., 1997; Gupta et al., 1995; Wiser et al., 1998). It suggests that subtle disturbances of handwriting in outpatients with schizophrenia may be present independent of the acute side e?ect of medication, and of chronic movement abnormalities such as tardive dyskinesia, and in populations at risk for psychosis.
Dysfluent handwriting in schizophrenic outpatients - Barbara Gawda Department of Psychology, Maria Curie–Sklodowska University, Lublin,
-
Thomas Edison = No Qualificans but invents lightbulb and motionpicture
Bill Gates = No computing qualificans but creates Microsoft
Albert Einstein = High school drop out but was Nobel Prize-winning physicist
Henry Ford = Not qualified in anything but creates Ford Motor company.
JP Morgan = No banking qualifications but creates banking dynasty.
Are you saying you cant do something if you don't have a sheet of paper with your name on? ;D
I am saying your OPINION is no more valid than anyone else's here but you seem to think it is. You can have an opinion, but don't set it up as any kind of fact.
I think Jeremy wrote the letters and that it looks more like his erratic style. That's my opinion, it's not a fact. Try a little humility and people may take you more seriously .............. not me of course! :P
-
I don't think Bamber would go as far as to write false letters to try to incriminate Sheila further. The letters were not brought up until decades later.
However the letters don't incriminate Sheila.
-
They give an overall picture of her state of mind though !
-
They give an overall picture of her state of mind though !
Or a picture of how someone else sees the mind of someone who is mentally ill.
-
The most natural thing in the world is for a mother to have her children with her and when that isn't possible for some reason, the effect it has on the mother is devastating and even under normal circumstances can take its toll dramatically on the mental health of the woman,besides having the same impact on the children who sense their mother's pain. This is the normal reaction but when the mother already suffers mental health problems NOBODY knows how separation is going to affect her.
Shock/trauma has different stages of emotions such as a bereavement does,you either accept a situation or you don't. Mothers WILL kill for their children. They'll move Heaven and Earth for them.
Sheila HADN'T accepted her situation and in her mind with much thought had realised her only way out was to kill her children and herself in order to be together. Her parents would naturally have tried to intervene at that stage,but failed.
The opportunity came about for this very sad situation because of the use of the readily available weapons at WHF.
I see NO other reason that it could have been anyone other than Sheila who'd been badly let down by the medics and authorities through lack of vital support. 33 years forward and it STILL goes on with mistakes STILL being made and COVERED up !
-
The most natural thing in the world is for a mother to have her children with her and when that isn't possible for some reason, the effect it has on the mother is devastating and even under normal circumstances can take its toll dramatically on the mental health of the woman,besides having the same impact on the children who sense their mother's pain. This is the normal reaction but when the mother already suffers mental health problems NOBODY knows how separation is going to affect her.
Shock/trauma has different stages of emotions such as a bereavement does,you either accept a situation or you don't. Mothers WILL kill for their children. They'll move Heaven and Earth for them.
Sheila HADN'T accepted her situation and in her mind with much thought had realised her only way out was to kill her children and herself in order to be together. Her parents would naturally have tried to intervene at that stage,but failed.
The opportunity came about for this very sad situation because of the use of the readily available weapons at WHF.
I see NO other reason that it could have been anyone other than Sheila who'd been badly let down by the medics and authorities through lack of vital support. 33 years forward and it STILL goes on with mistakes STILL being made and COVERED up !
Whilst I totally concur -in general- to all you say, NONE of it is a necessary and guaranteed particular. Are you quite clear in your own mind regarding Sheila's illness? There have been times when you appear to think she had some form of mental illness and others where you seem to have gone down the road of some strong discipline would have sorted her out. In the above post, were it not for the fact that you're telling us how Sheila's mind was working, you're beginning to sound like a counselor, although claiming to know what's in someone's mind isn't something a counselor would do. They ask the question of them first.
Sheila was NOT separated from he children, Nor, other than Jeremy's word, was she going to be. She'd met Christine. She'd introduced her to Colin and the twins. They'd allegedly been glued to each other for several days. In Colin's words "For the first time, Sheila had hope for the future".
Sad though it is, the system is always going to let someone down. As long as imperfect people (do their best to?) serve imperfect people, there will never -CAN never- be perfection for everyone.
-
Whilst I totally concur -in general- to all you say, NONE of it is a necessary and guaranteed particular. Are you quite clear in your own mind regarding Sheila's illness? There have been times when you appear to think she had some form of mental illness and others where you seem to have gone down the road of some strong discipline would have sorted her out. In the above post, were it not for the fact that you're telling us how Sheila's mind was working, you're beginning to sound like a counselor, although claiming to know what's in someone's mind isn't something a counselor would do. They ask the question of them first.
Sheila was NOT separated from he children, Nor, other than Jeremy's word, was she going to be. She'd met Christine. She'd introduced her to Colin and the twins. They'd allegedly been glued to each other for several days. In Colin's words "For the first time, Sheila had hope for the future".
Sad though it is, the system is always going to let someone down. As long as imperfect people (do their best to?) serve imperfect people, there will never -CAN never- be perfection for everyone.
I'm not claiming to" be in someone's mind ", what I've said is the normal and natural emotion that a mother has for her child.
It's you who keeps contradicting what I've said about Sheila and her health----simply because you won't/don't accept that she'd been responsible for all the mayhem. Yes,she was unwell and in turn was making everyone else ill too because there was no real help out there. Her mother was having to return to GP visits because of it.
In Sheila's mind she WAS separated from her children not having them on a full-time basis as a mother.
I keep stressing that although Sheila had been unwell she wasn't stupid and would have recognised herself that she'd been unable to carry out certain tasks but at the same time felt powerless to ask for help because her once assertiveness had been masked by the medication which had been given to her.
Under the influence of an unnecessary cosh of knockout drugs !!
According to JB and now widely known Sheila had been in the midst of a discussion re.putting the children into foster-care,contrary what you and others think or say and to Sheila would definitely have been the end of the line and if Ferguson had been truthful he'd have admitted that this discussion would have torn her apart along with others who'd agreed with that arrangement.
-
I don't think Bamber would go as far as to write false letters to try to incriminate Sheila further. The letters were not brought up until decades later.
However the letters don't incriminate Sheila.
The notes were handed to DCI Jones at a time when he led the investigation into four murders and a suicide, which means that they surfaced at the beginning of the enquiry before DCI Jones lost his post, and obviously prior to his untimely death which occurred prior to the trial! If you read the documentation accompanying these handwritten notes you will see that it was decided that 'no further action' would be taken (nfa), which coincided with a change in leadership of the investigation which effectively became a case of five murders, with Jeremy being the chief suspect!
-
The notes were handed to DCI Jones at a time when he led the investigation into four murders and a suicide, which means that they surfaced at the beginning of the enquiry before DCI Jones lost his post, and obviously prior to his untimely death which occurred prior to the trial! If you read the documentation accompanying these handwritten notes you will see that it was decided that 'no further action' would be taken (nfa), which coincided with a change in leadership of the investigation which effectively became a case of five murders, with Jeremy being the chief suspect!
The chief reason the case against Jeremy initially fell apart after his initial arrest on suspicion of being the killer of the five victims, is that DCI Jones knew that he couldn't have, and had not shot and killed his sister, because DCI Jones knew that police had shot Sheila Caffell, initially during a one on one struggle downstairs in the kitchen where Sheila had pulled the barrel end of a rifle in toward her own neck, which originally was explained away as a suicide (in conversations between those at the scene and those back in the control room), and that police had inadvertently shot her a second time, after she had recovered downstairs and made her way upstairs to the parents bedroom and collapsed again on top of the bed. DCI Jones knew that she had been shot again after her body had been moved from the bed onto the bedroom floor and that whilst 'informatives' were being carried out, another rifle which had been resting at a nearby first floor box room window was brought to her body and placed in her possession , this was done as a gauging exercise, it was part and parcel of the 'informatives', but no-one had checked the rifle to see if it was still loaded with bullets or a bullet! In the process of carrying out this exercise and with Sheila's fingers on the trigger mechanism, whilst the muzzle end of the guns barrel was under her chin, a shot accidently went off which took everyone by surprise, a shot which effectively ended Sheila Caffell's life, once and for all - these are the true facts surrounding the cause of death in Sheila Caffell's case, DCI Jones knew this, hence why the police did not charge Jeremy Bamber with the five murders and Jeremy was released on bail only charged with the offence of burglary of the Idea Road Camp site office, an offence he carried out with his accomplice Julie Mugford'...
-
I don't think Bamber would go as far as to write false letters to try to incriminate Sheila further. The letters were not brought up until decades later.
However the letters don't incriminate Sheila.
I didn't say he wrote them to 'incriminate' Sheila.
-
It was always DcI Jones belief, that Sheila had shot and killed the other four victims, and that before Sheila shot Neville Bamber dead downstairs in the kitchen, that she forced him at gun point to contact Jeremy to get him to come to the farmhouse because he believed that Sheila had wanted to shoot and kill him as well...
Ask yourselves, where did DCI Jones get this narrative from? How did he know that Sheila had forced Neville Bamber to make a call to try and lure Jeremy to the farmhouse so that she could kill him as well?
Firstly, because of the burn marks on the back of Neville Bambers neck which appeared to have been caused by the end of a guns barrel pressed into position there in a forceful manner, and secondly because of the existence of the almost undecipherable handwritten notes and the coded message that had been produced using letters of the alphabet 'G'(get), 'J'(Jeremy), {to} ' C'(come), (to the} 'F'(farm)...
-
The notes were handed to DCI Jones at a time when he led the investigation into four murders and a suicide, which means that they surfaced at the beginning of the enquiry before DCI Jones lost his post, and obviously prior to his untimely death which occurred prior to the trial! If you read the documentation accompanying these handwritten notes you will see that it was decided that 'no further action' would be taken (nfa), which coincided with a change in leadership of the investigation which effectively became a case of five murders, with Jeremy being the chief suspect!
How come they aren't mentioned anywhere until they surfaced here? There is no evidence that the documentation you posted relates to these notes.
-
It was always DcI Jones belief, that Sheila had shot and killed the other four victims, and that before Sheila shot Neville Bamber dead downstairs in the kitchen, that she forced him at gun point to contact Jeremy to get him to come to the farmhouse because he believed that Sheila had wanted to shoot and kill him as well...
Ask yourselves, where did DCI Jones get this narrative from? How did he know that Sheila had forced Neville Bamber to make a call to try and lure Jeremy to the farmhouse so that she could kill him as well?
Firstly, because of the burn marks on the back of Neville Bambers neck which appeared to have been caused by the end of a guns barrel pressed into position there in a forceful manner, and secondly because of the existence of the almost undecipherable handwritten notes and the coded message that had been produced using letters of the alphabet 'G'(get), 'J'(Jeremy), {to} ' C'(come), (to the} 'F'(farm)...
Also in the coded message, a series of five 3's (totaling 15 additional bullets which when added to the first full round of one of the rifles ammunition magazine, produces a total of 25 bullets almost matching identically with the total number of rounds fired during the shooting tragedy! I say almost matching, because the police introduced at least one additional bullet into the batch of crime scene ammunition so that they could promote the falsehood that these shootings were a one gun crime! The additional bullet they added being the replacement PV/29 associated with the misinterpreted suicide shot downstairs in the kitchen!
At least one bullet was not recovered from the body of one of the child victims which exposes what the police and it's experts got up to in trying to make these killings into a one gun crime. Since once they added the replacement test fired whole bullet (PV/20) and removed the original piece of badly fragmented bullet which had been PV/20, and effectively disposed of it, or destroyed it, they thought they were home and dry, because between them this motley crew of corrupters, presented 25 spent cartridge cases, and 25 bullets. However, one bullet was not recovered from one of the child victims, so there were actually 25 spent cartridge cases and 26 bullets!
To be more precise, and because they removed the original piece of badly fragmented bullet which had been PV/20 which they disposed of destroyed, there was actually only 25 spent cartridge cases, and a total of 27 bullets!
-
No. But if we could see those letters it would help in making comparisons. As they are closer to the event and coincides more with Sheila's deteriorating mental heath.
And indeed the handwriting should have changed.
"Many neurological disorders like apraxia and chorea can
affect handwriting. Many psychiatric disorders like Depression, Obsessive
Compulsive Disorder, schizophrenia are also linked with handwriting change.
A unique presentation of major depressive disorder manifesting as chief
complain of handwriting change was observed in a girl who had nice
handwriting before depression. In spite of constant efforts she was not able to
revert back to her original handwriting. Her new handwritings were different
from old one in form of width and height of letters, organization and overall
presentation. She was prescribed antidepressants. Depressive symptoms were
relieved and her handwriting started gradually improving considerably
though previous level had not been achieved."
Handwriting change as a psychiatric symptom (2016) IJMDS January 2016
Dysfuent handwriting in schizophrenia is related to the schizophrenic disorder itself, which may reduce the automatization of movement (Douglas & Sara, 1975). This thesis is justi?able because subtle psychomotor disturbance may be also observed in clinically unafected relatives of patients with schizophrenia, and in unmedicated patients with schizophrenia (Flyckt et al., 1999). Decreased automatization of movement results in dysfuent movement, disturbances in movement and is thought to be associated with neurobiological dispositions in people within schizophrenia spectrum connected with dysfunctional neural connections between cortical and subcortical regions or abnormalities in hemispheric specialization (Gallucci et al., 1997; Gupta et al., 1995; Wiser et al., 1998). It suggests that subtle disturbances of handwriting in outpatients with schizophrenia may be present independent of the acute side e?ect of medication, and of chronic movement abnormalities such as tardive dyskinesia, and in populations at risk for psychosis.
Dysfluent handwriting in schizophrenic outpatients - Barbara Gawda Department of Psychology, Maria Curie–Sklodowska University, Lublin,
Oh!who I'm sure it does when a patient isn't taking their medication. However, it would also look different if a person deliberately tried to change it and make it look as though a mad person were responsible. However, there would still be subtle similarities - like the signature.
Worked out 'Vincent' is yet'?
-
How come they aren't mentioned anywhere until they surfaced here? There is no evidence that the documentation you posted relates to these notes.
I took possession of these notes as part of the consignment that was originally stored in a friend of Jeremy's, (Lee) garage who lived in the Colchester area. She and her husband (who is a BT Engineer) needed the space for an extension they were having built in their house, and it was all going to be destroyed until I took possession of it all - Lee and Ian took control of all this material around the time of the failed 2002 appeal!
It was going to be destroyed, Jeremy wasn't allowed to have it kept in prison and have it moved around from prison to prison everytime they transferred him from one prison to another, and so I said that I would take care of it on the proviso that the contents from then on belonged solely to me, on the condition that if I found anything amongst it that might be helpful to Jeremy's cause, I would post it in to him!
I still have not read everything I have got in my possession, but much of the material in my possession are the original documents not copies! Documents which I think his solicitors were going to destroy once he lost his 2002 appeal. I even have his custody records from when he was first arrested, and letters that people had written to him, the list of documents is endless too many for me to list here!
Box 57 - that's where these handwritten notes were stored as part of the Stokenchurch enquiry, which appears to be missing unless it is here with me somewhere amongst all that I have!
-
Oh!who I'm sure it does when a patient isn't taking their medication. However, it would also look different if a person deliberately tried to change it and make it look as though a mad person were responsible. However, there would still be subtle similarities - like the signature.
Worked out 'Vincent' is yet'?
Who was 'St Vincent'?
-
I took possession of these notes as part of the consignment that was originally stored in a friend of Jeremy's, (Lee) garage who lived in the Colchester area. She and her husband (who is a BT Engineer) needed the space for an extension they were having built in their house, and it was all going to be destroyed until I took possession of it all - Lee and Ian took control of all this material around the time of the failed 2002 appeal!
It was going to be destroyed, Jeremy wasn't allowed to have it kept in prison and have it moved around from prison to prison everytime they transferred him from one prison to another, and so I said that I would take care of it on the proviso that the contents from then on belonged solely to me, on the condition that if I found anything amongst it that might be helpful to Jeremy's cause, I would post it in to him!
I still have not read everything I have got in my possession, but much of the material in my possession are the original documents not copies! Documents which I think his solicitors were going to destroy once he lost his 2002 appeal. I even have his custody records from when he was first arrested, and letters that people had written to him, the list of documents is endless too many for me to list here!
Box 57 - that's where these handwritten notes were stored as part of the Stokenchurch enquiry, which appears to be missing unless it is here with me somewhere amongst all that I have!
The notes aren't original - at least not what is posted here.
If there is an 'official' list of the contents of box 57, that would help because they would be on the list.
-
Wouldn't anyone think that because of the years and crimes that all members of EP had covered and seen that they should have recognised the crime at WHF as having been a murder/suicide ? Afterall there were enough officers including the firearms team. Shouldn't the decision have been unanimous ?
Well it was--------except by one person who saw fit to turn it on its head. Where would he have been without the relatives and JM ?? Think about it ! And look what happened when he was " in charge ".
What was SJ thinking about when medical officers just cast a glance at each of the deceased to confirm that they were dead-------without examining any of them then not conserving any area of the farmhouse. What was he hoping to gain with his tin-pot ways ?
There is HOPE when you read about Stephen Simmons who was pardoned after 43 years !! ::)
Does ANYONE know what they're doing ? NO !!
-
Wouldn't anyone think that because of the years and crimes that all members of EP had covered and seen that they should have recognised the crime at WHF as having been a murder/suicide ? Afterall there were enough officers including the firearms team. Shouldn't the decision have been unanimous ?
Well it was--------except by one person who saw fit to turn it on its head. Where would he have been without the relatives and JM ?? Think about it ! And look what happened when he was " in charge ".
What was SJ thinking about when medical officers just cast a glance at each of the deceased to confirm that they were dead-------without examining any of them then not conserving any area of the farmhouse. What was he hoping to gain with his tin-pot ways ?
There is HOPE when you read about Stephen Simmons who was pardoned after 43 years !! ::)
Does ANYONE know what they're doing ? NO !!
What do you think the 'medical officers' should have done Lookout? There is regular speculation here about Sheila's body being moved, that's because at a crime scene, you aren't supposed to move anything! It would have been pretty obvious that they were dead and BECAUSE they thought it was murder/suicide (based on what BAMBER told them), they only neede to pronounce death as a formality.
-
Who was 'St Vincent'?
St Vincent was the patron saint of wine. His day s 22nd Jan and he's big in Spain (not so here).
Anyway, so who was Vincent in respect to the letter?
-
What do you think the 'medical officers' should have done Lookout? There is regular speculation here about Sheila's body being moved, that's because at a crime scene, you aren't supposed to move anything! It would have been pretty obvious that they were dead and BECAUSE they thought it was murder/suicide (based on what BAMBER told them), they only neede to pronounce death as a formality.
Well the time,or approximate time of death for starters. Dr Craig had only seen one gunshot. Fingermarks around her neck were never questioned and RM was never studied as to when it took place. Yes the scene had been contrived but not by the medic/s nor JB.
There were a dozen or so trained officers at the scene who had seen it all before and they not Jeremy had concluded that it was a murder suicide.
-
When investigations aren't carried out properly they WILL be open to question and so they should be.
-
Well the time,or approximate time of death for starters. Dr Craig had only seen one gunshot. Fingermarks around her neck were never questioned and RM was never studied as to when it took place. Yes the scene had been contrived but not by the medic/s nor JB.
There were a dozen or so trained officers at the scene who had seen it all before and they not Jeremy had concluded that it was a murder suicide.
What conclusion would they be expected to arrive at having been told that a woman, recently released from a psych hospital, and had previously attempted suicide, was running around with a loaded gun. Whatever spin you like to put on it, Jeremy guided them along that chain of thought.
-
When investigations aren't carried out properly they WILL be open to question and so they should be.
They'd have been even MORE open to question if they had messed about with the bodies prior to documenting the scene!
-
I'm not claiming to" be in someone's mind ", what I've said is the normal and natural emotion that a mother has for her child.
It's you who keeps contradicting what I've said about Sheila and her health----simply because you won't/don't accept that she'd been responsible for all the mayhem. Yes,she was unwell and in turn was making everyone else ill too because there was no real help out there. Her mother was having to return to GP visits because of it.
In Sheila's mind she WAS separated from her children not having them on a full-time basis as a mother.
I keep stressing that although Sheila had been unwell she wasn't stupid and would have recognised herself that she'd been unable to carry out certain tasks but at the same time felt powerless to ask for help because her once assertiveness had been masked by the medication which had been given to her.
Under the influence of an unnecessary cosh of knockout drugs !!
According to JB and now widely known Sheila had been in the midst of a discussion re.putting the children into foster-care,contrary what you and others think or say and to Sheila would definitely have been the end of the line and if Ferguson had been truthful he'd have admitted that this discussion would have torn her apart along with others who'd agreed with that arrangement.
Yes you are!!! Quote "In her mind, after much thought, she realized..............." and you're doing it again!! Quote "In Sheila's mind she WAS already separated from her children............." And I absolutely refute that she was "in the midst of a discussion re putting the children into foster care" if for no OTHER reason than because they spent the majority of their time in Colin's care.
-
Well the time,or approximate time of death for starters. Dr Craig had only seen one gunshot. Fingermarks around her neck were never questioned and RM was never studied as to when it took place. Yes the scene had been contrived but not by the medic/s nor JB.
There were a dozen or so trained officers at the scene who had seen it all before and they not Jeremy had concluded that it was a murder suicide.
Because Jeremy influenced their initial thoughts. Criag wasn't there to determine time of death - just pronounce death. We go over this at least once a month. How was he supposed to investigate TOD at a crime scene without disturbing anything?
-
Well the time,or approximate time of death for starters. Dr Craig had only seen one gunshot. Fingermarks around her neck were never questioned and RM was never studied as to when it took place. Yes the scene had been contrived but not by the medic/s nor JB.
There were a dozen or so trained officers at the scene who had seen it all before and they not Jeremy had concluded that it was a murder suicide.
He only noted one wound, but then he only noted A wound on the others.
-
St Vincent was the patron saint of wine. His day s 22nd Jan and he's big in Spain (not so here).
Anyway, so who was Vincent in respect to the letter?
From where comes the job description vintner, ie a wine merchant ;D I, too, would be interested to know how he fits into the letter.
-
The notes were handed to DCI Jones at a time when he led the investigation into four murders and a suicide, which means that they surfaced at the beginning of the enquiry before DCI Jones lost his post, and obviously prior to his untimely death which occurred prior to the trial! If you read the documentation accompanying these handwritten notes you will see that it was decided that 'no further action' would be taken (nfa), which coincided with a change in leadership of the investigation which effectively became a case of five murders, with Jeremy being the chief suspect!
Do you know when the notes were handed over and by whom, Mike? What is the date of the paperwork that decided no further action was required?
-
He only noted one wound, but then he only noted A wound on the others.
Exactly, and that's as far as his examination went ::)
-
What conclusion would they be expected to arrive at having been told that a woman, recently released from a psych hospital, and had previously attempted suicide, was running around with a loaded gun. Whatever spin you like to put on it, Jeremy guided them along that chain of thought.
Jeremy hadn't spoken to those who'd first entered the farmhouse ? The first arrivals would have received their information from the call that Nevill had made previously.
-
They'd have been even MORE open to question if they had messed about with the bodies prior to documenting the scene!
But the bodies were moved--------and not by Jeremy ! And you KNOW it !!
-
Jeremy hadn't spoken to those who'd first entered the farmhouse ? The first arrivals would have received their information from the call that Nevill had made previously.
And it hadn't occurred to you that every word Jeremy had said would have been conveyed verbatim to those who went in first? Do you really imagine that their colleagues would have allowed them to walk, blind, into a situation where someone was brandishing a loaded gun? There was no call from Nevill. It's only in Silent Witness that the dead speak.
-
But the bodies were moved--------and not by Jeremy ! And you KNOW it !!
Why would he? He'd already posed Sheila how he wanted her to appear. No one is stupid enough to think he moved her by osmosis whilst he was outside.
-
And it hadn't occurred to you that every word Jeremy had said would have been conveyed verbatim to those who went in first? Do you really imagine that their colleagues would have allowed them to walk, blind, into a situation where someone was brandishing a loaded gun? There was no call from Nevill. It's only in Silent Witness that the dead speak.
And do you think they'd have believed the " liar " Jeremy above his father ?
-
Nobody was in any hurry until Nevill rang them not long after he'd rang Jeremy.
-
And do you think they'd have believed the " liar " Jeremy above his father ?
As they never heard his father's voice, they only had Jeremy's word to go by.
-
Nobody was in any hurry until Nevill rang them not long after he'd rang Jeremy.
Why would police be in any hurry to get to a situation they hadn't yet been called to? They didn't know there was a situation until Jeremy called them and he most definitely took his time, didn't he?
-
Well the time,or approximate time of death for starters. Dr Craig had only seen one gunshot. Fingermarks around her neck were never questioned and RM was never studied as to when it took place. Yes the scene had been contrived but not by the medic/s nor JB.
There were a dozen or so trained officers at the scene who had seen it all before and they not Jeremy had concluded that it was a murder suicide.
Lookout, they HAD an approximate time of death provided by Jeremy Bamber. At the time, they had no reason not to believe that the death occurred between 03:10 (the time Jeremy said he received the phone call from Nevil) and around 07:30 when the bodies were discovered. So they had just over a 4 hour window.
-
But the bodies were moved--------and not by Jeremy ! And you KNOW it !!
Telling me what I think won't convince me of what YOU believe. They weren't moved after Jeremy left, there was no reason to.
-
Jeremy hadn't spoken to those who'd first entered the farmhouse ? The first arrivals would have received their information from the call that Nevill had made previously.
Really? ;D ;D Think you need to read the raid team's statements again, especially those that entered first! They were the individuals that HE was in 'conversation' with.
-
And do you think they'd have believed the " liar " Jeremy above his father ?
They didn't speak to his father.
-
Nobody was in any hurry until Nevill rang them not long after he'd rang Jeremy.
Never happened.
-
As they never heard his father's voice, they only had Jeremy's word to go by.
If both males had sounded the same on the phone how can you argue ? It's not impossible.
-
Why would police be in any hurry to get to a situation they hadn't yet been called to? They didn't know there was a situation until Jeremy called them and he most definitely took his time, didn't he?
He didn't take nearly 3 hours though did he ?
-
Why would he? He'd already posed Sheila how he wanted her to appear. No one is stupid enough to think he moved her by osmosis whilst he was outside.
You talk of osmosis-------how did the rifle get from the window onto Sheila's body while JB was outside ?
-
Really? ;D ;D Think you need to read the raid team's statements again, especially those that entered first! They were the individuals that HE was in 'conversation' with.
I'd rather read the SC/688/85 crime files.
-
He didn't take nearly 3 hours though did he ?
And the police arrived before he did.
-
You talk of osmosis-------how did the rifle get from the window onto Sheila's body while JB was outside ?
That rifle has been moved more times than I've had hot dinners. Like much of the information here, it's been well manipulated.
-
Lookout, they HAD an approximate time of death provided by Jeremy Bamber. At the time, they had no reason not to believe that the death occurred between 03:10 (the time Jeremy said he received the phone call from Nevil) and around 07:30 when the bodies were discovered. So they had just over a 4 hour window.
But nobody believed Jeremy did they ? Then because no tests were done and no time of death entered you think that lets them off ?
-
That rifle has been moved more times than I've had hot dinners. Like much of the information here, it's been well manipulated.
Really ??
-
Why would police be in any hurry to get to a situation they hadn't yet been called to? They didn't know there was a situation until Jeremy called them and he most definitely took his time, didn't he?
Jeremy's message wasn't urgent enough for them to have got there quicker than they had---------but Nevill's call spurred them on because he was in the thick of it and that call was soon after the one to JB.
-
That rifle has been moved more times than I've had hot dinners. Like much of the information here, it's been well manipulated.
Manipulated from your quarters,yes.
-
If both males had sounded the same on the phone how can you argue ? It's not impossible.
IF Nevill called and IF both males -one 24 the other 62 had sounded the same- wouldn't someone have asked why they were phoning again? It might not be impossible, but it's not feasible because there was no reason for another call to have been suppressed.
-
IF Nevill called and IF both males -one 24 the other 62 had sounded the same- wouldn't someone have asked why they were phoning again? It might not be impossible, but it's not feasible because there was no reason for another call to have been suppressed.
If EP had taken the two calls for one then it would have indicated that the situation was pretty urgent ?
-
Jeremy's message wasn't urgent enough for them to have got there quicker than they had---------but Nevill's call spurred them on because he was in the thick of it and that call was soon after the one to JB.
But he told them his father sounded "panicked". I believe it was after he complained that they'd put him on hold whilst passing the information on. You're altering what is said to have occurred and what is claimed to have been said to suit yourself, here, aren't you? Tell me, as you seem to know what people are thinking, did Nevill sit and flick through the telephone directory for a local police station or might it have occurred to him, if not his witless son, that the situation, ie his daughter allegedly wandering around brandishing a loaded gun, called for an emergency number. to be used
-
If EP had taken the two calls for one then it would have indicated that the situation was pretty urgent ?
But they didn't and they got there before Jeremy, didn't they?
-
But nobody believed Jeremy did they ? Then because no tests were done and no time of death entered you think that lets them off ?
Initially, they only had Jeremy's word providing a window for TOD. The medical examiner at the scene was only required to pronounce life extinct.
-
Manipulated from your quarters,yes.
But I wasn't there any more than you were.
-
Initially, they only had Jeremy's word providing a window for TOD. The medical examiner at the scene was only required to pronounce life extinct.
So a team of professionals go by what JB had said ?? Dear me it gets worse.
-
So a team of professionals go by what JB had said ?? Dear me it gets worse.
So what in your 'vastly superior' opinion, were police supposed to do? Let's imagine it's you standing outside telling them what you know about the violent family member inside, and they choose not to take your word for it but waste time looking for someone else to give them information? Bet you'd stand meekly by and say nothing. NOT! They had no reason to doubt the person who'd called for help away from the scene of crime.
-
So what in your 'vastly superior' opinion, were police supposed to do? Let's imagine it's you standing outside telling them what you know about the violent family member inside, and they choose not to take your word for it but waste time looking for someone else to give them information? Bet you'd stand meekly by and say nothing. NOT! They had no reason to doubt the person who'd called for help away from the scene of crime.
Rather, what would they have done if JB hadn't been there ? But why did they take notice of him when they nailed him anyway ?? Nobody believed his sister would have done it so why did he open his mouth about her to begin with. He didn't have to,then they might just have done their job properly.
A killer would have kept his mouth shut about his sister,knowing that it would have immediately implicated him as making excuses for mental illness is a bit tame. I'm surprised he hadn't worked that one out.
He" knew" Sheila was dead so why did he bother saying anything ? I can't understand that. The least said the better when you're guilty !! Unlike the chap in last night's programme who after 14 years "remembered" something he'd done against his wife involving a glass door. Whereas JB told EP et al EVERYTHING he knew there and then !!
-
Rather, what would they have done if JB hadn't been there ? But why did they take notice of him when they nailed him anyway ?? Nobody believed his sister would have done it so why did he open his mouth about her to begin with. He didn't have to,then they might just have done their job properly.
A killer would have kept his mouth shut about his sister,knowing that it would have immediately implicated him as making excuses for mental illness is a bit tame. I'm surprised he hadn't worked that one out.
He" knew" Sheila was dead so why did he bother saying anything ? I can't understand that. The least said the better when you're guilty !! Unlike the chap in last night's programme who after 14 years "remembered" something he'd done against his wife involving a glass door. Whereas JB told EP et al EVERYTHING he knew there and then !!
Lookout, it's absolutely NO GOOD doing hypothetics. It's useless doing "what if's". All we have is what there is and it can't be changed. It's no good insinuating into it what would have gone in in your mind. As it happened, he wouldn't have known that no one would believe Sheila incapable. I imagine that to have carried it out, he'd have believed he'd nailed it.
You say you can't understand. I believe you. I think, because you seem unable to process any thoughts of his guilt, you can only see what thoughts you'd have had and your own reasoning....................although you make a good attempt at telling us what you think other killers would have done, I still think you probably mean what you'd have done. You might be many things, but I don't think you're a killer.
-
You talk of osmosis-------how did the rifle get from the window onto Sheila's body while JB was outside ?
The rifle went from Sheila's body to the window via the police moving it.
-
The rifle went from Sheila's body to the window via the police moving it.
SOME of us know that.
-
The rifle went from Sheila's body to the window via the police moving it.
We need a timeline really of what WPC Jeapes saw and when.
-
St Vincent was the patron saint of wine. His day s 22nd Jan and he's big in Spain (not so here).
Anyway, so who was Vincent in respect to the letter?
The letter was written by someone mentally ill and non compos mentis. Vincent could well have been a voice in her head or some other beliefs that are not based in reality. A character in a persecutory delusion. Or he could well have been real, who knows. Sheila's mental state explains anything that makes no sense in that letter. The author was not sound of mind.
From the angle you seem to be constructing (Forgery's made by Jeremy in prison). Who is Vincent and why did Jeremy put this Vincent character into the letters and for what reason ??? That's a question for you to answer. Your argument involves the author being calculating, fully aware and scheming. So you tell us what all those incoherent parts and oddites in those letter are supposed to mean.
-
We need a timeline really of what WPC Jeapes saw and when.
What Jeaps saw was in the box room not the main bedroom.
-
A medium on one of the visits for a reading may have had a " Vincent " as their guide.
Colin and Sheila used to see a clairvoyant as he was into that-------the opposite of religion.
Clairvoyants write letters like those as they write " thoughts " that spring into their minds. Sometimes they make sense,sometimes they don't.
What was the writing implement,a biro or a fountain pen ? Or a quill even.
-
A medium on one of the visits for a reading may have had a " Vincent " as their guide.
Colin and Sheila used to see a clairvoyant as he was into that-------the opposite of religion.
Clairvoyants write letters like those as they write " thoughts " that spring into their minds. Sometimes they make sense,sometimes they don't.
What was the writing implement,a biro or a fountain pen ? Or a quill even.
A Medium? hahaha
That reminds me. I can just get my Ouija board out and ask Sheila directly! ;D
-
As they never heard his father's voice, they only had Jeremy's word to go by.
The police did hear Neville Bambers voice (3.26am, log) and Sheila heard him talking to the police, hence why in her almost undecipherable handwritten notes she recorded the fact that the police would be arriving at the farmhouse soon...
-
A Medium? hahaha
That reminds me. I can just get my Ouija board out and ask Sheila directly! ;D
Colin was a frequent visitor by all accounts.
A guy I know draws faces ( a fantastic artist ) and takes his drawings to meetings where he's guaranteed that at least one drawing is a recognised family member from out of the audience. He then rattles off the life etc of that person that he'd drawn just from memory. How often does that happen ?
Some are clever and some not so good. I'd rather have the spoof who was on " Phoenix Nights ". :)) :))
-
The rifle went from Sheila's body to the window via the police moving it.
No, no, no...
The anshuzt rifle went from the first floor box room window where Jeapes' and Brown saw it prior to the raid team making its entry into the farmhouse at 7.30am, onto Sheila's body once her body had been moved off the bed onto the bedroom floor, then moved to the main bedroom window after it had discharged the second fatal shot which effectively killed her off, then photograph no.23 was taken showing the rifle at the main bedroom window, prior to it being brought back to Sheila's body in time for it to be photographed in her possession...
The only people who could have and did move the rifle from one place to another and then onto and eventually off her body were the police. The only alternative explanation was that Sheila Moved the rifle from place to place by herself - either way Jeremy Bamber could not have shot his sister dead, and staged her death scene on the parents bedroom floor!
-
We need a timeline really of what WPC Jeapes saw and when.
Jeapes' / Brown saw the anshuzt rifle at the first floor box room window as the six man raid team was making its approach to enter the farmhouse by the court yard door! The police started to hammer down the court yard door at 7.30am, so Jeapes' and Brown saw the rifle at the box room window, before this or that!
How then, did this very same rifle end up in the possession of Sheila Caffell's body on the parents bedroom floor?
Either Sheila was still alive after police entered the farmhouse at 7.30am, or the police brought the rifle from the box room window and they staged her death scene in possession of the rifle..
-
But nobody believed Jeremy did they ? Then because no tests were done and no time of death entered you think that lets them off ?
Initially they did believe him. Lets them off what?
-
Solving who killed Sheila Caffell, and who staged her suicide on the parents bedroom floor is the simplest thing anybody could be asked to contemplate - (a) rifle at first floor box room window before the police entered the building! (b) police found Sheila's body laid on the parents bedroom floor after they entered the premises in possession of'that' rifle!!!
-
Solving who killed Sheila Caffell, and who staged her suicide on the parents bedroom floor is the simplest thing anybody could be asked to contemplate - (a) rifle at first floor box room window before the police entered the building! (b) police found Sheila's body laid on the parents bedroom floor after they entered the premises in possession of'that' rifle!!!
Two locations (A) and (B), rifle was at (B) just prior to the police entering the premises, after they got into the premises, the rifle was at (B)...
Who moved the rifle from (A) to (B)?
-
The letter was written by someone mentally ill and non compos mentis. Vincent could well have been a voice in her head or some other beliefs that are not based in reality. A character in a persecutory delusion. Or he could well have been real, who knows. Sheila's mental state explains anything that makes no sense in that letter. The author was not sound of mind.
From the angle you seem to be constructing (Forgery's made by Jeremy in prison). Who is Vincent and why did Jeremy put this Vincent character into the letters and for what reason ??? That's a question for you to answer. Your argument involves the author being calculating, fully aware and scheming. So you tell us what all those incoherent parts and oddites in those letter are supposed to mean.
You mean you THINK/BELIEVE they were written by someone mentally ill.
As for Vincent, maybe it was someone he knew and he just threw him in there for colour - like Matthew MacDonald.
-
Initially they did believe him. Lets them off what?
From not having done their job properly.
-
A medium on one of the visits for a reading may have had a " Vincent " as their guide.
Colin and Sheila used to see a clairvoyant as he was into that-------the opposite of religion.
Clairvoyants write letters like those as they write " thoughts " that spring into their minds. Sometimes they make sense,sometimes they don't.
What was the writing implement,a biro or a fountain pen ? Or a quill even.
I think it was Tyler who said that's where these letters originated. Who know - these letters will never spring Jeremy!
-
From not having done their job properly.
Never mind, they got there in the end! ;)
-
From not having done their job properly.
Which was, in the main, because of what Jeremy told them, there being no one, at the time, to contradict him.
-
As for Vincent,it could have been the film or the song---------both about Van Gogh around that time.
-
I think it was Tyler who said that's where these letters originated. Who know - these letters will never spring Jeremy!
Copies of these letters / notes originated from the documents in my possession!
-
As for Vincent,it could have been the film or the song---------both about Van Gogh around that time.
I think Sheila might have been referring to Saint Vincent..
(1) - https://www.catholic.org/
(2) - https://youtu.be/r6MC1nye1yk?list=PL58g24NgWPIzvBk2IQVES_xC4WTm6-CDI
-
I think Sheila might have been referring to Saint Vincent..
Why would she?
-
Why would she?
Patron Saint of the poor, charities and lost causes...
-
Patron Saint of the poor, charities and lost causes...
And of wine. Hence we get vintner.
-
And of wine. Hence we get vintner.
I was confirmed with the Christian name of Vincent, as part of my Catholic upbringing, hence why I'm known as 'Michael Vincent Teskowski...
-
I was confirmed with the Christian name of Vincent, as part of my Catholic upbringing, hence why I'm known as 'Michael Vincent Teskowski...
I think Sheila makes mention of 'Vincent' in her handwritten notes because she realises that her mother (June Bamber) was beyond help, she was a lost cause, already dying or dead by the time Sheila was writing out her inner confused thoughts!
-
I think Sheila makes mention of 'Vincent' in her handwritten notes because she realises that her mother (June Bamber) was beyond help, she was a lost cause, already dying or dead by the time Sheila was writing out her inner confused thoughts!
I also think the use of 'SYC' was inserted as reference to 'GOD'...
-
I was confirmed with the Christian name of Vincent, as part of my Catholic upbringing, hence why I'm known as 'Michael Vincent Teskowski...
So, plenty of hypotheses. All options open, eh Mike?
-
I think Sheila makes mention of 'Vincent' in her handwritten notes because she realises that her mother (June Bamber) was beyond help, she was a lost cause, already dying or dead by the time Sheila was writing out her inner confused thoughts!
Members of C of E aren't into saints.
-
I also think the use of 'SYC' was inserted as reference to 'GOD'...
Sorry, you're wrong. Had a search through some theology books and there's no reference of SYC to God. I found Allah, Yaweh, Jehovah, Creator, The Great I Am. All God personal. Then of course, there's the generic ones, ie deity and daemon. No SYC.
-
Patron Saint of the poor, charities and lost causes...
I thought that was St. Jude.
-
Patron Saint of the poor, charities and lost causes...
He was the patron saint of wine - lost causes was Jude
-
Short for p syc hiatrist-----" syc ".
-
I thought that was St. Jude.
Vincent de Paul was a French priest in the late 1500's who dedicated himself to the care of the poor.
-
Short for p syc hiatrist-----" syc ".
Or p syc hopath? ;)
-
Short for p syc hiatrist-----" syc ".
It most definitely IS NOT. Psych is always written using the Greek glyph.
-
Or p syc hopath? ;)
More likely to be psychiatrist being that her mother had also received treatment. You've got psychopath on the brain. ::)
-
It most definitely IS NOT. Psych is always written using the Greek glyph.
Not by everyone it would seem. Unless you,of course,know different.
-
More likely to be psychiatrist being that her mother had also received treatment. You've got psychopath on the brain. ::)
How on earth do you make that leap? Why would I refer to the doctor I shared with my mother as "octo"?
-
More likely to be psychiatrist being that her mother had also received treatment. You've got psychopath on the brain. ::)
Well, being as Sheila didn't write it, she wasn't referring to anything and we all have a psychopath on the brain - each time we post here.
-
How on earth do you make that leap? Why would I refer to the doctor I shared with my mother as "octo"?
Well I didn't think you could get any sillier but---------------back to splitting hairs aren't you ?
-
Not by everyone it would seem. Unless you,of course,know different.
Let's put it this way, I stand a better chance of proving to be UNtrue, that you have of proving it true. It isn't another name for God and it's not a diminutive of psychiatrist, psychologist, psychotic. Course, if an illiterate 'sycopath' wrote it......................
-
What's wrong with " doc " for short,that EVERYONE knows. ::) Bit different when it comes to the spelling of PSYCHIATRIST isn't it ?
-
Well I didn't think you could get any sillier but---------------back to splitting hairs aren't you ?
And I didn't think I'D see the day arrive when you became daft enough or desperate enough to make such a ludicrous connection. But there ya go, eh?
-
What's wrong with " doc " for short,that EVERYONE knows. ::) Bit different when it comes to the spelling of PSYCHIATRIST isn't it ?
You don't have to take my word for it, you know? You can write to The Royal College. I'm sure they'll explain it. You can argue with them that you think SYC is a better abbreviation.
-
And I didn't think I'D see the day arrive when you became daft enough or desperate enough to make such a ludicrous connection. But there ya go, eh?
Now't daft about me I can assure you. Nor am I desperate.What have I got to be desperate about ??
-
Now't daft about me I can assure you. Nor am I desperate.What have I got to be desperate about ??
Well, you come out with some OUTLANDISH suggestions tonight. It's quite obvious that they've been wild stabs in the dark. If you're not daft, I guess you must be desperate to prove your point.
-
You don't have to take my word for it, you know? You can write to The Royal College. I'm sure they'll explain it. You can argue with them that you think SYC is a better abbreviation.
What about abbreviations in the minds of disturbed persons ? Were you inside Sheila's mind ?
-
What about abbreviations in the minds of disturbed persons ? Were you inside Sheila's mind ?
No, neither were you but it's not stopping you deciding what the note means ;D ;D
-
No, neither were you but it's not stopping you deciding what the note means ;D ;D
Well I know what I'd rather write instead of the full word--------psychiatrist or syc ?
-
Well I know what I'd rather write instead of the full word--------psychiatrist or syc ?
So you're saying, are you, that from the benefit of your close involvement with psychiatry, both staff and patients, you've discovered the most commonly used abbreviation for "psychiatrist" is syc?
-
So you're saying, are you, that from the benefit of your close involvement with psychiatry, both staff and patients, you've discovered the most commonly used abbreviation for "psychiatrist" is syc?
The saying of the word syc was commonly heard,but writing it was always done in a professional capacity as psychatrist. Sheila hadn't happened to do that had she ? So in order for her to discontinue writing it in full she shortened it to syc which makes sense as the " p " is silent anyway isn't it ?