Jeremy Bamber Forum

JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: David1819 on July 08, 2018, 03:37:PM

Title: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 08, 2018, 03:37:PM
When you consider the fact that Nevills burns are circular with an area in the centre less burned. Just like the Boyce experiments. There is little room for doubt for what caused them.

PS: Images 4 and 5 I have increased the contrast to make it easier to see.

(https://s8.postimg.cc/5b4a8cfb9/burntrial.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/iphd4vm4l/nb_burn.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/6c4ixe3zp/nb_burn2.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/71nb9qp3p/nb_burn3.png.jpg)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/q80idfdgl/muzzle.jpg)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 03:41:PM
When I mentioned that a few years back I received a chorus of " it doesn't get hot enough to burn " so I turned to that of cigar burns.  :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 08, 2018, 03:55:PM
When I mentioned that a few years back I received a chorus of " it doesn't get hot enough to burn " so I turned to that of cigar burns.  :-\

Maybe it doesn't. It's only one person's opinion. How did that person know how hot the Aga would have been at the moment those marks were allegedly made? It was high summer. It surely wouldn't have been necessary to have had such extreme heat as during winter months, and should there have been another cooker, the Aga would only have been needed for hot water.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 04:00:PM
Maybe it doesn't. It's only one person's opinion. How did that person know how hot the Aga would have been at the moment those marks were allegedly made? It was high summer. It surely wouldn't have been necessary to have had such extreme heat as during winter months, and should there have been another cooker, the Aga would only have been needed for hot water.






Whatever  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 08, 2018, 04:13:PM





Whatever  ::)

Indeed so. There are several possibilities.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 04:31:PM
Indeed so. There are several possibilities.






If YOU say so.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 08, 2018, 04:38:PM





If YOU say so.

But I'm not insisting there's any one in particular -I once suggested the possibility of 'minor procedures' having been carried out- I have an open mind. It makes such a difference when none of us -including some 'experts' it seems- knows exact facts.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 08, 2018, 04:44:PM
When you consider the fact that Nevills burns are circular with an area in the centre less burned. Just like the Boyce experiments. There is little room for doubt for what caused them.

PS: Images 4 and 5 I have increased the contrast to make it easier to see.

(https://s8.postimg.cc/5b4a8cfb9/burntrial.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/iphd4vm4l/nb_burn.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/6c4ixe3zp/nb_burn2.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/71nb9qp3p/nb_burn3.png.jpg)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/q80idfdgl/muzzle.jpg)
This doesn't prove very much since if Jeremy did return the bloodied silencer to the gun cupboard he would have prodded Nevill to check if he were dead with the gun barrel only.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 04:52:PM
Steve I wouldn't have thought that anyone who'd received a hail of bullets and a bashing would need prodding in which to make sure that they were dead.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 08, 2018, 05:04:PM
Steve I wouldn't have thought that anyone who'd received a hail of bullets and a bashing would need prodding in which to make sure that they were dead.
No that's true, but neither would a Sheila in psychosis be bothered about the consequences of her actions. The marks are still unexplained anyway after 33 years.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 05:07:PM
No that's true, but neither would a Sheila in psychosis be bothered about the consequences of her actions. The marks are still unexplained anyway after 33 years.





Sheila wouldn't have been aware of her actions during this time. She had a job with good and evil so her thoughts on reality would also have been confusing.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 08, 2018, 05:42:PM




Sheila wouldn't have been aware of her actions during this time. She had a job with good and evil so her thoughts on reality would also have been confusing.
Yes but there's also the suicide note to explain where "my babies and me go to our rest" and talk of Police arriving, suggesting she is indeed compos mentis. If she's not aware of her actions yet reloads the rifle as Mike is now suggesting there's yet more to explain away.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 08, 2018, 06:07:PM
Yes but there's also the suicide note to explain where "my babies and me go to our rest" and talk of Police arriving, suggesting she is indeed compos mentis. If she's not aware of her actions yet reloads the rifle as Mike is now suggesting there's yet more to explain away.


Mmm. Rather like wading through treacle, isn't it?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 08, 2018, 06:15:PM
Yes but there's also the suicide note to explain where "my babies and me go to our rest" and talk of Police arriving, suggesting she is indeed compos mentis. If she's not aware of her actions yet reloads the rifle as Mike is now suggesting there's yet more to explain away.






Exactly. Sheila in her quiet thoughts both on her way to the farmhouse then on the evening of the tragedy must have planned it in her mind and the discussion at the supper table sealed the deal for her in mulling over how she'd been treated in many ways. After Jeremy had left and with supper dishes cleared away Sheila had apparently gone to bed but could have been busy writing her notes until she'd been sure that the boys were asleep and both parents settled.
During this time her inner thoughts would have turned to rage because to my mind you can't kill anyone if you're cool calm and collected so Sheila carried on her mission in a blind panic thinking that this was the best " way out " for all of them. It only takes a moment of madness for anyone with such thoughts to carry out their intentions .  Had Sheila known that what she'd done was real ? I don't know ! She'd obviously given it thought especially at WHF where weapons were to hand.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 08, 2018, 06:25:PM
When you consider the fact that Nevills burns are circular with an area in the centre less burned. Just like the Boyce experiments. There is little room for doubt for what caused them.

PS: Images 4 and 5 I have increased the contrast to make it easier to see.

(https://s8.postimg.cc/5b4a8cfb9/burntrial.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/iphd4vm4l/nb_burn.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/6c4ixe3zp/nb_burn2.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/71nb9qp3p/nb_burn3.png.jpg)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/q80idfdgl/muzzle.jpg)

In your OPINION!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 08, 2018, 07:50:PM
It is inconcievable that Sheila would have a super human,  murderous, uncontrollable rage. Then suddenly stop to calmly heat a rifle nozzle and burn Nevill's back.

Why would Sheila then put the silencer on to shoot herself ?

Sheila was not strong enough to lift a 16 stone dead weight onto the coal scuttle.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 08, 2018, 09:47:PM
It is inconcievable that Sheila would have a super human,  murderous, uncontrollable rage. Then suddenly stop to calmly heat a rifle nozzle and burn Nevill's back.

I find it more conceivable that who ever done this was crazy rather than rational.

But anyway if you want to argue that Jeremy inflicted the wounds after he put away the silencer that's all well and good on its own. However you cannot also argue that the absence of the blood in the rifle barrel supports the use of a silencer because in your version of events any blood would become charred in the barrel.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 08, 2018, 09:49:PM
I find it more conceivable that who ever done this was crazy rather than rational.

But anyway if you want to argue that Jeremy inflicted the wounds after he put away the silencer that's all well and good on its own. However you cannot also argue that the absence of the blood in the rifle barrel supports the use of a silencer because in your version of events any blood would become charred in the barrel.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 09:59:AM
I find it more conceivable that who ever done this was crazy rather than rational.

But anyway if you want to argue that Jeremy inflicted the wounds after he put away the silencer that's all well and good on its own. However you cannot also argue that the absence of the blood in the rifle barrel supports the use of a silencer because in your version of events any blood would become charred in the barrel.

Again, just your opinion. Mine is that the scene is organised and the victims were executed - with a few added extras to confirm Jeremy's claims and support his alibi.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 10:06:AM
Exactly. Sheila in her quiet thoughts both on her way to the farmhouse then on the evening of the tragedy must have planned it in her mind and the discussion at the supper table sealed the deal for her in mulling over how she'd been treated in many ways. After Jeremy had left and with supper dishes cleared away Sheila had apparently gone to bed but could have been busy writing her notes until she'd been sure that the boys were asleep and both parents settled.
During this time her inner thoughts would have turned to rage because to my mind you can't kill anyone if you're cool calm and collected so Sheila carried on her mission in a blind panic thinking that this was the best " way out " for all of them. It only takes a moment of madness for anyone with such thoughts to carry out their intentions .  Had Sheila known that what she'd done was real ? I don't know ! She'd obviously given it thought especially at WHF where weapons were to hand.

So she didn't know what she was doing, but planned prior to her trip to WHF? She knew the gun would be left out did she? All of the above is yet again  contradictory.  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 10:11:AM
Taking everything into account what would have been the time spent inside WHF that night in carrying out the murders taking into consideration the lengths of time during struggles individually between June and Nevill towards the shooter, as per the " grab marks " on both adults ? The placing of towels/cushions covering blood, " arrangements " of bodies,etc.
Stopping to reload ?
What time would this have begun ? 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 10:14:AM
So she didn't know what she was doing, but planned prior to her trip to WHF? She knew the gun would be left out did she? All of the above is yet again  contradictory.  ::)





It was a farm, of course she knew there were guns  ::) You just love that word don't you ? It's certainly not ME who's contradictory !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 10:28:AM




It was a farm, of course she knew there were guns  ::) You just love that word don't you ? It's certainly not ME who's contradictory !!

But it taking a huge leap for her to progress from the possibility of firing a gun, already loaded, into the air, some 10 years earlier, on a Scottish holiday, and firing/reloading with enough accuracy to kill people. Aha! MAYBE, as you seem to think she'd planned it, she had taken secret lessons? But that doesn't quite equate with her being psychotic, does it?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 11:00:AM
But it taking a huge leap for her to progress from the possibility of firing a gun, already loaded, into the air, some 10 years earlier, on a Scottish holiday, and firing/reloading with enough accuracy to kill people. Aha! MAYBE, as you seem to think she'd planned it, she had taken secret lessons? But that doesn't quite equate with her being psychotic, does it?






One never forgets how to ride a bicycle after 10 years so why should it be any different being around guns and the firing of them ? Sheila was brought up on the farm and was well aware of how things worked,including a gun. The girl wasn't stupid by any means. More than likely and because she'd been close to her father she may have accompanied him while shooting at the farm we don't know.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 11:06:AM
Being " psychotic " doesn't deem a person useless by any means. They're more than capable of leading a normal life. To be psychotic is to have a sudden outburst which most people can keep under control but there are the odd few who can't and this can mean being violent too.

 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 11:39:AM
One never forgets how to ride a bicycle after 10 years so why should it be any different being around guns and the firing of them ? Sheila was brought up on the farm and was well aware of how things worked,including a gun. The girl wasn't stupid by any means. More than likely and because she'd been close to her father she may have accompanied him while shooting at the farm we don't know.

Sheila fired a shotgun into the air - ONCE. She's never used the semi-auto rifle. Why and when would she accompany Nevil? The semi-auto was a fairly recent purchase anyway.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 11:40:AM
Being " psychotic " doesn't deem a person useless by any means. They're more than capable of leading a normal life. To be psychotic is to have a sudden outburst which most people can keep under control but there are the odd few who can't and this can mean being violent too.

Generally becuse they don't take their medication!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 11:49:AM
Sheila fired a shotgun into the air - ONCE. She's never used the semi-auto rifle. Why and when would she accompany Nevil? The semi-auto was a fairly recent purchase anyway.






An easy enough gun to use and handle I suspect. As I've said Sheila wasn't stupid and wouldn't have needed lessons on how to use it semi or not. What's the " recent purchase " got to do with anything ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 11:52:AM
Generally becuse they don't take their medication!






Or too little ? Plus none of those which counteract the side-effects ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 12:02:PM

An easy enough gun to use and handle I suspect. As I've said Sheila wasn't stupid and wouldn't have needed lessons on how to use it semi or not. What's the " recent purchase " got to do with anything ?

Is it Lookout? When was the last time you used one? Bamber left the rifle and the magazine in different places. She would have had to know that the rilfe needed a magazine, then how to fix it to the rifle and that you needed to chamber a shot before use. The recent purchase is pretty obvious, if it was new, Sheila couldn't have followed Nevil around the farm while he used it (although quite why she would do so in the first place is beyond me!).
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 12:06:PM
Or too little ? Plus none of those which counteract the side-effects ?

She didn't have too little in her system, she STILL had a moderate dose, even though due for her next injection. What side effects do you imagine the other drugs countered? Given that the haloperidol had been reduced, the side effects that she complaied of (not the ones people peddle here) we likely also reduced and so she saw no need to take the other drugs.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 12:09:PM
Is it Lookout? When was the last time you used one? Bamber left the rifle and the magazine in different places. She would have had to know that the rilfe needed a magazine, then how to fix it to the rifle and that you needed to chamber a shot before use. The recent purchase is pretty obvious, if it was new, Sheila couldn't have followed Nevil around the farm while he used it (although quite why she would do so in the first place is beyond me!).





I was shown some years ago how to load a Winchester rifle and when you've watched someone handling these rifles you never forget------the same as Sheila wouldn't forget. She was still able to paint her nails and also write.Dumb,she wasn't.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 12:13:PM
She didn't have too little in her system, she STILL had a moderate dose, even though due for her next injection. What side effects do you imagine the other drugs countered? Given that the haloperidol had been reduced, the side effects that she complaied of (not the ones people peddle here) we likely also reduced and so she saw no need to take the other drugs.






It would have depended on Sheila's tolerance of the drug to start with. Why do you think she'd asked for it to be reduced ?? What side effects was she having that made her want to reduce it ? Why wasn't she taking her other meds with the Haldol ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 12:45:PM





One never forgets how to ride a bicycle after 10 years so why should it be any different being around guns and the firing of them ? Sheila was brought up on the farm and was well aware of how things worked,including a gun. The girl wasn't stupid by any means. More than likely and because she'd been close to her father she may have accompanied him while shooting at the farm we don't know.

Living on a farm is not tantamount to being knowledgeable about guns. You keep asserting Sheila WAS x, y, and z but you have absolutely NO proof that any of what you say is correct, so it often ends up reading as if you're making it up to fit with what you think.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 12:46:PM
I was shown some years ago how to load a Winchester rifle and when you've watched someone handling these rifles you never forget------the same as Sheila wouldn't forget. She was still able to paint her nails and also write.Dumb,she wasn't.

Sheila was never shown how to load the semi-auto! Did Sheila paint her own nails? You don't know, do you? I'm not the one who is using the word 'stupid' that's an assumption you're making - if she can't load the rifle, she must be somehow 'stupid'.

So how do you load a Winchester rifle? And what model was  the rifle?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 12:48:PM
It would have depended on Sheila's tolerance of the drug to start with. Why do you think she'd asked for it to be reduced ?? What side effects was she having that made her want to reduce it ? Why wasn't she taking her other meds with the Haldol ?

Well, she was clearly intollerant to the initial dosage which is why she was over sedated and complained of feeling flat. The rest of your post are questions I asked you - in order to make the claims you repeatedly make, you should at least know what side effects she was suffering?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 12:53:PM





An easy enough gun to use and handle I suspect. As I've said Sheila wasn't stupid and wouldn't have needed lessons on how to use it semi or not. What's the " recent purchase " got to do with anything ?

I'M not stupid but it would take more than one session with a tutor before I'm computer literate. As I said, there's a HUGE leap between firing a ready loaded gun randomly into the air ONCE, and aiming and firing it accurately enough to kill people -including children- plus having to reload in between the killings. I fail to see how you've managed to jump to the conclusion that she wouldn't have needed lessons in firing a semi auto.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 01:32:PM





One never forgets how to ride a bicycle after 10 years so why should it be any different being around guns and the firing of them ? Sheila was brought up on the farm and was well aware of how things worked,including a gun. The girl wasn't stupid by any means. More than likely and because she'd been close to her father she may have accompanied him while shooting at the farm we don't know.


Again, there's a vast chasm between a kiddywinky trailing around with daddy -I trailed around behind mine because I enjoyed his company, but because, like Sheila wasn't interested in guns, I was never interested in DIY and car maintenance, I can't change a wheel and I can't build extensions- a teenager firing a random shot in the air with a ready loaded gun, and a woman, nearly 10 years later suddenly being competent enough to use a gun to kill, not as a one off, but 5 times.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 06:19:PM
Living on a farm is not tantamount to being knowledgeable about guns. You keep asserting Sheila WAS x, y, and z but you have absolutely NO proof that any of what you say is correct, so it often ends up reading as if you're making it up to fit with what you think.





Nor do you have proof that she had no knowledge which is the same as " making it up" isn't it ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 06:25:PM
Sheila was never shown how to load the semi-auto! Did Sheila paint her own nails? You don't know, do you? I'm not the one who is using the word 'stupid' that's an assumption you're making - if she can't load the rifle, she must be somehow 'stupid'.

So how do you load a Winchester rifle? And what model was  the rifle?





As I said,I was shown how to load the rifle and have no idea what the model was as there were two the other one being a bolt action which I didn't bother with. Both were easy to handle and use for hitting tin cans.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 09, 2018, 06:29:PM
Sheila was never shown how to load the semi-auto! Did Sheila paint her own nails? You don't know, do you? I'm not the one who is using the word 'stupid' that's an assumption you're making - if she can't load the rifle, she must be somehow 'stupid'.

So how do you load a Winchester rifle? And what model was  the rifle?

Loading a gun of that type is fairly intuitive. Like most products they are designed to be easy. I was never shown how to use a microwave yet I can use one.

I was never shown how to use a door handle so I guess I am stuck in this room  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 06:33:PM




Nor do you have proof that she had no knowledge which is the same as " making it up" isn't it ?


Surely the fact that, save one sketchy report of her once firing a gun in the air in Scotland, is proof enough that she had no knowledge. Unless you're going to suggest that there's a conspiracy of silence re her 'championship' proficiency in order to frame Jeremy?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 06:42:PM

Surely the fact that, save one sketchy report of her once firing a gun in the air in Scotland, is proof enough that she had no knowledge. Unless you're going to suggest that there's a conspiracy of silence re her 'championship' proficiency in order to frame Jeremy?






We all know that Sheila hadn't " framed Jeremy " and we also know that until the guarded information is out in the open that what we say on this forum is all speculation and our own personal opinions.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 09, 2018, 07:07:PM
When I was six years old I got one of these for Christmas (exact model) plus with some tapes to play.


(https://www.radiomuseum.org/images/radio/sony_tokyo/walkman_wm_ex102_1689431.jpg)

No one showed me how to use it yet i did. I assume most kids would work it out also. This has 8 buttons  While the anslutz rifle has just three (Trigger, Chamber and Safety switch)

Sony Walkman =  Load batteries > load cassette tape > Insert headphones > work out 8 buttons

Anslutz rifle =  Load bullets  > Insert magazine > work out 3 buttons

Walkman is not only harder to get going its a far more sophisticated piece of kit in comparison.

To say a 29 year old woman could not have done such a thing without being shown you are essentially saying Sheila was so mentally challenged she would need help going to the toilet.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 07:08:PM
Loading a gun of that type is fairly intuitive. Like most products they are designed to be easy. I was never shown how to use a microwave yet I can use one.

I was never shown how to use a door handle so I guess I am stuck in this room  ::)

I don't agree unless you are someone familiar with guns and she wasn't. I have 5 sewing machines and every one is threaded in a different way. They have to be threaded correctly or they simply don't sew. You wouldn't manage it if you weren't familiar.

Door knobs and microwaves are something you have grown up with. Sheila didn't grow up with or have any experience of semi-automatics and in the throws of psychosis the ability to engage with a new skill would be impaired.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:11:PM





We all know that Sheila hadn't " framed Jeremy " and we also know that until the guarded information is out in the open that what we say on this forum is all speculation and our own personal opinions.

I'm inclined to go with the belief that the information that tells us what DID happen is the same information which can be used to tell us what DIDN'T. I wasn't, for a moment, suggesting that Sheila had framed Jeremy. I was facetiously suggesting that evidence of her firearms prowess had been suppressed by those you believe to have framed him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 07:16:PM
When I was six years old I got one of these for Christmas (exact model) plus with some tapes to play.


(https://www.radiomuseum.org/images/radio/sony_tokyo/walkman_wm_ex102_1689431.jpg)

No one showed me how to use it yet i did. I assume most kids would work it out also. This has 8 buttons  While the anslutz rifle has just three (Trigger, Chamber and Safety switch)

Sony Walkman =  Load batteries > load cassette tape > Insert headphones > work out 8 buttons

Anslutz rifle =  Load bullets  > Insert magazine > work out 3 buttons

Walkman is not only harder to get going its a far more sophisticated piece of kit in comparison.

To say a 29 year old woman could not have done such a thing without being shown you are essentially saying Sheila was so mentally challenged she would need help going to the toilet.

Were you psychotic at the time?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:17:PM
I'm inclined to go with the belief that the information that tells us what DID happen is the same information which can be used to tell us what DIDN'T. I wasn't, for a moment, suggesting that Sheila had framed Jeremy. I was facetiously suggesting that evidence of her firearms prowess had been suppressed by those you believe to have framed him.





One thing for sure nobody needs a degree in shooting someone dead,especially when the firearm is already loaded and ready to use.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 07:17:PM
I'm inclined to go with the belief that the information that tells us what DID happen is the same information which can be used to tell us what DIDN'T. I wasn't, for a moment, suggesting that Sheila had framed Jeremy. I was facetiously suggesting that evidence of her firearms prowess had been suppressed by those you believe to have framed him.

I think her name was Calamity Jane in the gun toting world of psychotic gunslinging.  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 07:18:PM




One thing for sure nobody needs a degree in shooting someone dead,especially when the firearm is already loaded and ready to use.

It wasn't loaded and ready to use!  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:20:PM
I don't agree unless you are someone familiar with guns and she wasn't. I have 5 sewing machines and every one is threaded in a different way. They have to be threaded correctly or they simply don't sew. You wouldn't manage it if you weren't familiar.

Door knobs and microwaves are something you have grown up with. Sheila didn't grow up with or have any experience of semi-automatics and in the throws of psychosis the ability to engage with a new skill would be impaired.

My previous microwave had a stop/start feature and a timer. My new one is far more sophisticated but all I use is the stop/start feature and the timer. Whilst, had she been interested, Sheila MAY have been able to pick up a gun and fired it randomly, I'd bet my life that she wouldn't have known how to load it. Isn't there a story of Jeremy being seen trying to get her to load his new 'toy', at a family function, with no success because she was totally disinterested?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:22:PM
I think her name was Calamity Jane in the gun toting world of psychotic gunslinging.  ::)


She shure uz hell wuzn't Annie Oakley!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 09, 2018, 07:23:PM
My previous microwave had a stop/start feature and a timer. My new one is far more sophisticated but all I use is the stop/start feature and the timer. Whilst, had she been interested, Sheila MAY have been able to pick up a gun and fired it randomly, I'd bet my life that she wouldn't have known how to load it. Isn't there a story of Jeremy being seen trying to get her to load his new 'toy', at a family function, with no success because she was totally disinterested?
Yes and in my opinion that was a made up story appearing at the eleventh hour by Robert Boutflour. My range cooker timer is flashing and am awaiting instruction on how to fix.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:29:PM
Yes and in my opinion that was a made up story appearing at the eleventh hour by Robert Boutflour. My range cooker timer is flashing and am awaiting instruction on how to fix.


Steve, I'm told -how reliably may be questionable- that cooker clock/timers are notorious for going wrong, and more trouble than they're worth to put right, because there's no easy way of accessing them.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:39:PM
When I was six years old I got one of these for Christmas (exact model) plus with some tapes to play.


(https://www.radiomuseum.org/images/radio/sony_tokyo/walkman_wm_ex102_1689431.jpg)

No one showed me how to use it yet i did. I assume most kids would work it out also. This has 8 buttons  While the anslutz rifle has just three (Trigger, Chamber and Safety switch)

Sony Walkman =  Load batteries > load cassette tape > Insert headphones > work out 8 buttons

Anslutz rifle =  Load bullets  > Insert magazine > work out 3 buttons

Walkman is not only harder to get going its a far more sophisticated piece of kit in comparison.

To say a 29 year old woman could not have done such a thing without being shown you are essentially saying Sheila was so mentally challenged she would need help going to the toilet.






Ooooh, I've got one of those-----bought it in Oz in 1990 and still have it.Works perfectly. Mine's a Sanyo bassxpander, model VIP-30. Tapes and radio.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:43:PM





Ooooh, I've got one of those-----bought it in Oz in 1990 and still have it.Works perfectly. Mine's a Sanyo bassxpander, model VIP-30. Tapes and radio.

Obviously I have no way of being certain, but from the evidence we have of Sheila, I'd be hugely surprised if she had any knowledge of anything technical or mechanical.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:45:PM
It wasn't loaded and ready to use!  ::)





What was all the hype about JB leaving a loaded rifle then ? On the table so said the red forum.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:48:PM

She shure uz hell wuzn't Annie Oakley!





Well she must have looked like her from the back.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:51:PM
Obviously I have no way of being certain, but from the evidence we have of Sheila, I'd be hugely surprised if she had any knowledge of anything technical or mechanical.





I'm sure she knew how to use a VHS recorder seeing as there was one at WHF.

I still have one of those as well. ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:51:PM




What was all the hype about JB leaving a loaded rifle then ? On the table so said the red forum.

The "where" is less relevant, perhaps, than that it was left out in plain sight. I believe Jeremy himself made that point.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 07:53:PM




I'm sure she knew how to use a VHS recorder seeing as there was one at WHF.

But Sheila didn't live at WHF.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:55:PM
The "where" is less relevant, perhaps, than that it was left out in plain sight. I believe Jeremy himself made that point.





So suddenly JB makes "that point ?" Either the rifle had been left loaded or it hadn't, which is to be to suit which agenda ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:57:PM
But Sheila didn't live at WHF.






She had done, possibly when it had been first installed. Then her subsequent stays there over time.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 07:59:PM




So suddenly JB makes "that point ?" Either the rifle had been left loaded or it hadn't, which is to be to suit which agenda ?





The guilters saying that the rifle had been left loaded on purpose ? Remember ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 08:00:PM
Can't have it both ways.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 08:02:PM





She had done, possibly when it had been first installed. Then her subsequent stays there over time.


She hadn't lived there for some 10 years, and perhaps, like I, she didn't treat her parents' home and possessions as if they were hers to do as she liked with?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 08:08:PM




So suddenly JB makes "that point ?" Either the rifle had been left loaded or it hadn't, which is to be to suit which agenda ?

Absolutely no reason why he shouldn't. He VERY clearly made the point that he'd left out a loaded rifle where his mentally ill sister could see it and had subsequently received a call from his father telling him she'd gone mad and got hold of the gun. If you recall, it was loaded -he SAID it was loaded- because he'd been out bunny bashing and returned without success.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 09, 2018, 08:22:PM
Yes it amazes me how the Jeremy supporters fall for that story..
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 08:35:PM
Yes it amazes me how the Jeremy supporters fall for that story..


It amazes me how frequently we repeat words without taking on board their significance. I've just reminded Lookout that Jeremy admitted to having left out a loaded gun -Lookout maintains that Jeremy had absolutely no idea that Sheila was mentally ill- but Jeremy spent the best part of 3 hours regaling the police with his comprehensive knowledge of how ill she was, which means he left out the gun in the full knowledge of how ill she was and how he could make it work in his favour.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 08:40:PM




Nor do you have proof that she had no knowledge which is the same as " making it up" isn't it ?

How can you have proof that someone didn't know something? There is no evidence that she did!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 08:40:PM
Absolutely no reason why he shouldn't. He VERY clearly made the point that he'd left out a loaded rifle where his mentally ill sister could see it and had subsequently received a call from his father telling him she'd gone mad and got hold of the gun. If you recall, it was loaded -he SAID it was loaded- because he'd been out bunny bashing and returned without success.






Caroline's said it wasn't loaded when I happened to say it was easier to shoot when a rifle had been already loaded ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 08:43:PM
Yes and in my opinion that was a made up story appearing at the eleventh hour by Robert Boutflour. My range cooker timer is flashing and am awaiting instruction on how to fix.

On  mine you press the first two buttons the clock - should reset it so you can amend the time.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 09, 2018, 08:49:PM
On  mine you press the first two buttons the clock - should reset it so you can amend the time.
Thank you Caroline I will try.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 08:51:PM




What was all the hype about JB leaving a loaded rifle then ? On the table so said the red forum.

Seriously Lookout - this is basic stuff about the case! He left the rifle minus the magazine, stood next to the coats and the magazine, he left on the settle. He removed the bullet from the breach of the rifle and placed it back in the magazine prior to placing it on the settle.


(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37257)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 08:52:PM
Duplicitous----------I like that word.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 08:57:PM





Caroline's said it wasn't loaded when I happened to say it was easier to shoot when a rifle had been already loaded ?

Well she's right, isn't she? It WASN'T loaded after the first chamber? had been emptied. It had to be REloaded.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 09:04:PM
Well she's right, isn't she? It WASN'T loaded after the first chamber? had been emptied. It had to be REloaded.





Loaded before he left for home after supper ? Was it or wasn't it ? This is worse than Brexit !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 09:06:PM
We all know what I mean don't we ? Jeremy left a loaded rifle after supper ? The rabbits scenario ? Yes/No
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 09:08:PM
Seriously Lookout - this is basic stuff about the case! He left the rifle minus the magazine, stood next to the coats and the magazine, he left on the settle. He removed the bullet from the breach of the rifle and placed it back in the magazine prior to placing it on the settle.


(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37257)






He left it loaded on the kitchen table.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 09, 2018, 09:09:PM
Who said it was left on the settle ? JB ? Ooops and here's me thinking he didn't tell lies.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 09, 2018, 09:14:PM




Loaded before he left for home after supper ? Was it or wasn't it ? This is worse than Brexit !

 Don't be silly, Lookout ::) It was certainly loaded when he took it out bunny bashing! Who on earth goes out to shoot something with a gun without bullets in it? Tsk, tsk :)) :)).................."worse than Brexit"? That's a good one. I like it :)) :))
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 09:31:PM





He left it loaded on the kitchen table.


Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 09:40:PM
,
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 09, 2018, 09:44:PM
How can you have proof that someone didn't know something? There is no evidence that she did!

This depends on the complexity of the task. Knowing that pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is ascertained though imitative learning. 99% of the worlds population learn about guns as kids watching shooting in films and TV.


On the other hand there is no evidence that Jeremy knew how to stage a suicide with all the typical trajectories, locations and bloodstains so even pathologists fall for it. This is a complex task that needs education. It cannot be achieved on common sense and native intelligence that developed simply by growing up.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 09, 2018, 09:52:PM
Seriously Lookout - this is basic stuff about the case! He left the rifle minus the magazine, stood next to the coats and the magazine, he left on the settle. He removed the bullet from the breach of the rifle and placed it back in the magazine prior to placing it on the settle.


(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37257)

Good to see Caroline now taking Jeremy as a reliable and honest witness and that he left the rifle near the kitchen and not on Sheila's body.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 09:53:PM
This depends on the complexity of the task. Knowing that pointing a gun at someone and pulling the trigger is ascertained though imitative learning. 99% of the worlds population learn about guns as kids watching shooting in films and TV.


On the other hand there is no evidence that Jeremy knew how to stage a suicide with all the typical trajectories, locations and bloodstains so even pathologists fall for it. This is a complex task that needs education. It cannot be achieved on common sense and native intelligence that developed simply by growing up.

The pathologist didn't attend the scene and Jeremy didn't successfully stage a suicide hence his incarceration.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 09, 2018, 09:55:PM
Good to see Caroline now taking Jeremy as a reliable and honest witness and that he left the rifle near the kitchen and not on Sheila's body.

That's where he said he left it prior to his return. He may well have done but ultimately, he left it on Sheila's body.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 09, 2018, 09:57:PM
Good to see Caroline now taking Jeremy as a reliable and honest witness and that he left the rifle near the kitchen and not on Sheila's body.
More heinous a crime there never has been.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 09, 2018, 10:25:PM
The pathologist didn't attend the scene and Jeremy didn't successfully stage a suicide hence his incarceration.


No a Silencer appeared that staged a murder hence his incarceration.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 01:12:AM

No a Silencer appeared that staged a murder hence his incarceration.

He didn't fool anyone for long - although .....
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 12:36:PM
That's where he said he left it prior to his return. He may well have done but ultimately, he left it on Sheila's body.






And you believe EVERYTHING that JB had said/stated ? Tut tut. If you don't believe whatever he's ever said, why take his word that he left the rifle was on the settle/monks bench ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 01:16:PM





And you believe EVERYTHING that JB had said/stated ? Tut tut. If you don't believe whatever he's ever said, why take his word that he left the rifle was on the settle/monks bench ?

Eh?  ;D ;D ;D ;D I don't -this is just what HE said! This is basic stuff Lookout - but why wouldn't YOU believe him? Why would an innocent Jeremy lie?  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 01:35:PM
Eh?  ;D ;D ;D ;D I don't -this is just what HE said! This is basic stuff Lookout - but why wouldn't YOU believe him? Why would an innocent Jeremy lie?  ::)






But I DO believe him Caroline. I was just curious to hear your view/excuse as a guilter as to why you believed him when he'd stated where he'd left the rifle. That's all.

The  "indicators " that JB gave from day one which I'd described as my gut-feelings regarding his honesty/innocence have never altered. Steady speech,tone of voice and I imagine his stance in facing his questionnaire with body and feet forward and not afraid to face anyone as nobody is who is telling the truth. I studied all this----the speech part being the interview in 2011 with Eric Allison. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 01:37:PM





And you believe EVERYTHING that JB had said/stated ? Tut tut. If you don't believe whatever he's ever said, why take his word that he left the rifle was on the settle/monks bench ?

Now WHY would an innocent Jeremy lie about it? And why are you hinting that it may better to take what he says with a pinch of salt? Why are you putting such implicit faith in someone who may not be telling the truth? Where, if it wasn't left on the settle, do you believe he left it? Why, if he was knowledgeable enough to convince the police she was mentally unstable enough and physically competent enough to use a gun to kill, why did he leave it out at all?....................but he HAD to say he left it out, didn't he? If he'd have put it away it would have been incredibly difficult to put the blame on Sheila because she'd have had to go looking for it. My own guess is that he'd left it somewhere easy enough for him to lay his hands on when he paid them a late night visit.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 01:48:PM
Now WHY would an innocent Jeremy lie about it? And why are you hinting that it may better to take what he says with a pinch of salt? Why are you putting such implicit faith in someone who may not be telling the truth? Where, if it wasn't left on the settle, do you believe he left it? Why, if he was knowledgeable enough to convince the police she was mentally unstable enough and physically competent enough to use a gun to kill, why did he leave it out at all?....................but he HAD to say he left it out, didn't he? If he'd have put it away it would have been incredibly difficult to put the blame on Sheila because she'd have had to go looking for it. My own guess is that he'd left it somewhere easy enough for him to lay his hands on when he paid them a late night visit.







I'm speaking in your language because you're such a staunch guilter it seems odd that you quote what JB said as being the truth ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 01:49:PM





But I DO believe him Caroline. I was just curious to hear your view/excuse as a guilter as to why you believed him when he'd stated where he'd left the rifle. That's all.

The  "inicators " that JB gave from day one which I'd described as my gut-feelings regarding his honesty/innocence have never altered. Steady speech,tone of voice and I imagine his stance in facing his questionnaire with body and feet forward and not afraid to face anyone as nobody is who is telling the truth. I studied all this----the speech part being the interview in 2011 with Eric Allison.

As he gave the interview after his conviction, he could afford to be relaxed -he may even have indulged in the odd drama course. Did he not say that he should have been an actor? He only needed to sound convincing. He couldn't be convicted a second time. What was there for him to be afraid of?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 01:50:PM
Then you answer with your usual, what I call excuses.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 01:59:PM






I'm speaking in your language because you're such a staunch guilter it seems odd that you quote what JB said as being the truth ?

I'm not sure, since I've believed him guilty, that I HAVE believed everything he said to be true, but I have FREQUENTLY claimed that whilst he has said x, y, and z, we actually only have his word for it. ie what TRULY transpired round that supper table may NOT be quite how he'd have us believe it to have been. Whether you like it or not, Jeremy had TOTAL control of every word which was uttered by his family -other than the phone call from Pam- from the moment they were all together in the kitchen. There's no one who can contradict him. A very powerful position to be in, don't you think?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 02:00:PM
As he gave the interview after his conviction, he could afford to be relaxed -he may even have indulged in the odd drama course. Did he not say that he should have been an actor? He only needed to sound convincing. He couldn't be convicted a second time. What was there for him to be afraid of?





No drama used. His remark about being an actor could have been something entirely different to what you think---------but because it goes along with your agenda it matters not what he was referring to at the time. Of the two it was surely JM who'd been the actress in all this ? Blubbering to order when questioned and immediately shutting off when dishing the dirt. The woman didn't like confrontation.I wonder why ?
JB hadn't answered questions " to be/sound convincing " at all. I imagine he'd have been forthright and straightforward with his answers.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 02:03:PM
Then you answer with your usual, what I call excuses.


No Lookout, you're the one who makes constant excuses for him. You change his character more times than he changes his underwear.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 02:05:PM
Interval---------Hooray. Those young boys and their coach are all out of the cave. Worry over for all.
Well done to all the rescuers what a brilliant job you've all done.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 02:14:PM




No drama used. His remark about being an actor could have been something entirely different to what you think---------but because it goes along with your agenda it matters not what he was referring to at the time. Of the two it was surely JM who'd been the actress in all this ? Blubbering to order when questioned and immediately shutting off when dishing the dirt. The woman didn't like confrontation.I wonder why ?
JB hadn't answered questions " to be/sound convincing " at all. I imagine he'd have been forthright and straightforward with his answers.

That would be as "forthright and straight forward" as when he alternately chewed a thread of his sweater and said "No comment", would it, and later on, in court, when he told counsel "That is for you to prove"?

Recalling those times when I'VE said "Aeee should have been en ector, Dahling" they have certainly NOT been at those times of family tragedies. I can't think of a more horrendously tragic occasion than being the only one left after one member of my family had allegedly slaughtered the others.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 02:16:PM
Interval---------Hooray. Those young boys and their coach are all out of the cave. Worry over for all.
Well done to all the rescuers what a brilliant job you've all done.

That's WONDERFUL news. There's probably going to be a very long road ahead to full recovery but the important thing is that they're all out.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 02:20:PM

No Lookout, you're the one who makes constant excuses for him. You change his character more times than he changes his underwear.






In what way ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 02:29:PM





But I DO believe him Caroline. I was just curious to hear your view/excuse as a guilter as to why you believed him when he'd stated where he'd left the rifle. That's all.

The  "inicators " that JB gave from day one which I'd described as my gut-feelings regarding his honesty/innocence have never altered. Steady speech,tone of voice and I imagine his stance in facing his questionnaire with body and feet forward and not afraid to face anyone as nobody is who is telling the truth. I studied all this----the speech part being the interview in 2011 with Eric Allison.

You thought he left it on the kitchen table!! I don't believe he left it out at all - at least not where he said he did. I think you read David's post and lept on  a bandwagon that that had no horses attached!  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 02:34:PM
That would be as "forthright and straight forward" as when he alternately chewed a thread of his sweater and said "No comment", would it, and later on, in court, when he told counsel "That is for you to prove"?

Recalling those times when I'VE said "Aeee should have been en ector, Dahling" they have certainly NOT been at those times of family tragedies. I can't think of a more horrendously tragic occasion than being the only one left after one member of my family had allegedly slaughtered the others.





Such rebuffs don't come into it. Like anyone normal and innocent ( he'd have seriously thought it was a joke being accused when he knew in his own mind that they were wrong ) It wasn't a way of lying-----far from it, he'd let them prattle on giving chapter and verse, I'd have probably sat filing my nails, as you do when you think that someone is going to end up with egg on their face. It's little wonder that EP wanted revenge,which it was !! Nothing else.

Had I been left with one family member out of 5 dead, I would have at least got him to one side and thoroughly questioned him myself before accusing him outright without any proof like they did. They were disgusting and showed their contempt towards him from day one !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 02:36:PM
You thought he left it on the kitchen table!! I don't believe he left it out at all - at least not where he said he did. I think you read David's post and lept on  a bandwagon that that had no horses attached!  ;D ;D ;D






I hadn't/haven't read David's post. Where ? Which one ? I'm watching the news.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 03:08:PM




Such rebuffs don't come into it. Like anyone normal and innocent ( he'd have seriously thought it was a joke being accused when he knew in his own mind that they were wrong ) It wasn't a way of lying-----far from it, he'd let them prattle on giving chapter and verse, I'd have probably sat filing my nails, as you do when you think that someone is going to end up with egg on their face. It's little wonder that EP wanted revenge,which it was !! Nothing else.

Had I been left with one family member out of 5 dead, I would have at least got him to one side and thoroughly questioned him myself before accusing him outright without any proof like they did. They were disgusting and showed their contempt towards him from day one !





In what way ?

OK.  I think you present him as being the way you seem to think fits with a given situation, as opposed to looking at the bigger picture. I'm fairly confident that a blanket term of -forgive the vulgarity- "cocksure" would have described him particularly well, and I don't believe I could find anyone who knew him who'd disagree with me.
 You've turned him from wuss to super wuss -so naive, so trusting, had no idea that the world was a big, bad place. Yet, you've spoken, with some pride, about his arrogant behaviour, but it doesn't equate with Little Lord Fauntleroy. You speak of how he loved the farm but seem unable to see that he'd probably have sold his soul to get out of going back there. Trouble was there were no more funds from the Bank of Mum and Dad and as hard work was never very high on his agenda, his options were limited. Again, I can only say that those who knew him wouldn't recognize the personalities you attribute to him -that you are SO certain, despite never having met him, describe who you believe he is. It feels rather like a mother who, whilst she's fully aware that her child's numerous bad traits could be problematic, makes excuses for his behaviours, and forgives him because she loves him.
I will just add that whilst my assessment of his character doesn't make him guilty, your own doesn't make him innocent.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 03:25:PM




Such rebuffs don't come into it. Like anyone normal and innocent ( he'd have seriously thought it was a joke being accused when he knew in his own mind that they were wrong ) It wasn't a way of lying-----far from it, he'd let them prattle on giving chapter and verse, I'd have probably sat filing my nails, as you do when you think that someone is going to end up with egg on their face. It's little wonder that EP wanted revenge,which it was !! Nothing else.

Had I been left with one family member out of 5 dead, I would have at least got him to one side and thoroughly questioned him myself before accusing him outright without any proof like they did. They were disgusting and showed their contempt towards him from day one !

 As I frankly can't believe that ANYONE innocent and charged with murder would see it as a joke, here is another example of what I was talking about. You're making excuses for his behaviours. You've even insinuated yourself into a "Lookout and Jeremy, locked together, fighting against the world" situation.  I, most certainly wouldn't have been filing my nails!! How RUDE!.................and they DIDN'T show "contempt for him from day one" and they didn't accuse him outright -I wouldn't mind betting that he suspected they were on to him but thought he was one step ahead- and you, had you towed the line, would probably have done exactly what they did.................had you shown any sign of going against the rules, you probably wouldn't have been given the chance.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 04:13:PM
As I frankly can't believe that ANYONE innocent and charged with murder would see it as a joke, here is another example of what I was talking about. You're making excuses for his behaviours. You've even insinuated yourself into a "Lookout and Jeremy, locked together, fighting against the world" situation.  I, most certainly wouldn't have been filing my nails!! How RUDE!.................and they DIDN'T show "contempt for him from day one" and they didn't accuse him outright -I wouldn't mind betting that he suspected they were on to him but thought he was one step ahead- and you, had you towed the line, would probably have done exactly what they did.................had you shown any sign of going against the rules, you probably wouldn't have been given the chance.






Playing with words again ? I didn't say that I saw murder as a joke. Why do you insist on purposely misinterpreting what I say ? Is it that you're too thick to realise what I mean or is this your way of pinning such blame onto an innocently said set of words ?

I'm by no means making any " excuses " for him at all. This is my way of supporting an INNOCENT man. I'd be the SAME for anyone else who was innocent as being supportive happens to be the way that I am when I KNOW that someone has been wronged.
What on earth do you mean by a " Lookout and Jeremy ?" Truly nonsensical language manufactured by your own weak argument. What you have to say on the matter doesn't bolster anyone but yourself and your own ego I'm afraid.


Those relatives pinned it on Jeremy from day one because " Taff " had been peed off with their presence in his office on more than one occasion, thinking they could win him round to their way but it didn't work and they were clearly hopping mad.

If the relatives knew Jeremy as they'd  professed to why didn't they all approach him in an adult manner like most family members would have done----------ooops, he WASN'T family,was he ??

Because they DIDN'T know him !! Or anything about him only by gossip from the curtain-twitchers 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 04:23:PM
If you want to see lies---------watch the Bews interview !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 10, 2018, 05:15:PM





Playing with words again ? I didn't say that I saw murder as a joke. Why do you insist on purposely misinterpreting what I say ? Is it that you're too thick to realise what I mean or is this your way of pinning such blame onto an innocently said set of words ?

I'm by no means making any " excuses " for him at all. This is my way of supporting an INNOCENT man. I'd be the SAME for anyone else who was innocent as being supportive happens to be the way that I am when I KNOW that someone has been wronged.
What on earth do you mean by a " Lookout and Jeremy ?" Truly nonsensical language manufactured by your own weak argument. What you have to say on the matter doesn't bolster anyone but yourself and your own ego I'm afraid.


Those relatives pinned it on Jeremy from day one because " Taff " had been peed off with their presence in his office on more than one occasion, thinking they could win him round to their way but it didn't work and they were clearly hopping mad.

If the relatives knew Jeremy as they'd  professed to why didn't they all approach him in an adult manner like most family members would have done----------ooops, he WASN'T family,was he ??

Because they DIDN'T know him !! Or anything about him only by gossip from the curtain-twitchers

Playing with words AKA a Word Salad
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 05:33:PM
Lettuce pray.  Beetroot to yourself. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 06:23:PM





Playing with words again ? I didn't say that I saw murder as a joke. Why do you insist on purposely misinterpreting what I say ? Is it that you're too thick to realise what I mean or is this your way of pinning such blame onto an innocently said set of words ?

I'm by no means making any " excuses " for him at all. This is my way of supporting an INNOCENT man. I'd be the SAME for anyone else who was innocent as being supportive happens to be the way that I am when I KNOW that someone has been wronged.
What on earth do you mean by a " Lookout and Jeremy ?" Truly nonsensical language manufactured by your own weak argument. What you have to say on the matter doesn't bolster anyone but yourself and your own ego I'm afraid.


Those relatives pinned it on Jeremy from day one because " Taff " had been peed off with their presence in his office on more than one occasion, thinking they could win him round to their way but it didn't work and they were clearly hopping mad.

If the relatives knew Jeremy as they'd  professed to why didn't they all approach him in an adult manner like most family members would have done----------ooops, he WASN'T family,was he ??

Because they DIDN'T know him !! Or anything about him only by gossip from the curtain-twitchers


You said "He'd have seriously thought it was a joke". I said "I can't believe that anyone innocent and charged with murder would see it as a joke". How is that playing with words? Are you too thick to make your meaning clear?

The "Lookout and Jeremy" is about you supporting his thread biting by adding your nail filing.
I suspect "those relatives" had access to a Jeremy rather different from the one you think you know. If they, having known him for 25 years, didn't know him, it's hardly likely that you do.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 06:52:PM

You said "He'd have seriously thought it was a joke". I said "I can't believe that anyone innocent and charged with murder would see it as a joke". How is that playing with words? Are you too thick to make your meaning clear?

The "Lookout and Jeremy" is about you supporting his thread biting by adding your nail filing.
I suspect "those relatives" had access to a Jeremy rather different from the one you think you know. If they, having known him for 25 years, didn't know him, it's hardly likely that you do.






Yes, a joke that EP had the audacity to accuse him and without proof.  NOT a joke about a murder  ::)
 As spoken in the vernacular.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 07:12:PM





Yes, a joke that EP had the audacity to accuse him and without proof.  NOT a joke about a murder  ::)

Well, I guess that's what YOU think, but unless you're a mind reader, how can you possibly know what was in someone else's mind 30+ years ago?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 07:16:PM





I hadn't/haven't read David's post. Where ? Which one ? I'm watching the news.

Of course you didn't Lookout  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 07:16:PM
Well, I guess that's what YOU think, but unless you're a mind reader, how can you possibly know what was in someone else's mind 30+ years ago?






It's a gift.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 07:24:PM
Playing with words again ? I didn't say that I saw murder as a joke. Why do you insist on purposely misinterpreting what I say ? Is it that you're too thick to realise what I mean or is this your way of pinning such blame onto an innocently said set of words ?

I'm by no means making any " excuses " for him at all. This is my way of supporting an INNOCENT man. I'd be the SAME for anyone else who was innocent as being supportive happens to be the way that I am when I KNOW that someone has been wronged.
What on earth do you mean by a " Lookout and Jeremy ?" Truly nonsensical language manufactured by your own weak argument. What you have to say on the matter doesn't bolster anyone but yourself and your own ego I'm afraid.


Those relatives pinned it on Jeremy from day one because " Taff " had been peed off with their presence in his office on more than one occasion, thinking they could win him round to their way but it didn't work and they were clearly hopping mad.

If the relatives knew Jeremy as they'd  professed to why didn't they all approach him in an adult manner like most family members would have done----------ooops, he WASN'T family,was he ??

Because they DIDN'T know him !! Or anything about him only by gossip from the curtain-twitchers

They knew him a sight better than you Lookout and perhaps they didn't approach him because they thought him capable of murdering 5 people in cold blood! What should they have said? "I say old bean, did you just knock off the family? Bad show old chap!" I guess a jolly good clip behind the ear would have sufficed!  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 07:26:PM





It's a gift.

It's a con!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:08:PM
They knew him a sight better than you Lookout and perhaps they didn't approach him because they thought him capable of murdering 5 people in cold blood! What should they have said? "I say old bean, did you just knock off the family? Bad show old chap!" I guess a jolly good clip behind the ear would have sufficed!  ::)






With all the cops floating around ? Do you think for one minute that JB would have attempted anything ?
You must be as paranoid as the relatives were . Some excuse that was when it's their side of the family with the violent streak-------remember the black eye that was inflicted on Nevill ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:11:PM
As for fraud and dishonesty look no further than PE !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 08:25:PM
With all the cops floating around ? Do you think for one minute that JB would have attempted anything ?
You must be as paranoid as the relatives were . Some excuse that was when it's their side of the family with the violent streak-------remember the black eye that was inflicted on Nevill ?

To be honest Lookout, this is your route - I can't see any reason why they would ask him if he were the killer but you asked the question. I see you're generalising again!  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 08:26:PM
As for fraud and dishonesty look no further than PE !!

Ever heard of a filter Lookout?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 08:30:PM





With all the cops floating around ? Do you think for one minute that JB would have attempted anything ?
You must be as paranoid as the relatives were . Some excuse that was when it's their side of the family with the violent streak-------remember the black eye that was inflicted on Nevill ?

You seem to have a thing about violence, don't you? You seem to like making more of it than there actually is, as in Sheila's case when a moment of frustration becomes a "violent temper" apparently never far from the surface. What is it that you're questioning "JB would have attempted........" "With all the cops flying around?" There was surely no need for him to "attempt" anything. He'd done it before they got there.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 08:33:PM
You seem to have a thing about violence, don't you? You seem to like making more of it than there actually is, as in Sheila's case when a moment of frustration becomes a "violent temper" apparently never far from the surface. What is it that you're questioning "JB would have attempted........" "With all the cops flying around?" There was surely no need for him to "attempt" anything. He'd done it before they got there.

 I think she means that if the relatives asked him if he killed the family (like you do), that he couldn't have done anything to them. Of course he's hardly going to admit being the killer is he?   ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:36:PM
Ever heard of a filter Lookout?






Why use a filter ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:41:PM
To be honest Lookout, this is your route - I can't see any reason why they would ask him if he were the killer but you asked the question. I see you're generalising again!  ::)






But I thought the relatives knew Jeremy well enough to approach him on the subject the way they spoke about him even down to the pupils of his eyes ?
Why wouldn't they ask him ? Even if it had been about problems within the famly.Wouldn't you ? Or would you rather accuse someone there and then without knowing them ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:44:PM
You seem to have a thing about violence, don't you? You seem to like making more of it than there actually is, as in Sheila's case when a moment of frustration becomes a "violent temper" apparently never far from the surface. What is it that you're questioning "JB would have attempted........" "With all the cops flying around?" There was surely no need for him to "attempt" anything. He'd done it before they got there.






No more than you use the word liar. Except that having a violent background is something that police usually look into when someone's murdered or injured another---------lying comes later.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 08:47:PM
I think she means that if the relatives asked him if he killed the family (like you do), that he couldn't have done anything to them. Of course he's hardly going to admit being the killer is he?   ;D ;D ;D

Of course she does!! Tsk! Silly me. I guess there's a general way in which all these things are handled..........................and then there's The Lookout Method. Thank God we no longer have the death sentence. I don't have much faith in verdict passed by gut instinct.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:49:PM
You seem to have a thing about violence, don't you? You seem to like making more of it than there actually is, as in Sheila's case when a moment of frustration becomes a "violent temper" apparently never far from the surface. What is it that you're questioning "JB would have attempted........" "With all the cops flying around?" There was surely no need for him to "attempt" anything. He'd done it before they got there.






JB wouldn't have attempted anything,not because the cops were around but because he wasn't that way inclined and far be it for him to have ever murdered 5 people because it ain't true.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 08:50:PM





No more than you use the word liar. Except that having a violent background is something that police usually look into when someone's murdered or injured another---------lying comes later.

I imagine the police view of what constitutes "a violent background" to be rather different from your own.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:52:PM
Of course she does!! Tsk! Silly me. I guess there's a general way in which all these things are handled..........................and then there's The Lookout Method. Thank God we no longer have the death sentence. I don't have much faith in verdict passed by gut instinct.

 




You'd have had SJ to thank if we'd still have had the death penalty,with his gut-instinct ! ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:54:PM
I imagine the police view of what constitutes "a violent background" to be rather different from your own.







Violence is violence whichever way you look at it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 08:54:PM





But I thought the relatives knew Jeremy well enough to approach him on the subject the way they spoke about him even down to the pupils of his eyes ?
Why wouldn't they ask him ? Even if it had been about problems within the famly.Wouldn't you ? Or would you rather accuse someone there and then without knowing them ?

 WHAT! And alert him to what they were thinking? Ever heard the expression "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"? Not everyone is inclined, like you, to do a bull in a china shop act.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:55:PM
What would you call hitting an elderly man ? A love tap ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 08:56:PM






Violence is violence whichever way you look at it.

Apparently so, too, is smacking a child. Something I believe you're an advocate of?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:58:PM
WHAT! And alert him to what they were thinking? Ever heard the expression "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer"? Not everyone is inclined, like you, to do a bull in a china shop act.






You'd soon find out using my method, which doesn't involve your " bull in a china shop " way either.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 08:59:PM
So your saying that Jeremy was their enemy ? A good start I must say.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 09:04:PM
It's exactly what you don't do when gaining information and that's to create an enemy. Never. Except EP !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 09:07:PM





You'd have had SJ to thank if we'd still have had the death penalty,with his gut-instinct ! ::)

So would you as you you believe in it. Interesting, isn't it? Two people. Two opposing "gut instincts". Which one is correct? Who would we put money on? A man with years of experience and training in what to look out for, who has had the benefit of meeting and speaking with the suspect, OR a woman with no experience, but an ego so big she thinks she know better than the experts, and makes a judgement call from a photo? Mmm. Difficult one.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 09:12:PM
So your saying that Jeremy was their enemy ? A good start I must say.

It's an expression, Lookout ::) ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 09:13:PM
What would you call hitting an elderly man ? A love tap ?

It rather depends on what said "elderly man" is doing.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 09:18:PM
It's exactly what you don't do when gaining information and that's to create an enemy. Never. Except EP !!

You appear to be saying that EP created an enemy from someone they were trying to gain information from?  Who are you speaking of?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 09:50:PM
Apparently so, too, is smacking a child. Something I believe you're an advocate of?





Yes,a corrective slap, not an act of violence/temper or aggression. There's a difference.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 09:54:PM
It rather depends on what said "elderly man" is doing.





Nobody but nobody no matter what should raise their hand/fist to an elderly person !! Never mind what the elderly man was doing. It rather sounds as though you too are an advocate for bashing the elderly ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 09:56:PM




Yes,a corrective slap, not an act of violence/temper or aggression. There's a difference.

That is an act of violence. There is nothing corrective about a slap.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 09:56:PM
You appear to be saying that EP created an enemy from someone they were trying to gain information from?  Who are you speaking of?






SJ's attitude toward Jeremy--------which is why Jeremy was cocky with him. Then again Colin couldn't stand SJ either.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 10:01:PM




Yes,a corrective slap, not an act of violence/temper or aggression. There's a difference.

Now who's playing with words? "Corrective" by whose standards? At what stage of childhood does the "corrective slap" turn into abuse/violence? The same action. Different descriptions.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 10:02:PM




Nobody but nobody no matter what should raise their hand/fist to an elderly person !! Never mind what the elderly man was doing. It rather sounds as though you too are an advocate for bashing the elderly ??

Like you're an advocate of child bashing, you mean?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 10, 2018, 10:06:PM





SJ's attitude toward Jeremy--------which is why Jeremy was cocky with him. Then again Colin couldn't stand SJ either.

I'm more inclined to think "Jeremy was cocky with him" because Jeremy was cocky. Another word for it would be arrogance. It's entirely irrelevant what Colin thought. Do we know if he was cocky, too?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 10:08:PM
That is an act of violence. There is nothing corrective about a slap.






There is if there's danger and a child ignores you. Some will slap out of fear but it doesn't say that a parent is violent or uses violence as a tight hug follows. If a smack left a mark then that's violence but I see no harm in a smack on the bottom through clothes if a child is wilful/disobedient.

If you have no children then it's pointless explaining but I'll bet you've cursed at some time when a child has screamed and carried on constantly during a flight !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 10:09:PM
Now who's generalising ?? I happened to have just mentioned Nevill being thumped  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 10, 2018, 10:11:PM
I'm more inclined to think "Jeremy was cocky with him" because Jeremy was cocky. Another word for it would be arrogance. It's entirely irrelevant what Colin thought. Do we know if he was cocky, too?






So Jeremy was cocky/arrogant call it what you like but it doesn't say he was a murderer because of it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 10:17:PM

There is if there's danger and a child ignores you. Some will slap out of fear but it doesn't say that a parent is violent or uses violence as a tight hug follows. If a smack left a mark then that's violence but I see no harm in a smack on the bottom through clothes if a child is wilful/disobedient.

If you have no children then it's pointless explaining but I'll bet you've cursed at some time when a child has screamed and carried on constantly during a flight !!

It doesn't matter what you call it or how you justify it - a smack is a smack.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 10, 2018, 10:18:PM





So Jeremy was cocky/arrogant call it what you like but it doesn't say he was a murderer because of it.

Of course not, nor does it mean he isn't.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 09:51:AM




Nobody but nobody no matter what should raise their hand/fist to an elderly person !! Never mind what the elderly man was doing. It rather sounds as though you too are an advocate for bashing the elderly ??


Now, you see, in 'my' world -different, it appears, from your own?- we are constantly reminded that bad behaviour is bad behaviour whether one is 8 or 80, ie neither is acceptable. Translated, surely it has to mean that whatever is deemed the appropriate way of dealing with one, must also be the appropriate way of dealing with the other? Ergo, whilst, on occasions, fractious/screaming children DO wind me up, there's usually a reason for it which can't be expressed any other way, whereas adults have other means of venting their feelings. It wasn't necessary for PE? -despite his anger- to thump Nevill, who, incidentally wasn't "an elderly man", any more than it was necessary for Jeremy -despite his apparent frustrations/feelings of entrapment?- to slaughter his entire family. But such is the way of the world, eh?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 11, 2018, 10:07:AM

Now, you see, in 'my' world -different, it appears, from your own?- we are constantly reminded that bad behaviour is bad behaviour whether one is 8 or 80, ie neither is acceptable. Translated, surely it has to mean that whatever is deemed the appropriate way of dealing with one, must also be the appropriate way of dealing with the other? Ergo, whilst, on occasions, fractious/screaming children DO wind me up, there's usually a reason for it which can't be expressed any other way, whereas adults have other means of venting their feelings. It wasn't necessary for PE? -despite his anger- to thump Nevill, who, incidentally wasn't "an elderly man", any more than it was necessary for Jeremy -despite his apparent frustrations/feelings of entrapment?- to slaughter his entire family. But such is the way of the world, eh?

It's simply a distraction Jane but it was Peter Eaton's brother (John) who punched Nevil having had a skin full. It doesn't say WHEN the alltercation took place, it may have been years before the murders but these things happen in some families.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2737.0;attach=16357)

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 10:43:AM
What sort of a date is that---15/10/85 ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 02:51:PM
It's simply a distraction Jane but it was Peter Eaton's brother (John) who punched Nevil having had a skin full. It doesn't say WHEN the alltercation took place, it may have been years before the murders but these things happen in some families.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=2737.0;attach=16357)


Heeheehee! Thanks, Caroline. I've noticed how, where, when and WHY these segways get thrown in!!! Incidentally, have just returned from lunch at The Chequers, Goldhanger and THIS time, I remembered to time it. From the junction with the Tollesbury Road to the Chequers -from where can be seen Bourtree Cottage- given that it was 12.30pm so there was quite a lot of traffic. It took exactly 5 minutes going and because we were behind a lorry, 5.5 minutes coming back. No more than 30 seconds need to be added on for the distance from the junction to WHF.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 11, 2018, 03:20:PM
What sort of a date is that---15/10/85 ?

It would be officially known as the 15th of October 1985? Is there a problem with that? It is when the information was received and recorded by EP.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 11, 2018, 03:23:PM

Heeheehee! Thanks, Caroline. I've noticed how, where, when and WHY these segways get thrown in!!! Incidentally, have just returned from lunch at The Chequers, Goldhanger and THIS time, I remembered to time it. From the junction with the Tollesbury Road to the Chequers -from where can be seen Bourtree Cottage- given that it was 12.30pm so there was quite a lot of traffic. It took exactly 5 minutes going and because we were behind a lorry, 5.5 minutes coming back. No more than 30 seconds need to be added on for the distance from the junction to WHF.

No worries, it's all over the forum that it was PE that punched Nevil - but it wasn't. Interesting about the journey though. We have just gone a similar distance and it's one that would take that long to walk.  ;)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 03:57:PM
No worries, it's all over the forum that it was PE that punched Nevil - but it wasn't. Interesting about the journey though. We have just gone a similar distance and it's one that would take that long to walk.  ;)

Aww! SUCH a shame it wasn't PE. Still, at least that's one bit of money/land grabbing Ann and he can't be accused of ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 04:40:PM
It would be officially known as the 15th of October 1985? Is there a problem with that? It is when the information was received and recorded by EP.






Yes,because had the incident happened years before why would it even have been mentioned or even relevant to the murders ( it could have been, thinking about it ) ? And who'd broached the subject ? Unless of course it had been the last/latest entry concerning the Bamber's which could well have taken place not long before the murders.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 04:43:PM
No worries, it's all over the forum that it was PE that punched Nevil - but it wasn't. Interesting about the journey though. We have just gone a similar distance and it's one that would take that long to walk.  ;)






I knew it wasn't PE.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 04:59:PM
It also reads that " Eaton had " overcharged " ? Nevill for some land ? Is that right ? If so why would you punch someone for that ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 05:28:PM
It also reads that " Eaton had " overcharged " ? Nevill for some land ? Is that right ? If so why would you punch someone for that ?

I'm sure you must have heard the adage "When drink's in, wit's out"?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 05:31:PM
I'm sure you must have heard the adage "When drink's in, wit's out"?






I've also heard that it's used as Dutch courage as a coward's way of settling a score !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 05:39:PM
This " land " appeared to have been a bone of contention with the Eatons ?? They'd have been overcharged not undercharged. Even that alone doesn't bode well and my reckoning was that the incident occurred not long after Nevill had purchased the land and not long before the murders.
The " two " who Nevill wouldn't have turned his back on were the Eaton brothers.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 05:41:PM





I've also heard that it's used as Dutch courage as a coward's way of settling a score !


Comes down to the same thing in the end though. Booze befuddles.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 05:51:PM

Comes down to the same thing in the end though. Booze befuddles.






Would you have said the same if JB had landed out ? I think not.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 05:53:PM
This " land " appeared to have been a bone of contention with the Eatons ?? They'd have been overcharged not undercharged. Even that alone doesn't bode well and my reckoning was that the incident occurred not long after Nevill had purchased the land and not long before the murders.
The " two " who Nevill wouldn't have turned his back on were the Eaton brothers.

So you're now going to tell us how the pair of them conspired to turn up late at night, during a time when Sheila and the twins were there, and kill the whole family?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 05:55:PM
So you're now going to tell us how the pair of them conspired to turn up late at night, during a time when Sheila and the twins were there, and kill the whole family?






No. You've just suggested that. It hasn't come from me this time.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 06:03:PM





Would you have said the same if JB had landed out ? I think not.

Who said that, at some time, and sober, he didn't? And why would he be more impervious, than others, to the effects of alcohol.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 11, 2018, 06:21:PM
Who said that, at some time, and sober, he didn't? And why would he be more impervious, than others, to the effects of alcohol.






I see. Probably something to do with him being a relative.That's okay then.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 11, 2018, 06:34:PM





I see. Probably something to do with him being a relative.That's okay then.


You seem to think so. I couldn't POSSIBLY comment..................other than to say stuff happens to everyone although it's probably a damn sight harder to accept for those who live within the rigidity of shoulds and should nots.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 11, 2018, 09:45:PM





Yes,because had the incident happened years before why would it even have been mentioned or even relevant to the murders ( it could have been, thinking about it ) ? And who'd broached the subject ? Unless of course it had been the last/latest entry concerning the Bamber's which could well have taken place not long before the murders.

Someone like you lookout
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 11, 2018, 09:48:PM
This " land " appeared to have been a bone of contention with the Eatons ?? They'd have been overcharged not undercharged. Even that alone doesn't bode well and my reckoning was that the incident occurred not long after Nevill had purchased the land and not long before the murders.
The " two " who Nevill wouldn't have turned his back on were the Eaton brothers.

Which is totally worthless.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 07:49:AM
What's wrong in having my own views ? I don't remark about yours !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 08:49:AM
What's wrong in having my own views ? I don't remark about yours !

Absolutely nothing. It's the way you tell it. Also you may pride yourself in being nearly as adept at the sarcy come-back as those you accuse of it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 09:20:AM
Absolutely nothing. It's the way you tell it. Also you may pride yourself in being nearly as adept at the sarcy come-back as those you accuse of it.






How come you've even " known " how I told it ? ::) Would it be because misinterpretation is your thing ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 09:38:AM
This " land " appeared to have been a bone of contention with the Eatons ?? They'd have been overcharged not undercharged. Even that alone doesn't bode well and my reckoning was that the incident occurred not long after Nevill had purchased the land and not long before the murders.
The " two " who Nevill wouldn't have turned his back on were the Eaton brothers.

Can you prove that?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 09:41:AM
Can you prove that?






Prove what ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 09:41:AM





Prove what ?

That it happened just before the murders
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 09:46:AM
That it happened just before the murders





By looking at the entry date .
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 09:52:AM
Neither JB nor June had known about this land purchase and it wasn't until after the tragedy that JB knew so seemingly a final " transaction " shortly before the 7th Aug.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 09:55:AM
Given the feeling that Nevill had had while speaking to BW it's no wonder the man feared for his life after feeling the weight of a punch from one brother. There was the annual shoot to face !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 10:43:AM




By looking at the entry date .

But that's not necessarily when said incident occurred. Had it not occurred to you that the actual timing of it might have made it irrelevant to the case?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 10:46:AM





How come you've even " known " how I told it ? ::) Would it be because misinterpretation is your thing ?

Might it just be that you word it in ways which make misinterpretation possible?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 10:49:AM
Neither JB nor June had known about this land purchase and it wasn't until after the tragedy that JB knew so seemingly a final " transaction " shortly before the 7th Aug.

So? Could be it's an example of how the relationship stood between father and son. Could also be that both JB and June DID know if there's only JB's word for it that they didn't.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 10:50:AM
Might it just be that you word it in ways which make misinterpretation possible?






That depends on how your mind works. Are you by nature a pessimistic person ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 10:57:AM
So? Could be it's an example of how the relationship stood between father and son. Could also be that both JB and June DID know if there's only JB's word for it that they didn't.






Because I believe JB over others it's not difficult for me to say that he hadn't known about the land,nor would June have known either as it had been a late transaction when June had been more preoccupied with her own health in paying regular visits to her GP.
How would anyone have felt being given a piece of land when suddenly the thought that it could be snatched from under them was a reality ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 10:59:AM




By looking at the entry date .

Eh? The date coincides with investigations done after the murders. So the entry date couldn't be BEFORE the murders could it?  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 11:00:AM
Neither JB nor June had known about this land purchase and it wasn't until after the tragedy that JB knew so seemingly a final " transaction " shortly before the 7th Aug.

How do you know?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 11:10:AM
Given the feeling that Nevill had had while speaking to BW it's no wonder the man feared for his life after feeling the weight of a punch from one brother. There was the annual shoot to face !!

You're doing what you usually do - you're making connections where none have been proven. You don't know who Nevill was referring. You don't know when the punch took place or which land was being discussed. You claim that June and Jeremy knew nothing about the land sale BUT this is land that Nevil bought and clearly believed he paid to much for. People in the pub knew about it so it's hardly likely that June didn't!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 11:20:AM





Because I believe JB over others it's not difficult for me to say that he hadn't known about the land,nor would June have known either as it had been a late transaction when June had been more preoccupied with her own health in paying regular visits to her GP.
How would anyone have felt being given a piece of land when suddenly the thought that it could be snatched from under them was a reality ?


You appear to be forming conclusions to make them fit with what Jeremy has said as opposed to taking time to reason out other possibilities. I wonder why you insist on remaining so blinkered?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:31:AM
How do you know?






There's a thread on here about " The Secret Land Deal " which contains a note headed by PE-----you should read it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:32:AM

You appear to be forming conclusions to make them fit with what Jeremy has said as opposed to taking time to reason out other possibilities. I wonder why you insist on remaining so blinkered?





You're just as " blinkered " if not more so !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:33:AM

You appear to be forming conclusions to make them fit with what Jeremy has said as opposed to taking time to reason out other possibilities. I wonder why you insist on remaining so blinkered?





Your own " possibilities " remain one-tracked too  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 11:41:AM




You're just as " blinkered " if not more so !

"Blinkered" is not having the ability to look at other possibilities, which describes you perfectly. You appear to see anyone who refuses to view JB in the same way as you as being so. You present a point you believe to be irrefutable. I present alternatives. What's blinkered about that.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:44:AM
"Blinkered" is not having the ability to look at other possibilities, which describes you perfectly. You appear to see anyone who refuses to view JB in the same way as you as being so. You present a point you believe to be irrefutable. I present alternatives. What's blinkered about that.





You present nothing of the kind !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:46:AM
You're too busy pulling me up about my posts to present any kind of alternate possibility, apart from that which goes along with your own agenda.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 11:54:AM





There's a thread on here about " The Secret Land Deal " which contains a note headed by PE-----you should read it.

But this wasn't a secret deal! And it wasn't sold by PETER Eaton! You've got it WRONG yet again!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 11:56:AM
You're too busy pulling me up about my posts to present any kind of alternate possibility, apart from that which goes along with your own agenda.

People have to spend most of the time correcting your posts because you generally get things wrong.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:58:AM
But this wasn't a secret deal! And it wasn't sold by PETER Eaton! You've got it WRONG yet again!






The argument was that Nevill told NOBODY !
I DIDN'T say that it was sold by PE at all. I said Nevill bought it------get your facts right and stop making me out to be a nerd !! Or worse.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 11:59:AM
Secret in that Nevill hadn't told his IMMEDIATE FAMILY----sheesh  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:05:PM
Secret in that Nevill hadn't told his IMMEDIATE FAMILY----sheesh  ::)

Make your mind up. Did Nevil like to keep things to himself or discuss his private business in the pub?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:06:PM
People have to spend most of the time correcting your posts because you generally get things wrong.






Where have my posts been corrected------show me-----when and by who ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:07:PM
Given the feeling that Nevill had had while speaking to BW it's no wonder the man feared for his life after feeling the weight of a punch from one brother. There was the annual shoot to face !!

So you're saying he was talking about Peter and John Eaton?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:10:PM
Make your mind up. Did Nevil like to keep things to himself or discuss his private business in the pub?





This LATE arrangement HAD been kept secret. JE's drunkenness would have put paid to that if he'd been shouting his mouth off as well as throwing punches.
They WERE a private family !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:10:PM





Where have my posts been corrected------show me-----when and by who ??

I'm not talking about physically correcting - I'm talking about pointing out incorrections. That's why we have so many arguments.

For instance, the following wasn't written by Peter Eaton, it's ABOUT Peter Eaton and we don't know that the land deal was secret - other than a claim here. People down the pub knew about it so it was no secret.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=788.0;attach=3465)

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:11:PM
So you're saying he was talking about Peter and John Eaton?






Who else ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:14:PM
Who else ?

I wouldn't presume to accuse someone Lookout - not without evidence.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:14:PM
I'm not talking about physically correcting - I'm talking about pointing out incorrections. That's why we have so many arguments.

For instance, the following wasn't written by Peter Eaton, it's ABOUT Peter Eaton and we don't know that the land deal was secret - other than a claim here. People down the pub knew about it so it was no secret.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=788.0;attach=3465)





There's no header !! Mike's info has the date, officers number and also officers names as witnesses.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:17:PM
Where are ALL these " incorrections " that I supposedly ALWAYS make ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:18:PM




There's no header !! Mike's info has the date, officers number and also officers names as witnesses.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mat on July 12, 2018, 12:18:PM


 ;D ;D ;D

You have the patience of a Saint, Caroline.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:19:PM
That's more like it--at least it's genuine.

Unlike some of the posts on that particular thread.More faces than the town-hall clock !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:22:PM
Where are ALL these " incorrections " that I supposedly ALWAYS make ?

Everyday Lookout! I wouldn't have time to point out all of the mistakes you have made over the years. That isn't a problem, it's the fact you can't admit when you're wrong.

You don't have any evidence to accuse the Eaton Bros but you have, the land deal clearly wasn't a secret because it was discussed in the pub that resulted in Nevil being punched. Don't you think June would have ask Nevil why JE had hit him or are you suggesting that (like June is supposed to have claimed in relation to her back eye) that he would have just said "I walked into a post"? Small place like that? The deal if discussed at the pub, would become public VERY quickly!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:23:PM
;D ;D ;D

You have the patience of a Saint, Caroline.

It's running low!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:25:PM
That's more like it--at least it's genuine.

Unlike some of the posts on that particular thread.More faces than the town-hall clock !!

The document refers to Peter Eaton, it's not written BY him and no where does it say the land deal was secret. That's just the claim of the thread.

Correction, it does say the deal was secret
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:25:PM
I wouldn't presume to accuse someone Lookout - not without evidence.






Accuse them of what may I ask ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:32:PM
Everyday Lookout! I wouldn't have time to point out all of the mistakes you have made over the years. That isn't a problem, it's the fact you can't admit when you're wrong.

You don't have any evidence to accuse the Eaton Bros but you have, the land deal clearly wasn't a secret because it was discussed in the pub that resulted in Nevil being punched. Don't you think June would have ask Nevil why JE had hit him or are you suggesting that (like June is supposed to have claimed in relation to her back eye) that he would have just said "I walked into a post"? Small place like that? The deal if discussed at the pub, would become public VERY quickly!






Like you and everyone else I surmise by reading into things and because Nevill had told BW how he'd better watch his back would possibly have followed the debacle in the pub. Coupled with the other brother, PE, who by all accounts wasn't so squeaky-clean himself ( as we learned post-murders ) between the two of them who'd be attending the shoot Nevill probably felt threatened. There was nobody else in mind at that time except that ALL you guilters prefer to say it had been JB.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:32:PM





Accuse them of what may I ask ??

You tell me - you're involving them - not me! By the way - Jeremy did know about the land deal.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31207)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:35:PM
The document refers to Peter Eaton, it's not written BY him and no where does it say the land deal was secret. That's just the claim of the thread.





I KNOW it's not written by him so stop making it look as though you work hard on my behalf because it's NOT TRUE !! So stop acting the martyr !!
I've lost count of the number of times I've had to REPEAT myself to make YOU understand  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:37:PM
It's running low!  ;D ;D ;D ;D





Why worry ?. You're the one who's indispensable !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:38:PM
The document refers to Peter Eaton, it's not written BY him and no where does it say the land deal was secret. That's just the claim of the thread.

Correction, it does say the deal was secret






Yeah !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:38:PM
The document refers to Peter Eaton, it's not written BY him and no where does it say the land deal was secret. That's just the claim of the thread.

Correction, it does say the deal was secret

But we know it wasn't because Jeremy knew about it and used it to taunt AE

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31207)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:39:PM
But we know it wasn't because Jeremy knew about it and used it to taunt AE

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31207)

And that it was actually JUNE who paid for the land! And it was in Jeremy's name!  ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:39:PM
You tell me - you're involving them - not me! By the way - Jeremy did know about the land deal.

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4226.0;attach=31207)







I don't read anything unless the heading is present and genuine.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:40:PM






I don't read anything unless the heading is present and genuine.

It's from AE's statement which is readily available on the forum!  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 12:43:PM
It's from AE's statement which is readily available on the forum!  ::)

Here - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.msg172906.html#msg172906 - page labelled 92.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 12:59:PM
Here - http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.msg172906.html#msg172906 - page labelled 92.






There's really no need since your patience is wearing thin.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 12, 2018, 01:53:PM
There's really no need since your patience is wearing thin.

What's up Lookout? Can't you admit that you didn't check all of the fact? I admitted to making a mistake - it's easy, it happens to everyone!  ;D

Anyway, given June ended up actually buying the land and Jeremy knew about it, I guess it was no secret.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 02:47:PM
Mmm. That blows Lookout's secret the out out the water. She'lShe'll have to dream up another one now.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 03:07:PM
It wasn't my secret. I was just the messenger--------again----reiterating what was used on the official document. Though it comes as no surprise that the case itself had more holes in it than a colander anyway.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 03:42:PM
Hee hee! I think this forum has made a large contribution to That, don't you.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 12, 2018, 03:52:PM
----------------not laughing !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 12, 2018, 03:56:PM
----------------not laughing !

Your own contributions have certainly been noteworthy.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 12, 2018, 08:44:PM
This doesn't prove very much since if Jeremy did return the bloodied silencer to the gun cupboard he would have prodded Nevill to check if he were dead with the gun barrel only.


He was shot 8 times. (four in the head) Why would Jeremy do this odd check for life on Nevill and nobody else?

If you want to make sure someone is dead you simply get up close and inflict a fatal headshot.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 12, 2018, 09:13:PM
I wouldn't presume to accuse someone Lookout - not without evidence.


http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191)


 ::)

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 12, 2018, 09:26:PM

He was shot 8 times. (four in the head) Why would Jeremy do this odd check for life on Nevill and nobody else?

If you want to make sure someone is dead you simply get up close and inflict a fatal headshot.
Well I suppose because he didn't know the strength of the bullets on humans with a gun designed to kill vermin.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 12, 2018, 09:28:PM

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191)


 ::)
This is well thought out. Wouldn't he risk being seen over fields on his return if he came back to WHF earlier when it hasn't yet dropped dark?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 13, 2018, 12:30:AM

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5565.msg243191.html#msg243191)


 ::)

I wasn't talking about Bamber!  ::) ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 13, 2018, 12:31:AM
This is well thought out. Wouldn't he risk being seen over fields on his return if he came back to WHF earlier when it hasn't yet dropped dark?

He risked a lot of things.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 13, 2018, 07:51:AM
So do we all as we go through life------JB wasn't/isn't unique you know  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 13, 2018, 09:17:AM
He risked a lot of things.
Hi Caroline, I remember discussing this with you, ie the possibility that JB arranged to stay the night at WHF that night.  If he is guilty it makes more sense than him climbing through windows imo.  However, I believe Len Foalkes states that he saw Nevill in the fields about 10pm moving the last load of harvest from the field although he could have been mistaken. We all do tend to see what we expect to see at times. So many possibilities in this case don't know how anyone can be absolutely certain of the truth. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 13, 2018, 09:32:AM
Wasn't there also another chap who'd been working late and took the tractor to the caravan site where he was staying ? He then brought it back next morning. He'd probably been helping Nevill.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 13, 2018, 10:28:AM
Hi Caroline, I remember discussing this with you, ie the possibility that JB arranged to stay the night at WHF that night.  If he is guilty it makes more sense than him climbing through windows imo.  However, I believe Len Foalkes states that he saw Nevill in the fields about 10pm moving the last load of harvest from the field although he could have been mistaken. We all do tend to see what we expect to see at times. So many possibilities in this case don't know how anyone can be absolutely certain of the truth.

Hi Maggie, it was simply a possibility. But even if Jeremy didn't bring in the last load, I still think he came back early. I don't think he came through a window and I think he left via the bathroom/toilet window, not the kitchen because this is the window he used some time after the murders.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 13, 2018, 10:29:AM
Wasn't there also another chap who'd been working late and took the tractor to the caravan site where he was staying ? He then brought it back next morning. He'd probably been helping Nevill.

He wasn't helping Nevil, he was working on a feild in Goldhanger, hence why he took the the tractor home.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 13, 2018, 11:49:AM
Hi Caroline, I remember discussing this with you, ie the possibility that JB arranged to stay the night at WHF that night.  If he is guilty it makes more sense than him climbing through windows imo.  However, I believe Len Foalkes states that he saw Nevill in the fields about 10pm moving the last load of harvest from the field although he could have been mistaken. We all do tend to see what we expect to see at times. So many possibilities in this case don't know how anyone can be absolutely certain of the truth.


Here's another possibility, Maggie. Nevill was in the fields at the time Len Folkes saw him and Jeremy had slipped back to the house whilst he was away. All he'd have had to do was knock on the door, OR as it may not have been locked, anyway, just walk in. I agree that there are many "possibilities! about this case but I'm inclined to think he was convicted on a balance of probabilities.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 13, 2018, 01:14:PM
I wonder if any of JB's legal team have visited him in prison to see/liaise with him at all ? Or have paid a visit to EP to discuss the withheld evidence ? I would have thought this was a procedure undertaken before any thoughts on an appeal. I'm sure I'd be wanting to see who I'd be representing in any forthcoming appeal.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 13, 2018, 01:26:PM

Here's another possibility, Maggie. Nevill was in the fields at the time Len Folkes saw him and Jeremy had slipped back to the house whilst he was away. All he'd have had to do was knock on the door, OR as it may not have been locked, anyway, just walk in. I agree that there are many "possibilities! about this case but I'm inclined to think he was convicted on a balance of probabilities.
True enough,  he may have done as you say. One stumbling block imo is that people far more qualified than myself believe he at the least had an unfair trial, I therefore feel I am far from qualified to be certain either way.  :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 13, 2018, 01:46:PM
True enough,  he may have done as you say. One stumbling block imo is that people far more qualified than myself believe he at the least had an unfair trial, I therefore feel I am far from qualified to be certain either way.  :-\

How qualified are jury members? Yet decisions are required of them. Certainly there ARE those "far more qualified" who believe he had an unfair trial, but I think that can probably be balanced by those, equally "far more qualified" who believe the correct verdict was reached. At the end of the day, it's only their opinion, to which they, like we, are entitled.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 13, 2018, 03:47:PM
How qualified are jury members? Yet decisions are required of them. Certainly there ARE those "far more qualified" who believe he had an unfair trial, but I think that can probably be balanced by those, equally "far more qualified" who believe the correct verdict was reached. At the end of the day, it's only their opinion, to which they, like we, are entitled.
True enough it is only opinipn in the end however there is so little hard evidence on either side which means this case really is to a large extent 'opinion'.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 13, 2018, 04:15:PM
True enough it is only opinipn in the end however there is so little hard evidence on either side which means this case really is to a large extent 'opinion'.

But that is true of most cases.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 13, 2018, 04:25:PM
True enough it is only opinipn in the end however there is so little hard evidence on either side which means this case really is to a large extent 'opinion'.

Only, in event of the fact that it hasn't yet been posited that little green men from Mars are the culprits,  everything which exonerates Sheila, points the finger at Jeremy. Even the absence of forensic evidence points more to Jeremy than to Sheila. Is it feasible that a woman, in the throes of psychosis would take the trouble to eradicate all signs of her having committed a crime, if she didn't even know she was committing one. Jeremy had all the time in the world to 'lose'  evidence of him having committed a crime. Some of it could have been going round in the washing machine whilst the police were interviewing him in his cottage.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 13, 2018, 04:40:PM

Here's another possibility, Maggie. Nevill was in the fields at the time Len Folkes saw him and Jeremy had slipped back to the house whilst he was away. All he'd have had to do was knock on the door, OR as it may not have been locked, anyway, just walk in. I agree that there are many "possibilities! about this case but I'm inclined to think he was convicted on a balance of probabilities.

And here's another!!! Off the top of my head!!! Jeremy persuades Sheila that both of them would be better -for their own reasons- off if their parents weren't there. They conspire to do away with them. Jeremy, an accomplished shot, helps Sheila to fire at their parents. Then it all changes. There's nothing Sheila can do -in fact, she's helpless- because she's already implicated in the two previous murders.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 13, 2018, 07:46:PM
And here's another!!! Off the top of my head!!! Jeremy persuades Sheila that both of them would be better -for their own reasons- off if their parents weren't there. They conspire to do away with them. Jeremy, an accomplished shot, helps Sheila to fire at their parents. Then it all changes. There's nothing Sheila can do -in fact, she's helpless- because she's already implicated in the two previous murders.
Both possible, that's what I was saying.... there are many possibilities. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 14, 2018, 01:04:AM
Well I suppose because he didn't know the strength of the bullets on humans with a gun designed to kill vermin.

Then why were the all the other victims tested for life?


Killers with Schizophrenia are know to carry out "bizarre mutilation of the victim's body"

"Decapitation and Dismemberment of the Corpse: A Matricide Case' published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. A 57-year-old woman was decapitated and her right arm and both hands were dismembered by her 33-year-old daughter, who had been receiving treatment for schizophrenia for 15 years."


Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 14, 2018, 02:50:AM
Then why were the all the other victims tested for life?


Killers with Schizophrenia are know to carry out "bizarre mutilation of the victim's body"

"Decapitation and Dismemberment of the Corpse: A Matricide Case' published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. A 57-year-old woman was decapitated and her right arm and both hands were dismembered by her 33-year-old daughter, who had been receiving treatment for schizophrenia for 15 years."

As do psychopaths
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 12:02:PM
As in Bi-Polar disorder which has been linked to a traumatic childhood experience which has the potential for violence as opposed to those who are schizophrenic.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 14, 2018, 12:07:PM
There is a lot of ignorance about mental health here. Lets find a couple of instances where bodies have been mutulated and apply it to all schizophrenics - silly.

Why don't you look and see how many mutulations were carried out by non-schizophreics, I think you'll find there are a LOT more who aren'!

Also Lookout, there are many, many people living with bi-polar disorder and the majority are NOT violent!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 12:09:PM
Trauma being the repeated separation between mother and child which affects development and also affective disturbances in adult life.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 12:14:PM
There is a lot of ignorance about mental health here. Lets find a couple of instances where bodies have been mutulated and apply it to all schizophrenics - silly.

Why don't you look and see how many mutulations were carried out by non-schizophreics, I think you'll find there are a LOT more who aren'!

Also Lookout, there are many, many people living with bi-polar disorder and the majority are NOT violent!




It's a far higher percentage than those who suffer schizophrenia. I know first hand of one bi-polar sufferer who is violent--------and you'd think butter wouldn't melt !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 12:37:PM
As in Bi-Polar disorder which has been linked to a traumatic childhood experience which has the potential for violence as opposed to those who are schizophrenic.

It seems to me that the more types of mental illness/personality disorder/psychological disturbance you attempt to stick to Sheila to prove her culpability, the more it looks as if Jeremy is responsible.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 12:42:PM



It's a far higher percentage than those who suffer schizophrenia. I know first hand of one bi-polar sufferer who is violent--------and you'd think butter wouldn't melt !

Knowing ONE bi-polar sufferer who's violent doesn't, as I'm sure you know, mean ALL are so. I've known, first hand, those who aren't.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 12:56:PM
It seems to me that the more types of mental illness/personality disorder/psychological disturbance you attempt to stick to Sheila to prove her culpability, the more it looks as if Jeremy is responsible.





On the contrary,it's yourself who's pushing towards his guilt with most of your ill-thought out posts-----so why do you bother ? At least I'm looking for alternatives to her supposed schizophrenia which according to some seemed to have manifested itself overnight.
It's your overall righteousness against all that JB has stated that goes against the grain which I find damaging especially when there are those who are far more knowledgeable working behind the scenes ?   
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 12:58:PM
Most of those who do support JB blame Sheila's culpability in all this------but for all the wrong reasons.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 14, 2018, 01:07:PM



It's a far higher percentage than those who suffer schizophrenia. I know first hand of one bi-polar sufferer who is violent--------and you'd think butter wouldn't melt !

Wel, if you know ONE, then I guess your stats must be right ........ oh hang on, I know THREE and NONE of them are violent! Post some proof Lookout, otherwise your arument just falls flat. Oh and make sure it proves what you said " a far higher percentage than those who suffer schizophrenia" are violent.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 14, 2018, 01:31:PM
Then why were the all the other victims tested for life?


Killers with Schizophrenia are know to carry out "bizarre mutilation of the victim's body"

"Decapitation and Dismemberment of the Corpse: A Matricide Case' published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences. A 57-year-old woman was decapitated and her right arm and both hands were dismembered by her 33-year-old daughter, who had been receiving treatment for schizophrenia for 15 years."
I don't believe Sheila's illness was like that, and anyway statistically schizophrenics are far more of a danger to themselves than others. Most people agree how peaceful Sheila looked in death, and I would argue this was solely because she was led to her death a few yards only that morning with no other physical exertion activities having occurred.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 01:33:PM




On the contrary,it's yourself who's pushing towards his guilt with most of your ill-thought out posts-----so why do you bother ? At least I'm looking for alternatives to her supposed schizophrenia which according to some seemed to have manifested itself overnight.
It's your overall righteousness against all that JB has stated that goes against the grain which I find damaging especially when there are those who are far more knowledgeable working behind the scenes ?

On the contrary, Lookout. My own posts, unlike your own, aren't just irrational, hot air spouts. For the most part I've already thought through what the next logical step is going to be -and make no mistake, there HAS to be one. Once I cut out the sentiment and started to apply the logic it became clear. The only alternatives you offer are about loading Sheila with other problems. You haven't cottoned on to the fact that if one child in a family has been badly traumatized by their experiences, it's common sense to to accept that the other won't have walked away Scott-free, and if they appear not to have been, it could easily slot them onto the psychopathic spectrum. I don't know what path you're attempting to take us down by talking about "her supposed schizophrenia which according to some seemed to have manifested itself overnight". You don't make clear which particular night you're referring to. According to Dr Ferguson, she was diagnosed as being such in 1983.

 It's an amusing irony that you talk about MY "overall righteousness" regarding "those who are far more knowledgeable working behind the scenes" when you have yet to agree with ANY- in fact you've DISagreed with ALL- of the "far more knowledgeable" involved in the case. You'll only support those current until they do something YOUR superior knowledge is offended by.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 14, 2018, 01:42:PM
As do psychopaths
From Jeremy's point of view: he had been given away at birth, accustomed himself to absentee mother June and various caregivers, familiarized himself with Nevill's own ways, packed off to the alien environment of Gresham's for eight years, encountered his mother's breakdown, became estranged from Sheila as her conversation became all the more incomprehensible to him, witnessed her first hospitalization, perceived how the twins were treated at White House Farm and how he might be replaced in the pecking order, saw Sheila's second hospitalization, then Nevill's stress which forced him to relinquish his magistrate's job.

He planned the murders for several months, yet in the back of his mind he still perceives himself as a nonentity who can't possibly live up his parents' aspirations. The murders are accomplished without a hitch, almost too perfectly, yet as he exits the kitchen there's still Nevill's body perched on his favourite chair, and the temptation is to prod it one last time to check death as guarantee that Jeremy can henceforth lead the life he wishes.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 01:59:PM
From Jeremy's point of view: he had been given away at birth, accustomed himself to absentee mother June and various caregivers, familiarized himself with Nevill's own ways, packed off to the alien environment of Gresham's for eight years, encountered his mother's breakdown, became estranged from Sheila as her conversation became all the more incomprehensible to him, witnessed her first hospitalization, perceived how the twins were treated at White House Farm and how he might be replaced in the pecking order, saw Sheila's second hospitalization, then Nevill's stress which forced him to relinquish his magistrate's job.

He planned the murders for several months, yet in the back of his mind he still perceives himself as a nonentity who can't possibly live up his parents' aspirations. The murders are accomplished without a hitch, almost too perfectly, yet as he exits the kitchen there's still Nevill's body perched on his favourite chair, and the temptation is to prod it one last time to check death as guarantee that Jeremy can henceforth lead the life he wishes.


Steve, you outline, very succinctly, that Jeremy couldn't have escaped all that befell Sheila, albeit, he had a very different coping mechanism. You've said, on previous occasions, that you believe he saw himself as a "nonentity". That's very much at odds with someone of his arrogance, who believes they can commit the perfect crime, don't you think? I'm rather more inclined to think that he simply didn't want to live up to what where Nevill and June's aspirations for him. That it wasn't the lifestyle he wanted for himself. I feel that, had he truly felt he owed them some sort of debt of gratitude, he may have been prepared to do what they wanted.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 14, 2018, 02:09:PM

Steve, you outline, very succinctly, that Jeremy couldn't have escaped all that befell Sheila, albeit, he had a very different coping mechanism. You've said, on previous occasions, that you believe he saw himself as a "nonentity". That's very much at odds with someone of his arrogance, who believes they can commit the perfect crime, don't you think? I'm rather more inclined to think that he simply didn't want to live up to what where Nevill and June's aspirations for him. That it wasn't the lifestyle he wanted for himself. I feel that, had he truly felt he owed them some sort of debt of gratitude, he may have been prepared to do what they wanted.
Jane I think he could escape the nonentity tag for awhile at least through the shortcut of inheriting money and the status that brought. I think one's self-esteem or lack of it might be something that many people conceal in different situations throughout life, though if constantly reminded of it the pressure cooker can explode in a way we have seen all too frequently in murder cases of this kind.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 14, 2018, 02:17:PM
Don't forget June was secure in her roots, at least for a time before she became engulfed in a feeling of hopelessness, which Robert Boutflour blamed directly on the adoptions. Nevill fulfilled himself through his work, a concept which was alien to son Jeremy. Sheila and Jeremy felt no such emotional security as they bopped away at Stringfellows nightclub, able to postpone their demons for a time but never to eradicate.


They were probably not so different from many youths of that period, though both were at the extremes of the spectrum and after the emotionless cocoon from which they emerged were unable to forge independent lives for themselves, which lay at the root of the problem.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 02:18:PM
Jane I think he could escape the nonentity tag for awhile at least through the shortcut of inheriting money and the status that brought. I think one's self-esteem or lack of it might be something that many people conceal in different situations throughout life, though if constantly reminded of it the pressure cooker can explode in a way we have seen all too frequently in murder cases of this kind.

It's a concept I'm very familiar with, Steve. I entirely agree that lack of self esteem can be suppressed along with all other emotions. When the pressure cooker/bottle finally explodes, the results can be devastating.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 02:21:PM
Don't forget June was secure in her roots, at least for a time before she became engulfed in a feeling of hopelessness, which Robert Boutflour blamed directly on the adoptions. Nevill fulfilled himself through his work, a concept which was alien to son Jeremy. Sheila and Jeremy felt no such emotional security as they bopped away at Stringfellows nightclub, able to postpone their demons for a time but never to eradicate.


They were probably not so different from many youths of that period, though both were at the extremes of the spectrum and after the emotionless cocoon from which they emerged were unable to forge independent lives for themselves, which lay at the root of the problem.

That was certainly a time during which we were less encouraged to feel, than to mindlessly achieve.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 03:04:PM
On the contrary, Lookout. My own posts, unlike your own, aren't just irrational, hot air spouts. For the most part I've already thought through what the next logical step is going to be -and make no mistake, there HAS to be one. Once I cut out the sentiment and started to apply the logic it became clear. The only alternatives you offer are about loading Sheila with other problems. You haven't cottoned on to the fact that if one child in a family has been badly traumatized by their experiences, it's common sense to to accept that the other won't have walked away Scott-free, and if they appear not to have been, it could easily slot them onto the psychopathic spectrum. I don't know what path you're attempting to take us down by talking about "her supposed schizophrenia which according to some seemed to have manifested itself overnight". You don't make clear which particular night you're referring to. According to Dr Ferguson, she was diagnosed as being such in 1983.

 It's an amusing irony that you talk about MY "overall righteousness" regarding "those who are far more knowledgeable working behind the scenes" when you have yet to agree with ANY- in fact you've DISagreed with ALL- of the "far more knowledgeable" involved in the case. You'll only support those current until they do something YOUR superior knowledge is offended by.






Obviously my main focus has been and will be on Sheila after considering all other options. After studying her life over the short period of years that she'd been alive she'd lived those years in the shadow of her mother and from day one it wasn't the ideal beginning. Life wasn't as kind to her as it should have been and the relationship with her mother had a direct affect as she emerged into adulthood.

JB obviously had the same background but was more resilient and had been able to shut off as some can though it seemed that he hadn't been subjected to the same religious content as Sheila had been therefore his mind hadn't been " fighting between good and evil or God and the Devil " like Sheila's had been. It also appeared to me that JB had been favoured more than Sheila in June's eyes a reason perhaps why Sheila leaned towards her father. Nothing unusual in this as it goes on in lots of families but it's so sad that Sheila couldn't share her problems with her mother in a mother/daughter relationship. Instead we see JB helping his mother bake cakes----no sign of Sheila ?


The trauma of abortion/miscarriages and live births without follow-up counselling for any would also have had lasting damage on Sheila's mental health along with a lack of support. It's too much to have expected that Sheila would have " got over " these things because she wouldn't have done and being predisposed to mental illness because of her beginning in life it became obvious that something was radically wrong.

As far as supporting the current team of course I do and I will knowing that they know far more about this case as time goes on and with the extra information they've been afforded, though not all of it as yet.


JB had a relatively easy life compared to Sheila which would have made a vast difference to how he felt against how Sheila was feeling at that time.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 03:13:PM
Mothers tend to be more lenient towards their sons rather than the daughters. Obviously an age-old thing, which as children you don't understand until later when boys/men would have been the breadwinners and the girls/women just had to tow the line in the home. We weren't as important !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 03:49:PM





Obviously my main focus has been and will be on Sheila after considering all other options. After studying her life over the short period of years that she'd been alive she'd lived those years in the shadow of her mother and from day one it wasn't the ideal beginning. Life wasn't as kind to her as it should have been and the relationship with her mother had a direct affect as she emerged into adulthood.

JB obviously had the same background but was more resilient and had been able to shut off as some can though it seemed that he hadn't been subjected to the same religious content as Sheila had been therefore his mind hadn't been " fighting between good and evil or God and the Devil " like Sheila's had been. It also appeared to me that JB had been favoured more than Sheila in June's eyes a reason perhaps why Sheila leaned towards her father. Nothing unusual in this as it goes on in lots of families but it's so sad that Sheila couldn't share her problems with her mother in a mother/daughter relationship. Instead we see JB helping his mother bake cakes----no sign of Sheila ?


The trauma of abortion/miscarriages and live births without follow-up counselling for any would also have had lasting damage on Sheila's mental health along with a lack of support. It's too much to have expected that Sheila would have " got over " these things because she wouldn't have done and being predisposed to mental illness because of her beginning in life it became obvious that something was radically wrong.

As far as supporting the current team of course I do and I will knowing that they know far more about this case as time goes on and with the extra information they've been afforded, though not all of it as yet.


JB had a relatively easy life compared to Sheila which would have made a vast difference to how he felt against how Sheila was feeling at that time.

Now that's a reasoned post, much of which I concur with. I don't agree with all of it but I get what you're saying.

We can only study what we know of Sheila's life. I suspect that's very little as chunks are missing, but I think there's enough for us to know that it wasn't a very happy life. I think it's FAR too sweeping a statement to claim that "Jeremy was more resilient". His emotions had to go somewhere. It would have been too personal, and he'd have been too young to have BEEN indifferent even if he'd feigned it. I think it was entirely possible that June favoured Jeremy over Sheila -it's also possible, that despite this, it was Nevill's approval that he craved- but I pay little heed to Jeremy's baking stories ONLY being about him and June together. It MAY have been that he watched Sheila and June baking and wished it he and June. It MAY have been, because there was a 3 year gap, that Sheila had baked with June previously, or even at such times when Jeremy wasn't there. These things simply are never set in stone. It depends on the view point/memory/agenda of the story teller.

I feel perfectly certain that all women who undergo abortion, natural or induced, and birth trauma, don't require counselling per se, but in Sheila's case, the odds,with all else she'd gone through, were very much stacked against her and I feel she'd have benefited enormously from having a safe space where she could have expressed herself fully. We can't say, categorically, because we don't know her genetic history, that she was predisposed to mental illness. What we CAN say, is that she'd been predisposed to too much emotional and psychological turmoil to "get over it" without intervention. Many years ago, such things were given the blanket term of "nervous breakdown" of which paranoia seemed to be a regular symptom. We can't actually say that Jeremy, other than superficially, had a "relatively easy life compared to Sheila". Sheila, it seemed, knew how to get her needs met. This possibly forced Jeremy into a place where his own needs were subjugated to hers and he was powerless to do anything about it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 03:50:PM
Mothers tend to be more lenient towards their sons rather than the daughters. Obviously an age-old thing, which as children you don't understand until later when boys/men would have been the breadwinners and the girls/women just had to tow the line in the home. We weren't as important !

Might that have been your own experience, Lookout?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 04:05:PM
Might that have been your own experience, Lookout?






More or less but it seemed to have been the done thing during the 50's as I recall----not only in our family.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 04:08:PM





More or less but it seemed to have been the done thing during the 50's as I recall----not only in our family.

It doesn't matter that it was the "done thing". What matters is that those who were subjected to it felt ignored, overlooked, unimportant, invisible.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 04:27:PM
It doesn't matter that it was the "done thing". What matters is that those who were subjected to it felt ignored, overlooked, unimportant, invisible.





I'd made sure I was none of those by standing up for myself and risking mother's wrath. It was brother who took no chances ( coward ) Nobody was going to break my spirit. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 14, 2018, 04:34:PM




I'd made sure I was none of those by standing up for myself and risking mother's wrath. It was brother who took no chances ( coward ) Nobody was going to break my spirit.


But I guess you were or you wouldn't have felt the need to stand up for yourself. Strong mother. Cowardly brother. Sounds like a mix of anger, hurt and jealousy would have been appropriate............and correct? What doesn't kill us makes us stronger, eh?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 14, 2018, 05:27:PM

But I guess you were or you wouldn't have felt the need to stand up for yourself. Strong mother. Cowardly brother. Sounds like a mix of anger, hurt and jealousy would have been appropriate............and correct? What doesn't kill us makes us stronger, eh?





Definitely makes you stronger and well prepared for what life throws at you.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 14, 2018, 10:40:PM





Obviously my main focus has been and will be on Sheila after considering all other options. After studying her life over the short period of years that she'd been alive she'd lived those years in the shadow of her mother and from day one it wasn't the ideal beginning. Life wasn't as kind to her as it should have been and the relationship with her mother had a direct affect as she emerged into adulthood.

JB obviously had the same background but was more resilient and had been able to shut off as some can though it seemed that he hadn't been subjected to the same religious content as Sheila had been therefore his mind hadn't been " fighting between good and evil or God and the Devil " like Sheila's had been. It also appeared to me that JB had been favoured more than Sheila in June's eyes a reason perhaps why Sheila leaned towards her father. Nothing unusual in this as it goes on in lots of families but it's so sad that Sheila couldn't share her problems with her mother in a mother/daughter relationship. Instead we see JB helping his mother bake cakes----no sign of Sheila ?


The trauma of abortion/miscarriages and live births without follow-up counselling for any would also have had lasting damage on Sheila's mental health along with a lack of support. It's too much to have expected that Sheila would have " got over " these things because she wouldn't have done and being predisposed to mental illness because of her beginning in life it became obvious that something was radically wrong.

As far as supporting the current team of course I do and I will knowing that they know far more about this case as time goes on and with the extra information they've been afforded, though not all of it as yet.


JB had a relatively easy life compared to Sheila which would have made a vast difference to how he felt against how Sheila was feeling at that time.

You studied Sheila? When?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 14, 2018, 10:57:PM





Obviously my main focus has been and will be on Sheila after considering all other options. After studying her life over the short period of years that she'd been alive she'd lived those years in the shadow of her mother and from day one it wasn't the ideal beginning. Life wasn't as kind to her as it should have been and the relationship with her mother had a direct affect as she emerged into adulthood.

JB obviously had the same background but was more resilient and had been able to shut off as some can though it seemed that he hadn't been subjected to the same religious content as Sheila had been therefore his mind hadn't been " fighting between good and evil or God and the Devil " like Sheila's had been. It also appeared to me that JB had been favoured more than Sheila in June's eyes a reason perhaps why Sheila leaned towards her father. Nothing unusual in this as it goes on in lots of families but it's so sad that Sheila couldn't share her problems with her mother in a mother/daughter relationship. Instead we see JB helping his mother bake cakes----no sign of Sheila ?


The trauma of abortion/miscarriages and live births without follow-up counselling for any would also have had lasting damage on Sheila's mental health along with a lack of support. It's too much to have expected that Sheila would have " got over " these things because she wouldn't have done and being predisposed to mental illness because of her beginning in life it became obvious that something was radically wrong.

As far as supporting the current team of course I do and I will knowing that they know far more about this case as time goes on and with the extra information they've been afforded, though not all of it as yet.


JB had a relatively easy life compared to Sheila which would have made a vast difference to how he felt against how Sheila was feeling at that time.
Actually lookout I was with you there until the last paragraph. Jeremy did make it easy upon himself and who could blame him hitherto, but the pressure which went with being heir was being ratcheted up daily by parents who expected him to fall in line, themselves having had far greater expectations of them in their time. But the threats and coercion which led to the break-up with Suzette and ultimately their deaths was Jeremy's justification as he surmised that they had earned their fate for the way they had treated him down the years.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 08:35:AM
Actually lookout I was with you there until the last paragraph. Jeremy did make it easy upon himself and who could blame him hitherto, but the pressure which went with being heir was being ratcheted up daily by parents who expected him to fall in line, themselves having had far greater expectations of them in their time. But the threats and coercion which led to the break-up with Suzette and ultimately their deaths was Jeremy's justification as he surmised that they had earned their fate for the way they had treated him down the years.

There is no scale of 1 to 10 for judging psychological/emotional pain. We don't have the right to judge how WE think it is/was for others. A wonderful example is that my late partner once told me how 'difficult' -actually he'd been troubled- his youngest son had been compared to the eldest who was so good "we never knew we had him". The eldest told be he been totally ignored. He'd been handed a toy or book, left to get on with it, whilst his parents' whole focus had been on his younger brother. His pain was never obvious, but was probably as acute as his brother's had been. The reasons for it may be diverse, but pain is pain is pain.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 09:20:AM

Steve, you outline, very succinctly, that Jeremy couldn't have escaped all that befell Sheila, albeit, he had a very different coping mechanism. You've said, on previous occasions, that you believe he saw himself as a "nonentity". That's very much at odds with someone of his arrogance, who believes they can commit the perfect crime, don't you think? I'm rather more inclined to think that he simply didn't want to live up to what where Nevill and June's aspirations for him. That it wasn't the lifestyle he wanted for himself. I feel that, had he truly felt he owed them some sort of debt of gratitude, he may have been prepared to do what they wanted.

I think he saw himself as the victim and that they owed him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 09:40:AM
I think he saw himself as the victim and that they owed him.


I don't think there's any doubt about it, Caroline. From where he possibly believed he was, who can say he was wrong? We don't know what might have been his aspirations as a child. We don't know that he ever shared them. There's a huge chasm between accepting, without complaint, a future mapped out, and wanting that future for oneself. It's quite easy to believe that he may have felt trapped, as opposed to Sheila, who seemed to be able to do exactly as she pleased. It's easy to believe he saw his future as funding Sheila's whims. Certainly, they owed him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 15, 2018, 09:46:AM
As do psychopaths

No they don't. Mutilation of a corpse for the sake of disposal/concealment is not bizarre at all. There is reason behind it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 09:54:AM
No they don't. Mutilation of a corpse for the sake of disposal/concealment is not bizarre at all. There is reason behind it.


Are you saying psychopaths aren't capable of reason?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 10:02:AM
No they don't. Mutilation of a corpse for the sake of disposal/concealment is not bizarre at all. There is reason behind it.

Yes they do - one example (but there are many!) is Ted Bundy who famously bit one of his victims (his teeth were matched to the bite) and mutilated others in various ways. Check your facts before making sweeping statements!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 15, 2018, 11:46:AM
Yes they do - one example (but there are many!) is Ted Bundy who famously bit one of his victims (his teeth were matched to the bite) and mutilated others in various ways. Check your facts before making sweeping statements!

Those bites were done during sexual intercourse with the victim. Ted Bundy was addicted to violent bondage porn (the root influence of his crimes). There is reasoning behind it.

Other than for the sake of disposing the body I guess you could dismember a victim for the sake of keeping it as a momento.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 12:04:PM
Those bites were done during sexual intercourse with the victim. Ted Bundy was addicted to violent bondage porn (the root influence of his crimes). There is reasoning behind it.

Other than for the sake of disposing the body I guess you could dismember a victim for the sake of keeping it as a momento.


Whatever the reasons, the act was committed. Keepsakes can become problematic, as Denis Nilson discovered.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 12:10:PM
Those bites were done during sexual intercourse with the victim. Ted Bundy was addicted to violent bondage porn (the root influence of his crimes). There is reasoning behind it.

Other than for the sake of disposing the body I guess you could dismember a victim for the sake of keeping it as a momento.

Seriousy David, you twist more than Chubby Checker! Anyone who mutilates a body would have a reason - it might be their reason but it is a reason nevertheless. Bundy was a paychopath and he mutilated the bodies of his victims because he enjoyed it. It wasn't to dipose of them, he simply enjoyed it and you initially said .....

"
No they don't. Mutilation of a corpse for the sake of disposal/concealment is not bizarre at all. There is reason behind it.

Gaining satisfaction from mutilation you think is 'rational'? How is this distinctive from your claim that schizophrenic's mutilate? Your example states that the person in question decapitated her victim, Bundy also did this with 12 of his victims and kept their heads in his apartment. He claims to have eaten parts of his victims. Of course, I'm sure he had a rational reason for doing so  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 12:32:PM
Pity it hadn't been in another country where they believe in an eye for an eye !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 01:00:PM
Pity it hadn't been in another country where they believe in an eye for an eye !!


That would be those same countries, would it, that stone women to death if a man, other than her husband has sex with her?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 01:09:PM

That would be those same countries, would it, that stone women to death if a man, other than her husband has sex with her?





Not necessarily. A country which doesn't treat heinous crimes with kid gloves in allowing the like of Bundy to live !! The USA don't stone women do they ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 01:25:PM
But neither do they follow the eye for an eye dictat.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 01:34:PM
They certainly eradicate monsters in various States though probably for lesser crimes than Bundy's sub-human way.


I'm not the only one by any means who believes in the death penalty for these monsters !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 01:41:PM
How do you think the families of his victims go through their lives ?? Could you ever forget while he's sitting back and being looked after ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 01:52:PM
They certainly eradicate monsters in various States though probably for lesser crimes than Bundy's sub-human way.


I'm not the only one by any means who believes in the death penalty for these monsters !


I share your belief that there are some who don't deserve to share the air others breath, but I'd prefer that their sentence included a way which forced them to make/gave them the choice of making reparation to society, ie they could choose to stay alive -as an alternative to the death sentence- by take part in drugs trials.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 02:03:PM
How do you think the families of his victims go through their lives ?? Could you ever forget while he's sitting back and being looked after ?

Like bad things that happen to us all, Lookout, there's no way of undoing it. Ultimately, if we can't move on, it's only our own lives which suffer. Our bitterness will have no effect whatsoever on whoever caused our suffering. My admiration is boundless for those families who've been able to forgive the person who robbed them of their loved one. Their grief and sorrow for their loss will be no less than that of those who can't forgive, but channeling it into helping to prevent others from going down the same path shows unrivaled generosity of spirit.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 02:10:PM
Like bad things that happen to us all, Lookout, there's no way of undoing it. Ultimately, if we can't move on, it's only our own lives which suffer. Our bitterness will have no effect whatsoever on whoever caused our suffering. My admiration is boundless for those families who've been able to forgive the person who robbed them of their loved one. Their grief and sorrow for their loss will be no less than that of those who can't forgive, but channeling it into helping to prevent others from going down the same path shows unrivaled generosity of spirit.





Sorry if I don't share your sentiments.
Because of your stance on this case could you forgive Jeremy ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 02:32:PM




Sorry if I don't share your sentiments.
Because of your stance on this case could you forgive Jeremy ?


Aww, c'mon, Lookout. Surely you know me well enough to know I can't answer "What would you do if..........." questions, anymore that I expound "If I were you, I'd.................." Please God, I NEVER have to face what Jeremy's family woke up to that August morning. HowEVER bad/undeserving/greedy you judge them to be, NONE of them deserved that.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 02:39:PM

Aww, c'mon, Lookout. Surely you know me well enough to know I can't answer "What would you do if..........." questions, anymore that I expound "If I were you, I'd.................." Please God, I NEVER have to face what Jeremy's family woke up to that August morning. HowEVER bad/undeserving/greedy you judge them to be, NONE of them deserved that.





Not my fault----you profess to be full of forgiveness so it's an easy enough question. No use generalising if there's one case in particular where you can't forgive, you either can or you can't. This is where we differ greatly because I call a spade a spade in my beliefs and folk know exactly where they are as I'll never waver on anything with my own beliefs so you SHOULD be able to answer.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 02:43:PM
So from what I can gather,you wouldn't forgive JB ? Can I ask why he's any different to the monster Bundy?

Perhaps it's because the family would never forgive him ? You do what others tell you ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 02:45:PM
IF JB had committed this crime I'm damn sure I'd never forgive him !! Or his like !
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 02:53:PM




Not necessarily. A country which doesn't treat heinous crimes with kid gloves in allowing the like of Bundy to live !! The USA don't stone women do they ??

Lookout, Ted Bundy was executed in Florida in 1989  ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 02:53:PM
Lookout, Ted Bundy was executed in Florida in 1989  ;D





Good.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 02:56:PM
So from what I can gather,you wouldn't forgive JB ? Can I ask why he's any different to the monster Bundy?

Perhaps it's because the family would never forgive him ? You do what others tell you ?

Society as a whole hasn’t and won’t forgive him, hence the whole life tarrif. What he did was unforgivable but it’s not for an individual to forgive - it’s for the legal system to determine justice.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 02:58:PM




Not my fault----you profess to be full of forgiveness so it's an easy enough question. No use generalising if there's one case in particular where you can't forgive, you either can or you can't. This is where we differ greatly because I call a spade a spade in my beliefs and folk know exactly where they are as I'll never waver on anything with my own beliefs so you SHOULD be able to answer.

You will also be aware that I don't do "SHOULD". I'm not certain how I can -HONESTLY- answer how I'd react to something I've never experienced. The most I CAN say is that I'd do my best to understand why something was done, but that doesn't mean I'd condone the act. It sounds to me as if you make a decision and stick to it like glue, come what may. It doesn't tell me, though, how you feel about that decision. If you accept that the taking of life is murder, how then, is it possible to show compassion for mercy killings? From an objective position, I can weigh each crime against another. From a subjective position, I'd find it much more difficult.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 03:05:PM
So from what I can gather,you wouldn't forgive JB ? Can I ask why he's any different to the monster Bundy?

Perhaps it's because the family would never forgive him ? You do what others tell you ?


I think the spectre of adoption hangs very heavily over over this crime, Lookout. I'm not aware of the family's feelings and even if I was, I'd be capable of supporting them without having them.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 03:06:PM
If the victim were a relative or friend, I could execute the perpetrator myself, if not, I couldn’t because I wouldn’t be as emotionally involved. That’s why they don’t let family choose punishments.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 15, 2018, 03:08:PM

I think the spectre of adoption hangs very heavily over over this crime, Lookout. I'm not aware of the family's feelings and even if I was, I'd be capable of supporting them without having them.

I agree - I think ultimately feelings of abandonment let to resentment which led to murder.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 03:11:PM
Society as a whole hasn’t and won’t forgive him, hence the whole life tarrif. What he did was unforgivable but it’s not for an individual to forgive - it’s for the legal system to determine justice.

You're absolutely correct, Caroline. It matters not a JOT what society feels -it wasn't society's family who were slaughtered- but society IS entitled to reflect the opinion of/sentence handed down by the legal system.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 03:13:PM
I agree - I think ultimately feelings of abandonment let to resentment which led to murder.


And to deny that is to deny Jeremy his feelings.................which is quite possible how the whole tragedy started.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 03:37:PM
Feelings ? Murderers don't have feelings !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 03:45:PM
Feelings ? Murderers don't have feelings !!


But ALL murderers were once small children who wanted nothing more than to be heard and approved by their parents.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 04:19:PM

But ALL murderers were once small children who wanted nothing more than to be heard and approved by their parents.






There must be millions of children " who'd wished to have been heard and approved " but there aren't millions who've murdered. It's as though you're excusing murder ?
To me there's NO excuse whatsoever for the lack of self-control unless a person is severely mentally ill and even then it has to be proved beyond doubt.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 15, 2018, 04:24:PM

But ALL murderers were once small children who wanted nothing more than to be heard and approved by their parents.
It's strange I was thinking myself over the weekend as I watched the new Karen Carpenter docudrama how problems which are never discussed as adolescents often rear their head again and come back to bite with a vengeance. https://youtu.be/Vj5Y6OxdWGI
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 04:32:PM





There must be millions of children " who'd wished to have been heard and approved " but there aren't millions who've murdered. It's as though you're excusing murder ?
To me there's NO excuse whatsoever for the lack of self-control unless a person is severely mentally ill and even then it has to be proved beyond doubt.

You're absolutely correct, Lookout. But we must remember that all children are individuals. Some will, if they have some sense of their self worth, have loving grandparents, or aunts and uncles they can unburden themselves to and feel supported by. Others who, for whatever reason, feel worthless/ungrateful will keep it to themselves out of fear of others learning how worthless and undeserving they are. I'm NOT excusing murder. I AM trying to find reasons for it. Bad behaviour is bad behaviour whether one is 8 or 80.

I found it very hard trying to live in a world which was nothing but black or white. No room for error. No room for reasoning. No room for my own beliefs. It was all about what others had dictated as SHOULD have.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 04:36:PM
It's strange I was thinking myself over the weekend as I watched the new Karen Carpenter docudrama how problems which are never discussed as adolescents often rear their head again and come back to bite with a vengeance. https://youtu.be/Vj5Y6OxdWGI

Sadly the problems which we experience in adolescence usually have their genesis in the unresolved conflicts of childhood.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 06:02:PM
It's strange I was thinking myself over the weekend as I watched the new Karen Carpenter docudrama how problems which are never discussed as adolescents often rear their head again and come back to bite with a vengeance. https://youtu.be/Vj5Y6OxdWGI






That was so sad Steve.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 15, 2018, 06:28:PM





That was so sad Steve.
Do you see a parallel in the dominant mother, the children wanting to please parents yet who have no control, the switching of the mother's affection, the stifling of romantic relationships, the quest for a utopian perfection which leads to the ensuing tragedy..
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 07:00:PM
Do you see a parallel in the dominant mother, the children wanting to please parents, the switching of the mother's affection, the stifling of romantic relationships, the quest for a utopian perfection which leads to the ensuing tragedy..





A real harridan. People like that leave you powerless-----if you let them, but because the mother was so controlling she too had a hidden problem in the way that she was. To be driven in such a way is just as bad as being despondent from a mental health point of view.

I can't watch programmes about pushy parents or child prodigies knowing that it usually ends in tears. How cruel ! I remember that very young pianist many years ago a wonderful player----but over the years his life took a U- turn. They suffer burn-out in trying to please everyone. Some are able to stand back and realise what's happening to them before it's too late but if there's a driving force at the back of you it can only end in tragedy sooner or later. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 15, 2018, 07:44:PM




A real harridan. People like that leave you powerless-----if you let them, but because the mother was so controlling she too had a hidden problem in the way that she was. To be driven in such a way is just as bad as being despondent from a mental health point of view.

I can't watch programmes about pushy parents or child prodigies knowing that it usually ends in tears. How cruel ! I remember that very young pianist many years ago a wonderful player----but over the years his life took a U- turn. They suffer burn-out in trying to please everyone. Some are able to stand back and realise what's happening to them before it's too late but if there's a driving force at the back of you it can only end in tragedy sooner or later.

 I do get that it's hard to watch pushy parents. One has an overwhelming feeling of impotence -helplessness- possibly watching history repeat. Unfortunately, the more powerful and controlling the mother, the more powerless and controlled can be the child. Those who do override that power are very likely to end up emulating the parent they've tried so hard to divorce themselves from. However, whilst all learned behaviour is repeated, on a scale of 1 to 10, most achieve no more than a low mean average.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 15, 2018, 08:06:PM




A real harridan. People like that leave you powerless-----if you let them, but because the mother was so controlling she too had a hidden problem in the way that she was. To be driven in such a way is just as bad as being despondent from a mental health point of view.

I can't watch programmes about pushy parents or child prodigies knowing that it usually ends in tears. How cruel ! I remember that very young pianist many years ago a wonderful player----but over the years his life took a U- turn. They suffer burn-out in trying to please everyone. Some are able to stand back and realise what's happening to them before it's too late but if there's a driving force at the back of you it can only end in tragedy sooner or later.
Yes lookout I think you may be referring to James Rhodes: sexual abuse, eating disorder, schizophrenia, suicide attempts. https://youtu.be/WhjcoZIRWVE
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 09:26:PM
Yes lookout I think you may be referring to James Rhodes: sexual abuse, eating disorder, schizophrenia, suicide attempts. https://youtu.be/WhjcoZIRWVE





Horrendous and heartbreaking. I knew something horrible happened to him but had no idea it was so bad poor poor man.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 15, 2018, 09:50:PM




Horrendous and heartbreaking. I knew something horrible happened to him but had no idea it was so bad poor poor man.
Yes it is. I can just see him pulling up a chair in that rather drab kitchen at White House Farm and putting the world to rights with Sheila. https://youtu.be/k7ogbFvvCq0
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 15, 2018, 10:22:PM
Yes it is. I can just see him pulling up a chair in that rather drab kitchen at White House Farm and putting the world to rights with Sheila. https://youtu.be/k7ogbFvvCq0






They'd have certainly understood each other.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 02:06:PM
How could JB have " moved/arranged " his father's position while he'd been in the RM state as shown in photographs ? 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 02:54:PM
How could JB have " moved/arranged " his father's position while he'd been in the RM state as shown in photographs ?

Because he moved him prior to the onset of rigor.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 03:19:PM
How could JB have " moved/arranged " his father's position while he'd been in the RM state as shown in photographs ?

I doubt he's have hung around long enough to see how long it took for RM to set in.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 03:49:PM
How could JB have " moved/arranged " his father's position while he'd been in the RM state as shown in photographs ?



From the direction of the blood running downwards. Its clear Nevil was in this position prior to getting those headshots.

(https://s8.postimg.cc/4gd8pjdyd/nbkcs.png)


Nevill succumbed in a position like a muslim prayer. The only difference being his head in on something thats on the floor rather than the floor itself.

(https://pm1.narvii.com/6339/d908f07daedb5b0fe16ab0b32025d21b8bf3ca7a_hq.jpg)

And if you dont think its possible to die in that posture well lo and behold

https://gfycat.com/SelfassuredShimmeringIsabellinewheatear (https://gfycat.com/SelfassuredShimmeringIsabellinewheatear)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 05:05:PM
Because he moved him prior to the onset of rigor.

pure speculation no evedence he moved him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 05:12:PM
pure speculation no evedence he moved him.

In case you hadn't noticed, this whole forum is based on speculation  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 05:22:PM
pure speculation no evedence he moved him.

Would you care to speculate on who did?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 05:26:PM
Because he moved him prior to the onset of rigor.





Which would be about midnight or thereabouts as it can take a few hours before a body is as stiff as it appears to be.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 05:27:PM
I doubt he's have hung around long enough to see how long it took for RM to set in.






Which means that Nevill wouldn't have been moved ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 05:29:PM
In case you hadn't noticed, this whole forum is based on speculation  ::)






Only just noticed ? Or is it only when you're wrong in what you state ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 05:34:PM
In case you hadn't noticed, this whole forum is based on speculation  ::)


why would he need to move him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 05:39:PM




Which would be about midnight or thereabouts as it can take a few hours before a body is as stiff as it appears to be.


"................or thereabouts................" "...............it CAN take a few hours....................." All a bit lose.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 05:41:PM





Which means that Nevill wouldn't have been moved ?

Well, it's unlikely to have been moved after RM. What would have been the point?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 06:12:PM
Well, it's unlikely to have been moved after RM. What would have been the point?






So what time would he have died before RM had set in as per the photographs ? In other words what time did the murders take place ? Soon after JB had left ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 06:15:PM

So what time would he have died before RM had set in as per the photographs ? In other words what time did the murders take place ? Soon after JB had left ?


"The typical timeline is that rigor mortis begins to be noticeable within a couple
of hours after death, reaching a maximum around 6–12 hours, give or take several
hours, and then it slowly dissipates over the next day or so."

Forensic Pathology for Police, Death Investigators, Attorneys, and Forensic Scientists
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 06:20:PM





So what time would he have died before RM had set in as per the photographs ? In other words what time did the murders take place ? Soon after JB had left ?

Ha! Lookout, I don't believe myself to be more knowledgeable than the experts -even they won't go any further than an estimated time of death- but I can throw in the variables, ie age, weight, health, physical condition of deceased, method of death, ambient room temperature etc, etc, etc..................
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 06:23:PM
if those burns were not coused by the hot end of the riffle what did couse them.

and why ould jeremy need to move neviles body.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 06:26:PM
Ha! Lookout, I don't believe myself to be more knowledgeable than the experts -even they won't go any further than an estimated time of death- but I can throw in the variables, ie age, weight, health, physical condition of deceased, method of death, ambient room temperature etc, etc, etc..................






So how did Nevill's body appear to move forward ? He'd have died seated and not bent forward as pictured.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 06:36:PM





So how did Nevill's body appear to move forward ? He'd have died seated and not bent forward as pictured.


Perhaps the force of the beating caused it? There must have been a hell of a lot of "Die, damn you" behind it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 06:40:PM
if those burns were not coused by the hot end of the riffle what did couse them.


Something that is the same size and same shape of the rifle muzzle.  ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 06:45:PM

Perhaps the force of the beating caused it? There must have been a hell of a lot of "Die, damn you" behind it.

you cant burn somone with your fists.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 06:56:PM

Perhaps the force of the beating caused it? There must have been a hell of a lot of "Die, damn you" behind it.

Is this Sheila's "strength of Goliath" you are referring to?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 06:58:PM

Perhaps the force of the beating caused it? There must have been a hell of a lot of "Die, damn you" behind it.






Nope.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:00:PM
you cant burn somone with your fists.


Well done! You can't........................But I never mentioned "fists".
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:01:PM





Nope.


Oh!! So you WERE there?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:05:PM

Oh!! So you WERE there?






No but you're the expert ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:06:PM





No but you're the expert ?


Since when have I EVER made such a claim?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:11:PM
You seem to think that a dead body can fall out of a chair. Adam reckons that JB moved him while in that position. Lord help us  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 07:15:PM
You seem to think that a dead body can fall out of a chair. Adam reckons that JB moved him while in that position. Lord help us  ::)

You are perfectly entitled to talk to yourself on here every day. Only two other posters read you're posts.

Why have you just said something that is not true about me ? 

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 07:16:PM
if those burns were not coused by the hot end of the riffle what did couse them.

and why ould jeremy need to move neviles body.

Bamber moved Nevill so he could pull his pyjama top up. To burn his back.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 07:17:PM
Everything here.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9835.0
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 07:18:PM
You seem to think that a dead body can fall out of a chair. Adam reckons that JB moved him while in that position. Lord help us  ::)

Nevile DID NOT fall out of the chair! The chair is tipped sideways and NOT forward and if he had fallen out of the chair sideways (which is hardly likely!), he's had fallen on his side! And Adam said nothing of the sort! I thought you didn't read the RED forum?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:21:PM
You seem to think that a dead body can fall out of a chair. Adam reckons that JB moved him while in that position. Lord help us  ::)


Please have the courtesy NOT to misrepresent what I say. There was NO ambiguity so even YOU must have been capable of comprehending. WHERE did I say that "a dead body can fall out of a chair"? I didn't. Because it couldn't. Unless 'encouraged' by some enormous force. Anger would add impetus to that 'encouragement'. Adam's views are rntirely Adam's.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 07:24:PM
Bamber moved Nevill so he could pull his pyjama top up. To burn his back.

and why would he want to do that.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 07:24:PM
I have no idea where Nevill lay after Bamber had knocked him out.

Certainly not sitting on a chair or kneeling & perched delicately with his head on a coal scuttle.

Bamber obviously picked Nevill up to have access to Nevill's bare back and head. It was impossible for Sheila to lift Nevill.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:27:PM

Please have the courtesy NOT to misrepresent what I say. There was NO ambiguity so even YOU must have been capable of comprehending. WHERE did I say that "a dead body can fall out of a chair"? I didn't. Because it couldn't. Unless 'encouraged' by some enormous force. Anger would add impetus to that 'encouragement'. Adam's views are rntirely Adam's.





Please don't misinterpret what I wrote. I said SEEM to THINK-----and not actually SAID  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:29:PM
You are perfectly entitled to talk to yourself on here every day. Only two other posters read you're posts.

Why have you just said something that is not true about me ?





Why are you shirty ?? Would that be because you DID say such but won't admit it ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:30:PM




Please don't misinterpret what I wrote. I said SEEM to THINK-----and not actually SAID  ::)
[/quote

 Pointless comment, wasn't it, given that it was obvious that I DIDN'T think it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 07:31:PM




Please don't misinterpret what I wrote. I said SEEM to THINK-----and not actually SAID  ::)

You've just done that to Adam!  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 07:33:PM




Why are you shirty ?? Would that be because you DID say such but won't admit it ?

OMG!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 07:34:PM
I have no idea where Nevill lay after Bamber had knocked him out.

Certainly not sitting on a chair or kneeling & perched delicately with his head on a coal scuttle.

Bamber obviously picked Nevill up to have access to Nevill's bare back and head. It was impossible for Sheila to lift Nevill.

why would would he need to do that.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 07:37:PM




Why are you shirty ?? Would that be because you DID say such but won't admit it ?


Er, just remind us of how frequently you play that game?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 07:38:PM
Something that is the same size and same shape of the rifle muzzle.  ;D

It is mentioned in the handwritten notes of Fletcher and Vanezis that the marks were caused by the end of the rifle barrel. Yet come trial they were not sure what caused them.  ???
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:42:PM
Why are the guilters so quick to chide all the time ? They come down on you like a ton of bricks !! I don't understand it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 07:45:PM
It is mentioned in the handwritten notes of Fletcher and Vanezis that the marks were caused by the end of the rifle barrel. Yet come trial they were not sure what caused them.  ???

how strange.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 07:48:PM
why would would he need to do that.

Why had/would Bamber burn Nevill's back ? Lots of reasons -


The concensus from both sides is they were burn marks.

Bamber had put Nevill onto a coal scuttle where his bare back was easily available.

Nevill was immobilised.  He would not fight back from the burns.

The aga was next to Nevill.

There were rifles available to heat & use.

Bamber wanted to make sure Nevill was dead for several reasons.

Bamber was composed & calculated enough to calm down after the kitchen fight to do burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had time to burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had to ensure Nevill was dead as Nevill would incriminate him if he survived.

Bamber may have considered this option beforehand if he felt he had to check for life.

If this was considered beforehand by Bamber, he could have brought his own burning item.

The rifle nozzle would take several minutes to heat sufficiently, Bamber could attend to other framing business.

The rifle nozzle would not be damaged after being burnt.

The evidence is Bamber took off the silencer after shooting Sheila. So had the rifle nozzle available to burn Nevill's back. Although as said other rifles were available.

There are no other credible alternative explanations why Nevill would have what experts say are three recent burn marks on his back which are the same size as rifle nozzles.

Burning Nevill's back is an effective way to check for life. A partially concious Nevill would certainly react.

Nevill was only shot 4 times upstairs. Bamber may have burnt Nevill's back prior to or while shooting him again downstairs. Bamber would not have known how many more shots were needed at Nevill after the kitchen fight. Burning his back after 1-4 shots is a way to check for life.

There is no reason why Sheila would burn Nevill's back.

It was impossible for Sheila to lift Nevill.

Sheila did not have the time to burn Nevill's back.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 17, 2018, 07:49:PM
Why are the guilters so quick to chide all the time ? They come down on you like a ton of bricks !! I don't understand it.

Because they have no valid argument. And deep down probably know they are wrong.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 07:51:PM
Because they have no valid argument. And deep down probably know they are wrong.

Crap and there you go again with your inane reverse psychology!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 07:57:PM
Why had/would Bamber burn Nevill's back ? Lots of reasons -


The concensus from both sides is they were burn marks.

Bamber had put Nevill onto a coal scuttle where his bare back was easily available.

Nevill was immobilised.  He would not fight back from the burns.

The aga was next to Nevill.

There were rifles available to heat & use.

Bamber wanted to make sure Nevill was dead for several reasons.

Bamber was composed & calculated enough to calm down after the kitchen fight to do burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had time to burn Nevill's back.

Bamber had to ensure Nevill was dead as Nevill would incriminate him if he survived.

Bamber may have considered this option beforehand if he felt he had to check for life.

If this was considered beforehand by Bamber, he could have brought his own burning item.

The rifle nozzle would take several minutes to heat sufficiently, Bamber could attend to other framing business.

The rifle nozzle would not be damaged after being burnt.

The evidence is Bamber took off the silencer after shooting Sheila. So had the rifle nozzle available to burn Nevill's back. Although as said other rifles were available.

There are no other credible alternative explanations why Nevill would have what experts say are three recent burn marks on his back which are the same size as rifle nozzles.

Burning Nevill's back is an effective way to check for life. A partially concious Nevill would certainly react.

Nevill was only shot 4 times upstairs. Bamber may have burnt Nevill's back prior to or while shooting him again downstairs. Bamber would not have known how many more shots were needed at Nevill after the kitchen fight. Burning his back after 1-4 shots is a way to check for life.

There is no reason why Sheila would burn Nevill's back.

It was impossible for Sheila to lift Nevill.

Sheila did not have the time to burn Nevill's back.

if he had shot him that many times he did not need to make sure he was dead. not many people survive a head shot at point blank that would be all that was needed.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 07:58:PM
Nevile DID NOT fall out of the chair! The chair is tipped sideways and NOT forward and if he had fallen out of the chair sideways (which is hardly likely!), he's had fallen on his side! And Adam said nothing of the sort! I thought you didn't read the RED forum?





I don't read the red forum as such I just saw Adam's post which made me gasp and prompted me to post here. As for other posts, they don't interest me at all.

The chair even tipped sideways would have tipped a dead Nevill to the floor !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 08:00:PM
if he had shot him that many times he did not need to make sure he was dead. not many people survive a head shot at point blank that would be all that was needed.

He shot Nevill 4 times upstairs & Nevill still put up a massive kitchen fight. Bamber had to make sure.

Why else do you believe Bamber lifted Nevill onto the coal scuttle ?

Why else did Nevill have 3 rifle burn marks on his back ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 08:11:PM
He shot Nevill 4 times upstairs & Nevill still put up a massive kitchen fight. Bamber had to make sure.

Why else do you believe Bamber lifted Nevill onto the coal scuttle ?

Why else did Nevill have 3 rifle burn marks on his back ?

well its simple the came from the  riffel.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 08:14:PM




I don't read the red forum as such I just saw Adam's post which made me gasp and prompted me to post here. As for other posts, they don't interest me at all.

The chair even tipped sideways would have tipped a dead Nevill to the floor !!

If you don't read it, how do you know when they're talking about you?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 17, 2018, 08:19:PM
well its simple the came from the  riffel.

Very possible. There were also other rifles available to burn.



Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 08:25:PM




I don't read the red forum as such I just saw Adam's post which made me gasp and prompted me to post here. As for other posts, they don't interest me at all.

The chair even tipped sideways would have tipped a dead Nevill to the floor !!

Of course you don't!  ::)

But he wasn't on the floor, he was perched on the back of the toppled chair - there is no way that he could have been found in that position if he fell out of a chair!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 08:43:PM
Of course you don't!  ::)

But he wasn't on the floor, he was perched on the back of the toppled chair - there is no way that he could have been found in that position if he fell out of a chair!





There's no way with him being dead could he have been " perched " anywhere either. Gravity would have sent him to the floor.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 08:50:PM




There's no way with him being dead could he have been " perched " anywhere either. Gravity would have sent him to the floor.

But that's how he was found Lookout so clearly NOT!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 17, 2018, 09:02:PM




There's no way with him being dead could he have been " perched " anywhere either. Gravity would have sent him to the floor.

Perhaps "wedged" would be a more understandable description?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 17, 2018, 09:03:PM
Assuming that Nevill had not converted to the Muslim faith is there any credible explanation for the way he was found?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 17, 2018, 09:08:PM
This is what I can't get my head around Steve.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 17, 2018, 09:45:PM
Assuming that Nevill had not converted to the Muslim faith is there any credible explanation for the way he was found?

You mean could he have fallen that way 'naturally' - I doubt it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 17, 2018, 10:31:PM
if the notes say it was a riffle but then that coused id have to assume it must of been.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 18, 2018, 12:05:AM
Assuming that Nevill had not converted to the Muslim faith is there any credible explanation for the way he was found?


Yes, he was on his knees then died.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 18, 2018, 02:15:AM
Bamber obviously picked Nevill up to have access to Nevill's bare back and head. It was impossible for Sheila to lift Nevill.

It was not done directly to bareskin. His Pyjama top was poked with the muzzle.


"With hindsight, Vanezis disagrees: ‘I’ve thought about this a lot, with the benefit of another twenty-eight years’ experience. If you put something hot against fairly thick clothing, you’re more likely to burn the skin than the clothing because of the properties of the skin. If you pushed a rifle against someone’s back, that would fit in very nicely with the gun having already been fired and the muzzle still being hot when touching the back.’ He discounts the poker: ‘No, I think it’s the gun pressed against his skin. I don’t think you can read too much into the slight difference in the shape of the marks either. They’re all fairly circular, skin is not totally flat, and the way you hold something is not always the same. My guess is that those marks are the effect of the muzzle of the rifle being prodded against Nevill’s pyjama top whilst he was still alive. The temperature is such that the clothing doesn’t burn. You don’t need a lot of heat for that. Don’t forget that we’re seeing those marks after death, which dries the skin and makes it darker.’"


 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 18, 2018, 02:18:AM
Why had/would Bamber burn Nevill's back ? Lots of reasons -


The concensus from both sides is they were burn marks.

Bamber had put Nevill onto a coal scuttle where his bare back was easily available.


lol Nevills bareskin from his hands legs and face was already uncovered.  Or does Jeremy think this area of the back is designated test for life patch?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 18, 2018, 06:50:AM
It was not done directly to bareskin. His Pyjama top was poked with the muzzle.


"With hindsight, Vanezis disagrees: ‘I’ve thought about this a lot, with the benefit of another twenty-eight years’ experience. If you put something hot against fairly thick clothing, you’re more likely to burn the skin than the clothing because of the properties of the skin. If you pushed a rifle against someone’s back, that would fit in very nicely with the gun having already been fired and the muzzle still being hot when touching the back.’ He discounts the poker: ‘No, I think it’s the gun pressed against his skin. I don’t think you can read too much into the slight difference in the shape of the marks either. They’re all fairly circular, skin is not totally flat, and the way you hold something is not always the same. My guess is that those marks are the effect of the muzzle of the rifle being prodded against Nevill’s pyjama top whilst he was still alive. The temperature is such that the clothing doesn’t burn. You don’t need a lot of heat for that. Don’t forget that we’re seeing those marks after death, which dries the skin and makes it darker.’"


Bamber poking the pyjama top & only the skin getting burnt. That is magic. I'm sure Bamber was not aware of such magic.

Vanezis also agrees it is rifle burn marks. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 18, 2018, 06:54:AM

lol Nevills bareskin from his hands legs and face was already uncovered.  Or does Jeremy think this area of the back is designated test for life patch?


So why did Bamber lift Nevill onto the coal scuttle ?

You agree they are rifle burn marks, so would have to ask Bamber. Burning Nevill's bare feet does not seem as effective as his back.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 08:18:AM
Bamber poking the pyjama top & only the skin getting burnt. That is magic. I'm sure Bamber was not aware of such magic.

Vanezis also agrees it is rifle burn marks.

wich proves that silencer wasn't used and that the silencr was planted.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 18, 2018, 08:21:AM
wich proves that silencer wasn't used and that the silencr was planted.

Perhaps Bamber used the silencer to kill everyone. Then took it off after killing Sheila & before burning Nevill.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 18, 2018, 08:32:AM

So why did Bamber lift Nevill onto the coal scuttle ?

You agree they are rifle burn marks, so would have to ask Bamber. Burning Nevill's bare feet does not seem as effective as his back.
Soles of the feet have many nerve endings and are extremely sensitive. Would have thought that was obvious and would have been a better test.  Not convinced that is the cause of the marks. :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 08:54:AM
Perhaps Bamber used the silencer to kill everyone. Then took it off after killing Sheila & before burning Nevill.

whywould he.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 10:34:AM
Yet we have those who don't believe the muzzle would have been hot enough to cause such burns ?
Which is it to be ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 10:39:AM
Yet we have those who don't believe the muzzle would have been hot enough to cause such burns ?
Which is it to be ??

well thats what the patholgists thought.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 10:42:AM
One of these days we might get to learn the WHOLE truth of this case.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 18, 2018, 11:09:AM
Yet we have those who don't believe the muzzle would have been hot enough to cause such burns ?
Which is it to be ??

Tat's not quite true - it wouldn't be hot enough simply after fireing it but it could be heated.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 11:17:AM
Tat's not quite true - it wouldn't be hot enough simply after fireing it but it could be heated.

can you be sure of that after a hell of lot of bullets wre discharged it could bee that hot.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 11:54:AM
It was a comparatively new rifle so I'm led to believe and would have been a more " heat-resistant " model to its older model ( if this was the one which had been used of course ) There'd been two to choose from or even three ( BRNO, new Anschutz and the Anschutz with a chunk out of it )
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 18, 2018, 12:09:PM
can you be sure of that after a hell of lot of bullets wre discharged it could bee that hot.

It#s not me who is claiming it, it was tested and that was the conclusion.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 18, 2018, 12:10:PM
It was a comparatively new rifle so I'm led to believe and would have been a more " heat-resistant " model to its older model ( if this was the one which had been used of course ) There'd been two to choose from or even three ( BRNO, new Anschutz and the Anschutz with a chunk out of it )

Led to believe by who?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 12:29:PM
well the main is it proves the silencer wasnt used and the silencer was the most important ppart of the proscution without it they they wouldnt of proscuted.

it also proves rwb planted it therefore descrediting all his other evdence.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 18, 2018, 12:36:PM
well the main is it proves the silencer wasnt used and the silencer was the most important ppart of the proscution without it they they wouldnt of proscuted.

it also proves rwb planted it therefore descrediting all his other evdence.


It proves no such thing.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 12:44:PM
Led to believe by who?







By many who'd said that the muzzle wouldn't be hot enough to have caused the burns.

I remember years ago arguing about this as my answer was that because of the continual firing in the frenzied manner in which it had been that the muzzle would naturally have been hot but I was quickly shouted down and told that it wouldn't have " overheated " ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 12:51:PM
Was the rifle, which was found by Davison/Davidson in the kitchen,ever tested for heating by Aga ?  Or shown any signs of having been heated, as metal does ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 18, 2018, 01:27:PM
It is quite a straight forward scenario after the kitchen fight -


Nevill was immobilised after his 4 shots & kitchen fight.

Bamber went straight upstairs to finsh everything off.

After shooting Sheila, the silencer was taken off. Which was either pre planned or Bamber realised at the time it needed to be.

After having to shoot June 2 more times upstairs, he decided to shoot Nevill 4 more times in the head.

Nevill was lifted and put onto the coal scuttle to give Bamber access to Nevill's head and bare back.

Nevill was shot and burned 4 & 3 times.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 18, 2018, 02:03:PM
Nevill was a heavyweight to move half- alive or dead so how to you think he was moved without showing pressure marks in doing so ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 18, 2018, 02:19:PM

It proves no such thing.

of course it does if the silencer was on the riffel then it couldent of burned neviles back.

if they silencr wasnt used then rwb must of planted it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 19, 2018, 07:54:AM
Bamber poking the pyjama top & only the skin getting burnt. That is magic. I'm sure Bamber was not aware of such magic.
 


Look Adam. clothes do not get burned when you iron them! Its magic!


(https://d1bwyguot0k3jj.cloudfront.net/medialibrary/2016/06/step-9-iron-the-rest-of-the-shirt.gif)




Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 12:30:PM

Look Adam. clothes do not get burned when you iron them! Its magic!


(https://d1bwyguot0k3jj.cloudfront.net/medialibrary/2016/06/step-9-iron-the-rest-of-the-shirt.gif)

They do if you don't keep it moving or it's too hot
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 12:30:PM
of course it does if the silencer was on the riffel then it couldent of burned neviles back.

if they silencr wasnt used then rwb must of planted it.

Why?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 19, 2018, 12:38:PM
if the silencer was on the riffle the riffle barrel would not of touched neviles skin would it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 12:59:PM
if the silencer was on the riffle the riffle barrel would not of touched neviles skin would it.

No, why must (specifically) RWB have planted the silence? Why must it have been him?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 19, 2018, 01:08:PM
They do if you don't keep it moving or it's too hot

That is correct. To cause the marks on Nevill's back, Bamber would have spent several seconds burning Nevill's back. Burning through Nevill's pyjamas.

Anyway Nevill was in the perfect position for Bamber to fire 4 more head shots & lift up Nevill's pyjama top. After Bamber had lifted Nevill onto the coal scuttle.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 19, 2018, 01:12:PM
Bamber would want to hide Nevill's burns & hope they were not really noticed by anyone.

Burning Nevill is not something a 'crazy' Sheila had the time or was calculated enough to do. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 19, 2018, 01:17:PM
if the silencer was on the riffle the riffle barrel would not of touched neviles skin would it.

It is inconclusive whether Bamber burned Nevill's back with or without the silencer attached. Bamber claims without, but he would say that.

It is also inconclusive whether Bamber burned Nevill before or after shooting Sheila.

What is conclusive is Bamber took the silencer off after shooting Sheila for an obvious reason.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 19, 2018, 01:18:PM
No, why must (specifically) RWB have planted the silence? Why must it have been him?

well hes the only credible suspect the polie dident plant becouse they dident find it rwb was the man who kicked up all the fuss abut it.

if jeremy dident use it and the burns i think prove he dident then it had to have been planted.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 19, 2018, 01:32:PM
well hes the only credible suspect the polie dident plant becouse they dident find it rwb was the man who kicked up all the fuss abut it.

if jeremy dident use it and the burns i think prove he dident then it had to have been planted.

Do you believe it possible that Bamber shot Sheila, took the silencer off, then burned Nevill's back ?

The burns may have been caused with the silencer attached, or by another rifle. No one knows. 

Either way, Bamber took off the silencer after shooting Sheila, to ensure the suicide stage was possible.

The only concensus is they are burn marks caused on the night after Bamber lifted Nevill onto the coal scuttle to shoot his head.  Specifically when during the massacre & what burning item was used, only Bamber knows.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 02:04:PM
well hes the only credible suspect the polie dident plant becouse they dident find it rwb was the man who kicked up all the fuss abut it.

if jeremy dident use it and the burns i think prove he dident then it had to have been planted.

So you're 'speculating'?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 19, 2018, 02:44:PM
So you're 'speculating'?

well it could of been the eatons i suppose but then agian you dont need to prove who planted to descredit it as evdence just that it was planted and i think thats been done.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Roch on July 19, 2018, 03:01:PM
So you're 'speculating'?

If you're a person who believes it's a bogus exhibit, then you have to come to an acceptance that one or more prosecution witnesses had involvement, in some form, alongside any officials that were involved.  I suppose you're right - it is speculation to try and pinpoint who and I tend to regard it as some kind of 'joint venture'. 

I personally suspect DB has involvement.  Unlike some others, he's vocal in the media, as if he's a stakeholder in the conviction (because of his previous actions).

   
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 19, 2018, 03:13:PM
of course if it was rwb he couldent be proscuted but sombody else could be.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 19, 2018, 05:15:PM
Nevill was a heavyweight to move half- alive or dead so how to you think he was moved without showing pressure marks in doing so ?






Nobody would have moved Nevill from the chair ! If he'd been sitting leant forward he'd have fallen forward landing head first as he was, in RM. He'd have been found on the floor hitting the scuttle as he went down.

There were cushions found on the floor and also towels, both covering/mopping up the blood which was there, which means that if Nevill had stayed seated blood would have covered the front of his jacket
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 06:38:PM





Nobody would have moved Nevill from the chair ! If he'd been sitting leant forward he'd have fallen forward landing head first as he was, in RM. He'd have been found on the floor hitting the scuttle as he went down.

There were cushions found on the floor and also towels, both covering/mopping up the blood which was there, which means that if Nevill had stayed seated blood would have covered the front of his jacket

And how would he have hit the coal scuttle from that position Lookout - having initially being sat in the chair.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 19, 2018, 06:50:PM
And how would he have hit the coal scuttle from that position Lookout - having initially being sat in the chair.






As I said, with falling forward.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 19, 2018, 06:53:PM
Do we know whereabouts LM was in Nevill's body ? At which point in his body had it collected ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 19, 2018, 09:21:PM
Do we know whereabouts LM was in Nevill's body ? At which point in his body had it collected ?

Yes - it was consistent with his position so he didn't fall off a chair while in full rigor.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 07:32:AM
So what was his position ? It tells us nothing does it ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 20, 2018, 11:57:AM
So what was his position ? It tells us nothing does it ?

Personally, I think it gives more weight to the notion of scene staging.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 12:39:PM
Personally, I think it gives more weight to the notion of scene staging.






By someone with the mental strength to do so,perhaps ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 12:41:PM
Which brings me back to what I'd said a few days ago about Nevill having been murdered many hours before anyone else given his appearance of RM ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 20, 2018, 12:53:PM





By someone with the mental strength to do so,perhaps ?

Nevil probably fell in a similar position to how he was found but (to me), someone has used the chair, the wall and the scuttle to help maintain the postion of the body. Not sure what you mean by 'mental strength'? The person killed people in cold blood, moving a body or displaying it would be a walk in the park.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 01:33:PM
Nevil probably fell in a similar position to how he was found but (to me), someone has used the chair, the wall and the scuttle to help maintain the postion of the body. Not sure what you mean by 'mental strength'? The person killed people in cold blood, moving a body or displaying it would be a walk in the park.






Anyone moving a dead body in such a position would NEED both mental and physical strength and the more mentally focussed the more the physical strength.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 01:39:PM
Nevill's " dead weight " would certainly not have been " a walk in the park ". Ever tried lifting a dead body his size ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 01:41:PM
I'd like to have known where the main point of his LM began. This would then give you the true position in which he'd died as you know the blood settles at the lowest point to where a body was found.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 01:43:PM
Unlike the others he wasn't on his back ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 20, 2018, 02:02:PM
It is mentioned in the handwritten notes of Fletcher and Vanezis that the marks were caused by the end of the rifle barrel. Yet come trial they were not sure what caused them.  ???

Actually I was wrong about Vanezis notes. He refers to the marks on Nevills arm being caused by the end of the rifle barrel.

He writes

"There is a collection of bruises on right forearm
_____ Of end of barrel of rifle
Area of bruising 2"x 4"
"


The marks on his back are probably mentioned in parts that I gave up on trying to work out.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 02:36:PM
Bruising would have occurred during the dragging in position of the poor man.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 02:38:PM
The stripes of blood on Sheila's arm could have come from a bleeding Nevill as she'd tried to position him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 02:40:PM
Was he then positioned to prevent entry into the farmhouse ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 20, 2018, 02:53:PM
Anyone moving a dead body in such a position would NEED both mental and physical strength and the more mentally focussed the more the physical strength.

Bamber has both!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 20, 2018, 02:55:PM
Was he then positioned to prevent entry into the farmhouse ?

He wasn't anywhere near the door!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 03:19:PM
Bamber has both!





He'll be physically stronger now but I doubt he could have punched his way out of a wet paper bag in his younger years. Same goes for his mental strength-----do you doubt that of 27 psychiatrists ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 03:20:PM
He wasn't anywhere near the door!






I understood there being difficulty in entering ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 20, 2018, 03:23:PM
The stripes of blood on Sheila's arm could have come from a bleeding Nevill as she'd tried to position him.

Nobody moved Nevill.

I have seen footage of people killed and falling in such positions. One being a guy at fruit market and his head lands on a box of apples. Body is in same position as Nevills.

If you want me to post it, Just ask.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 20, 2018, 03:48:PM
Nevill would have had to have been wedged somehow to stop him falling forward as the top half of the body is naturally more solid  and heavier than the bottom half. He would have been on the floor at some point in a forward position for blood to have pooled on the floor because there was no such volume of blood on himself considering the damage to the head where most of the blood would have come from.

I don't understand it at all as the large pool of blood isn't near the position of his head.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 20, 2018, 10:30:PM
If you're a person who believes it's a bogus exhibit, then you have to come to an acceptance that one or more prosecution witnesses had involvement, in some form, alongside any officials that were involved.  I suppose you're right - it is speculation to try and pinpoint who and I tend to regard it as some kind of 'joint venture'. 

I personally suspect DB has involvement.  Unlike some others, he's vocal in the media, as if he's a stakeholder in the conviction (because of his previous actions).
   


Robert Boutflour mentions the silencer striking the mantle-shelf in his diary. This was long before Brain Elliot at huntingdon labratory confirmed this via microscopic examination.

Ann Eaton mentions what appeared to be coagulated blood on the silencer. Had that blood been there since the 7th of august, there is no way you can tell its blood by simply looking at it. It would appear like dark rust by that time.

In late August, Robert Boutflour tells Barlow that he thinks Jeremy used Sheila's tampons in the lounge to clean the silencer after the killings. (tampons are designed to absorb blood and are shaped like a tube). Thus he is insinuating at there is or was blood inside the silencer at some point. This was before the silencer was dismantled and blood was found inside.

They know too much, and know before even the folks at the lab know it. The only logical explanation is they created it in the first place.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 12:40:AM
Nevill would have had to have been wedged somehow to stop him falling forward as the top half of the body is naturally more solid  and heavier than the bottom half. He would have been on the floor at some point in a forward position for blood to have pooled on the floor because there was no such volume of blood on himself considering the damage to the head where most of the blood would have come from.

I don't understand it at all as the large pool of blood isn't near the position of his head.

The blood from his head has ran down the coal scuttle and pooled on the floor.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 21, 2018, 07:11:AM
It is good that everyone agrees that Sheila did not pick up Nevill.

Nugs is now going for a technicality. Saying if Bamber burnt Nevill's back without the silencer, it means RB fabricated it. This is wrong, but good luck in trying to prove what Bamber used to burn Nevill's back.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 21, 2018, 07:18:AM

Robert Boutflour mentions the silencer striking the mantle-shelf in his diary. This was long before Brain Elliot at huntingdon labratory confirmed this via microscopic examination.

Ann Eaton mentions what appeared to be coagulated blood on the silencer. Had that blood been there since the 7th of august, there is no way you can tell its blood by simply looking at it. It would appear like dark rust by that time.

In late August, Robert Boutflour tells Barlow that he thinks Jeremy used Sheila's tampons in the lounge to clean the silencer after the killings. (tampons are designed to absorb blood and are shaped like a tube). Thus he is insinuating at there is or was blood inside the silencer at some point. This was before the silencer was dismantled and blood was found inside.

They know too much, and know before even the folks at the lab know it. The only logical explanation is they created it in the first place.

AE & RB found the silencer. It had what looked like blood & paint in. They already suspected Bamber.

I don't see what the big deal is about them having opinions beforehand. They didn't either & wrote it in their diaries which everyone has seen.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 21, 2018, 07:25:AM
Nobody moved Nevill.

I have seen footage of people killed and falling in such positions. One being a guy at fruit market and his head lands on a box of apples. Body is in same position as Nevills.

If you want me to post it, Just ask.

David, you know a 6.4, 16 stone man would not fall into a kneeling position, his head delicately & perfectly  placed on fop of a small light coal scuttle which has a tiny surface area. In the heat of a feroucious high tempo fight.

Bamber obviously put Nevill in that position so he could shoot him in the head another 4 times & burn his available bare back 3 times.

A box of apples is much heavier, has a much larger surface area and would not be knocked over.

But good that you agree Nevill's three back marks are burn marks & that Sheila couldn't lift Nevill.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 11:04:AM





I understood there being difficulty in entering ?

Because it was locked!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 11:08:AM
David, you know a 6.4, 16 stone man would not fall into a kneeling position, his head delicately & perfectly  placed on fop of a small light coal scuttle which has a tiny surface area. In the heat of a feroucious high tempo fight.

Bamber obviously put Nevill in that position so he could shoot him in the head another 4 times & burn his available bare back 3 times.

A box of apples is much heavier, has a much larger surface area and would not be knocked over.

But good that you agree Nevill's three back marks are burn marks & that Sheila couldn't lift Nevill.

Certain items (chair and coal scuttle) were used as 'props' in order to maintain the position.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 21, 2018, 11:56:AM
JB wouldn't have positioned anything in such a way as to " seal " himself inside the farmhouse.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 21, 2018, 12:01:PM
JB wouldn't have positioned anything in such a way as to " seal " himself inside the farmhouse.


Certainly he wouldn't. The windows weren't sealed.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 12:37:PM
JB wouldn't have positioned anything in such a way as to " seal " himself inside the farmhouse.

Nevil wasn't positioned near the door and Bamber didn't leave via it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 21, 2018, 01:59:PM
Nevil wasn't positioned near the door and Bamber didn't leave via it.






How are you saying that he left ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 02:10:PM





How are you saying that he left ?

I think he left via the bathroom window - the one he used after the murders.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 21, 2018, 02:18:PM
I think he left via the bathroom window - the one he used after the murders.






Only think ? Surely you have to be certain about that when you say he's guilty ? Was there any other way ? What was the indicator that he'd supposedly left by the bathroom window ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 21, 2018, 02:20:PM
What time was that and how did he get back home ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 21, 2018, 02:46:PM


Only think ? Surely you have to be certain about that when you say he's guilty ? Was there any other way ? What was the indicator that he'd supposedly left by the bathroom window ?

The bathroom window was found secured from the inside by Taff Jones around 9am. Furthermore Barlow could not even close it from the outside. Hence why the Kitchen window was chosen.


If Jeremy did leave via this window. It would mean Jeremy instructed Sheila to close and secure it behind him. And Jeremy has convinced Sheila to shoot herself later when the police arrive.


Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 21, 2018, 03:10:PM
The bathroom window was found secured from the inside by Taff Jones around 9am. Furthermore Barlow could not even close it from the outside. Hence why the Kitchen window was chosen.


If Jeremy did leave via this window. It would mean Jeremy instructed Sheila to close and secure it behind him. And Jeremy has convinced Sheila to shoot herself later when the police arrive.
It's not clear whether the kitchen window catch was stiff enough to allow the window to be closed fully. https://twitter.com/Bambertweets/status/1002873617485582337
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 21, 2018, 03:11:PM
It's not clear whether the kitchen window catch was stiff enough to allow the window to be closed fully. https://twitter.com/Bambertweets/status/1002873617485582337

I was talking about the bathroom window
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 21, 2018, 03:28:PM
I was talking about the bathroom window







You said the kitchen window would be used in preference to the bathroom one ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 21, 2018, 03:34:PM
When you say bathroom window I assume you  mean the downstairs shower room where some of the guns were kept?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 06:13:PM
The bathroom window was found secured from the inside by Taff Jones around 9am. Furthermore Barlow could not even close it from the outside. Hence why the Kitchen window was chosen.


If Jeremy did leave via this window. It would mean Jeremy instructed Sheila to close and secure it behind him. And Jeremy has convinced Sheila to shoot herself later when the police arrive.

Rubbish, it's a sash window which can be locked using string. He used the same window after the murders!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 21, 2018, 06:14:PM





Only think ? Surely you have to be certain about that when you say he's guilty ? Was there any other way ? What was the indicator that he'd supposedly left by the bathroom window ?

Because he used it before. How can I be certain when I wasn't there? Don't be silly!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 22, 2018, 08:46:AM
Rubbish, it's a sash window which can be locked using string. He used the same window after the murders!






String ? You'd have to use something far less pliable in order to shift a sash window lock from the outside as besides the age of the locking system you also have the stiffness of new paint making the lock less efficient.

Sliding a penknife underneath from outside will open a sash window so I imagine it would be the same in securing it closed--------------but never string.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 22, 2018, 11:02:AM





String ? You'd have to use something far less pliable in order to shift a sash window lock from the outside as besides the age of the locking system you also have the stiffness of new paint making the lock less efficient.

Sliding a penknife underneath from outside will open a sash window so I imagine it would be the same in securing it closed--------------but never string.

Not to open it - to CLOSE it from the outside! We KNOW he can enter via that window - he did so after the murders and he admitted to being able to do so. Closing a sash is easy - you just need a piee of string.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 22, 2018, 02:15:PM
The same device was used in Hercule Poirot's Christmas.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 22, 2018, 03:00:PM
I can't even begin to visualise how " easy " it would have been using string ?------knowing what these latches/catches are and how they operate.
The old lever catches of the Georgian/Victorian properties are also fitted with a " stop " to lock-in the lever or/and a screw-down bolt on the inside making it secure so that entry can't be gained from the outside-----even using a penknife.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 22, 2018, 04:55:PM
I can't even begin to visualise how " easy " it would have been using string ?------knowing what these latches/catches are and how they operate.
The old lever catches of the Georgian/Victorian properties are also fitted with a " stop " to lock-in the lever or/and a screw-down bolt on the inside making it secure so that entry can't be gained from the outside-----even using a penknife.

There is NO QUESTION that Bamber could enter the house using the bathroom window - HE DID! FACT!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 22, 2018, 06:31:PM
There is NO QUESTION that Bamber could enter the house using the bathroom window - HE DID! FACT!





After the murders ? Yes ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 22, 2018, 06:35:PM




After the murders ? Yes ?
But doesn't this smack of trying to cover his tracks..
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 22, 2018, 06:46:PM




After the murders ? Yes ?

Didn't he make a point of saying that he'd gained entry that way when he was younger?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 22, 2018, 06:47:PM
But doesn't this smack of trying to cover his tracks..


No. It told them it was no big thing. Something he was used to doing.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 22, 2018, 07:03:PM




After the murders ? Yes ?

Which PROVES he knew how to get in!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 22, 2018, 07:06:PM

No. It told them it was no big thing. Something he was used to doing.

I think his main reason for doing this was to say 'yes, I can get in, but I can't lock the window after I leave'. Hence the note to BW to lock the window - it's so easy to lock the latch using the string and no one would ever know!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 22, 2018, 07:25:PM
Which PROVES he knew how to get in!





He'd already told the world and his wife that he used to get in through a window--------as well as one or two others who used to do the same but it doesn't mean that he got in this way on the night of the murders or that he was even there at all does it ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 12:17:AM




He'd already told the world and his wife that he used to get in through a window--------as well as one or two others who used to do the same but it doesn't mean that he got in this way on the night of the murders or that he was even there at all does it ?

No, but it adds weight to the possibility!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 10:23:AM
Didn't he make a point of saying that he'd gained entry that way when he was younger?






I already stated that. Reply 490.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 10:25:AM
Which PROVES he knew how to get in!






It doesn't PROVE that he committed the murders though,does it ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 23, 2018, 10:28:AM





I already stated that.






After the murders ? Yes ?


Your above words do NOT read as if you're acknowledging that he gained entry, via the window, PRIOR to the murders.


Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 10:36:AM


Your above words do NOT read as if you're acknowledging that he gained entry, via the window, PRIOR to the murders.






It depends how you interpret it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 23, 2018, 10:41:AM





It depends how you interpret it.






After the murders ? Yes ?

Never mind reply 490. Your earlier post leaves no room for misinterpretation.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 10:54:AM

Never mind reply 490. Your earlier post leaves no room for misinterpretation.






That's your problem ! I haven't/didn't ever deny that he never entered the property via a window--------along with others who knew the " route ".
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 12:15:PM





It doesn't PROVE that he committed the murders though,does it ?


No, but it adds weight to the possibility!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 12:26:PM

No, but it adds weight to the possibility!






" Possibility " is no use in a court of law-------not in my books anyway. He did or he didn't it's that simple
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 12:32:PM





" Possibility " is no use in a court of law-------not in my books anyway. He did or he didn't it's that simple

You KNOW it adds weight which is why you're peddling like hell to TRY and reduce the impact. It's what you always do. The window incident wasn't the ONKY evidence it added weight to the rest and for someone who made their mind up on intution, the above statement is a bit rich!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 12:43:PM
You KNOW it adds weight which is why you're peddling like hell to TRY and reduce the impact. It's what you always do. The window incident wasn't the ONKY evidence it added weight to the rest and for someone who made their mind up on intution, the above statement is a bit rich!





" Intuition " has differing meanings indifferent individuals------rightly or wrongly.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 12:48:PM




" Intuition " has differing meanings indifferent individuals------rightly or wrongly.

It only has one meaning.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 12:51:PM
It only has one meaning.






But from person to person it can have a different meaning, unless you think we're all clones  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 12:53:PM
My intuition is different from yours----------understand, comprendre, capire, ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 23, 2018, 01:27:PM
Rubbish, it's a sash window which can be locked using string. He used the same window after the murders!

Locking the windows inside from the outside with a piece of string in the darkness of the night sounds like rubbish to me. The only downstairs light reported as being on was the kitchen light.

Torch in one hand, string in the other seems rather implausible also
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 23, 2018, 01:28:PM
My intuition is different from yours----------understand, comprendre, capire, ?


Intuition is intuition is intuition. Intuition is instinctive thinking which negates the need for reasoned thought. It therefore cannot differ from person to person.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 01:30:PM





But from person to person it can have a different meaning, unless you think we're all clones  ::)

No, it STILL only has one meaning!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 01:32:PM
Locking the windows inside from the outside with a piece of string in the darkness of the night sounds like rubbish to me. The only downstairs light reported as being on was the kitchen light.

Torch in one hand, string in the other seems rather implausible also

It doesn't really matter what it sounds like to you - it CAN be done and very easily too! You've added the torch into the mix  :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 23, 2018, 01:34:PM

Intuition is intuition is intuition. Intuition is instinctive thinking which negates the need for reasoned thought. It therefore cannot differ from person to person.

Maybe it's just Lookout's intuition that's different - we're all not worthy!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 01:38:PM

Intuition is intuition is intuition. Intuition is instinctive thinking which negates the need for reasoned thought. It therefore cannot differ from person to person.





It also includes gut-feeling !!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 01:39:PM
Why don't you carry-on like this on the red forum ?? It's always puzzled me.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 23, 2018, 01:39:PM
It doesn't really matter what it sounds like to you - it CAN be done and very easily too!

If its that easy can you please upload a video demonstration to youtube?

You've added the torch into the mix  :-\


Its dark. You need to be able to see what you are doing.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 23, 2018, 01:41:PM




It also includes gut-feeling !!


Gut-feeling is instinct or intuition as opposed to opinion based on fact.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 23, 2018, 01:43:PM
How would he hold the torch while fiddling with a piece of string ?  :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 12:39:AM
If its that easy can you please upload a video demonstration to youtube?


Its dark. You need to be able to see what you are doing.

Were you there David? Do you know how dark it was? No you don't! Just been down to the shed, managed to find my way there and back, unlock and lock it and guess what? NO TORCH!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 12:40:AM
How would he hold the torch while fiddling with a piece of string ?  :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

No fiddling required Lookout and NO TORCH either!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 24, 2018, 08:59:AM
No fiddling required Lookout and NO TORCH either!

 Supporters appear to infer that, as the 'deed' suggested by guilters, was a spur of the moment decision on Jeremy's part, it couldn't have happened because too many obstacles would have prevented it. I'm inclined to think it was something carried out, from a start point of fantasy, to a place where it all came together like a perfect storm, with (almost) military precision.He'd certainly have been dreaming of circumstances occurring which would allow for it to come together.

It's not unlikely that the 'fantasy' became a 'necessity' during Sheila's last spell in hospital. It was probably hard enough to swallow that her freedom/family was being funded by Nevill, but exorbitant private hospital fees, too? If he envisaged years of this, he'd not only see his inheritance dwindle, he'd see himself as having to work to pay for it. There may never be an end to it.......................and then, miraculously, it all started to fall into place. His fantasy may have needed no more adjustment than a bit of tweaking to make it happen.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 24, 2018, 12:25:PM
No fiddling required Lookout and NO TORCH either!

I look forward to the video demonstration.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 01:56:PM
I look forward to the video demonstration.

I did think about making a video, then I thought about all of the odd-balls and thought better of it. I'll show you how it works and you can try it yourself - there will be no video's of me on this or any other forum.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 24, 2018, 02:19:PM
I did think about making a video, then I thought about all of the odd-balls and thought better of it. I'll show you how it works and you can try it yourself - there will be no video's of me on this or any other forum.


In other words. It can't be done.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 03:12:PM

In other words. It can't be done.

You live in a dream world - it can be EASILY done, go try it yourself. I'd never put a video of myself on the forum because of people like you. Too many cranks. Nothing stopping you from trying it yourself though! Crack on!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 24, 2018, 03:46:PM
Locking the windows inside from the outside with a piece of string in the darkness of the night sounds like rubbish to me. The only downstairs light reported as being on was the kitchen light.

Torch in one hand, string in the other seems rather implausible also

it would be bloody hard i think
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 04:21:PM
it would be bloody hard i think

But it's not
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 24, 2018, 04:23:PM
But it's not

well maybe not for you but for most people it would be.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 24, 2018, 09:17:PM
well maybe not for you but for most people it would be.

No really, it's VERY easy!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 24, 2018, 11:57:PM
No really, it's VERY easy!

i couldent do it.

why do you think the torch was invented.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 12:07:AM
i couldent do it.

why do you think the torch was invented.

How do you know? You don't even know what's involved!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 25, 2018, 12:21:AM
How do you know? You don't even know what's involved!

if everyfody could find there way about perfectly in the dark they wouldent of invnted the torch would thyy
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 07:20:AM
if everyfody could find there way about perfectly in the dark they wouldent of invnted the torch would thyy

Dear God, can your posts get any more inane?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 11:51:AM
if everyfody could find there way about perfectly in the dark they wouldent of invnted the torch would thyy

I believe the hall light was on!-Funny though isn't it, it's perfectly logical for a woman in the throws of psychosis to be able to use a semi-automatic rifle that she has never used before. One which needed her to locate the magazine, attach it and chamber a shot before it could be used.  Howeever, it's a complicated processs to loop a piece of string around a catch and pull it - when talking about Bamber. You people!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 25, 2018, 12:05:PM
I believe the hall light was on!-Funny though isn't it, it's perfectly logical for a woman in the throws of psychosis to be able to use a semi-automatic rifle that she has never used before. One which needed her to locate the magazine, attach it and chamber a shot before it could be used.  Howeever, it's a complicated processs to loop a piece of string around a catch and pull it - when talking about Bamber. You people!  ;D ;D ;D ;D

there have been plenty of cases of it happening psychosis doesnt prevent you from loading and firing a gun and theres absluty no evdence she hadent before.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 03:23:PM
there have been plenty of cases of it happening psychosis doesnt prevent you from loading and firing a gun and theres absluty evdence she hadent before.

You're right, she hadn't fired that gun before so wouldn't know that it required a magazine and once fitted, that the first shot needed to be chambered!

Mean while, Jeremy can't function when it's a bit dark!  ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 25, 2018, 03:34:PM
there have been plenty of cases of it happening psychosis doesnt prevent you from loading and firing a gun and theres absluty evdence she hadent before.
Are these people in psychosis during the act and do they remember what they did afterwards?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 03:37:PM
Are these people in psychosis during the act and do they remember what they did afterwards?

And during psychosis, are they capable of those practical and intellectual tasks which they've never previously been capable of?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 25, 2018, 04:00:PM
And during psychosis, are they capable of those practical and intellectual tasks which they've never previously been capable of?
As far as I am aware someone diagnosed as Schizophrenic suffer from delusions and hallucinations
 They would be in such  a state for at least 6 months.  They would not be aware they are psychotic but would believe their own delusions and hallucinations which could cause them to behave in strange and irrational ways.   I would guess they would remember there actions as in their head they would be rightly reacting to their delusion or hallucination.  :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 04:09:PM
As far as I am aware someone diagnosed as Schizophrenic suffer from delusions and hallucinations
 They would be in such  a state for at least 6 months.  They would not be aware they are psychotic but would believe their own delusions and hallucinations which could cause them to behave in strange and irrational ways.   I would guess they would remember there actions as in their head they would be rightly reacting to their delusion or hallucination.  :-\

But supposing such tasks had previously never been attempted? ie WE can Goggle it/read a recipe book/instruction manual...................
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 25, 2018, 04:25:PM
But supposing such tasks had previously never been attempted? ie WE can Goggle it/read a recipe book/instruction manual...................
I would guess it would be the same for them as anyone else.  If in  a  temper frenzy would be very hit and mias and depend how complicated the lit was.  If calm and determined probably more chance of success again depending how complicated it was to use.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 25, 2018, 04:31:PM
But supposing such tasks had previously never been attempted? ie WE can Goggle it/read a recipe book/instruction manual...................
People who are psychotic do bizarre things even when stabalised on mrdication.  I know someone who is highly qualified and holds down a job, although she changes it about every 6 months? but her home life and personal life is chaotic and she exhibits bizarre unpredictable behavour.   To her she is fine.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 04:50:PM
People who are psychotic do bizarre things even when stabalised on mrdication.  I know someone who is highly qualified and holds down a job, although she changes it about every 6 months? but her home life and personal life is chaotic and she exhibits bizarre unpredictable behavour.   To her she is fine.

Yes, there are wide variations in all illnesses. My late partner was definitely on the autistic spectrum, but Concorde flew courtesy of equipment he'd designed, and our latest, and only recently launched warship was the last project he worked on prior to his death. However, a friend's 25 year old grandson who is also autistic, lives in self contained accommodation -by choice- in the grounds of his parents' home and still wets the bed. Sheila never qualified at anything. Nor did she hold down a job.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 25, 2018, 05:40:PM
You're right, she hadn't fired that gun before so wouldn't know that it required a magazine and once fitted, that the first shot needed to be chambered!

Mean while, Jeremy can't function when it's a bit dark!  ::)

theres the relatives word she hadent found it befor.

and even if she hadent you only need to oberserve somone else doig it to work it out.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 25, 2018, 05:45:PM
Are these people in psychosis during the act and do they remember what they did afterwards?

happens in amerca all the time chris kyle the amercan a man with psychosis shot hime stone dead.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 05:59:PM
theres the relatives word she hadent found it befor.

and even if she hadent you only need to oberserve somone else doig it to work it out.


So, let me get this straight. MOST people, according to and including you, couldn't do it -whatever it was you were talking about- HOWEVER, again, according to you, "you only need to observe someone else doing it to work it out"!!! Make your mind up.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 06:25:PM
theres the relatives word she hadent found it befor.

and even if she hadent you only need to oberserve somone else doig it to work it out.

As opposed to who's?

But pulling sting when it's a bit dark is beyond your capability?  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 25, 2018, 06:37:PM
As opposed to who's?

But pulling sting when it's a bit dark is beyond your capability?  ;D ;D


EH!!! Was he really saying he couldn't pull a piece of string in the dark when he said he and others couldn't do it :o :o :o
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 06:44:PM

EH!!! Was he really saying he couldn't pull a piece of string in the dark when he said he and others couldn't do it :o :o :o

Yep - unbelievable eh?  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mat on July 25, 2018, 10:59:PM
Yep - unbelievable eh?  ;D ;D ;D ;D

It's an odd point on contention - considering who admits they've entered the house via the windows after the murders and in the past.  :-\
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 25, 2018, 11:04:PM
It's an odd point on contention - considering who admits they've entered the house via the windows after the murders and in the past.  :-\

Must have been 'flood lit' though Mat  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 26, 2018, 01:38:AM
It's an odd point on contention - considering who admits they've entered the house via the windows after the murders and in the past.  :-\

That is not the point here. Caroline is peddling the idea that after the murders Jeremy closed and secured the bathroom sash window from the outside using a bit of string.


I don't know how this is supposed to work. Hence I asked for a video.

Only plausible method is banging a casement window IMO.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 26, 2018, 01:43:AM
That is not the point here. Caroline is peddling the idea that after the murders Jeremy closed and secured the bathroom sash window from the outside using a bit of string.


I don't know how this is supposed to work. Hence I asked for a video.

Only plausible method is banging a casement window IMO.

Then you would be WRONG!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 26, 2018, 05:04:AM
Then you would be WRONG!

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 26, 2018, 11:53:AM
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Then that's most of what you post BUT, it's quite simple David, an old sash window is made up of two frames; the top frame is in front of the bottom Frame. The locks sit on top of the lower sash and the bottom of the upper sash. There are various locks that were used (examples below). The screw type is basically just a pivot screw fitted to the bottom of the top frame. The catch (screw part) pivots back and forth and can be secured using the grove fitting which is fixed onto the top of the lower frame. To open it, you would simply make sure that it isn't screwed tighly. All you would need to do to open the window, is use something like a errrr a 'hacksaw' blade pushed up between the two frames and knock the catch out. To lock it (or give the impression that it is secured) is loop a piece of string around the pivot screw open the bottom sash keeping hold of the string, climb out of the window, close the sash and pull the strng free. You may even be able to bang this lock into place but the lock would be very loose; using the string, it can be made tighter because the string will create extra force to pull it into the groove. It works with a similar catch - see below, which is similar to the one I used and you would never know it had been locked from outside.

The window at WHF was old and probably a ittle loose, making it easier to perform the above. I'm not sure why you want to dismiss the posibility! I've tried it, I KNOW it's possible - you can buy the locks and make a mock frame and string is cheap as chips! You could even try it in the dark - but be careful though  - you may need a net!  ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 26, 2018, 03:52:PM
Made a video and sent it to NGB  ;)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: ngb1066 on July 26, 2018, 04:13:PM
Made a video and sent it to NGB  ;)

I have just viewed the video made by Caroline.  It does demonstrate that a sash catch of the type shown in Caroline's previous post can be closed using a piece of string.  I think it would require that the window was not a very tight fit in its frame.  There needs to be sufficient space for the string to be retrieved, although the space required would not be a lot.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 26, 2018, 04:57:PM
I have just viewed the video made by Caroline.  It does demonstrate that a sash catch of the type shown in Caroline's previous post can be closed using a piece of string.  I think it would require that the window was not a very tight fit in its frame.  There needs to be sufficient space for the string to be retrieved, although the space required would not be a lot.

Thanks Neil :)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 26, 2018, 07:29:PM
I believe Caroline is the only poster who believes Bamber exited out of the bathroom window. Using a piece of string in the dark. This is a brand new theory which has only been suggested recently.

The evidence , witnesses & prosecution claim is that Bamber exited through the kitchen window. But nothing wrong with Bamber having two options.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 26, 2018, 09:46:PM
I have just viewed the video made by Caroline.  It does demonstrate that a sash catch of the type shown in Caroline's previous post can be closed using a piece of string.  I think it would require that the window was not a very tight fit in its frame.  There needs to be sufficient space for the string to be retrieved, although the space required would not be a lot.
Do we know this was the case at White House Farm?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 26, 2018, 10:35:PM
The fingerprint dust is mentioned in Julie's statement here (Sheet 14). http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1932.0.html
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 26, 2018, 10:37:PM
I have just viewed the video made by Caroline.  It does demonstrate that a sash catch of the type shown in Caroline's previous post can be closed using a piece of string.  I think it would require that the window was not a very tight fit in its frame.  There needs to be sufficient space for the string to be retrieved, although the space required would not be a lot.


Does the video show the string fastening the latch into position to secure the window once the window is closed?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 26, 2018, 11:05:PM

Does the video show the string fastening the latch into position to secure the window once the window is closed?

Yes it does! I didn't use a window - you don't need to - it's the principle of how you work the catch. Of course I could find window and still prove you wrong. Or you can go find your own and try a find  way to NOT make it work  ::). I knew you would look for an excuse  ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 26, 2018, 11:50:PM
Yes it does! I didn't use a window - you don't need to - it's the principle of how you work the catch. Of course I could find window and still prove you wrong. Or you can go find your own and try a find  way to NOT make it work  ::). I knew you would look for an excuse  ;D ;D


You didn't even use a window? Then you have not proved anything. What excuses do I need  ???

Of course I could find window and still prove you wrong. Or you can go find your own and try a find  way to NOT make it work  ::). I knew you would look for an excuse  ;D ;D

The burden of proof is on you not me.

You have moved a catch that's in a position that allows you to fasten the string around it and pull it in the required direction. If this catch is situated behind a closed window you have no such liberties.

From Jeremy's police interview, we know that the catch needed to be forced upwards to be unsecured. Thus to be secured it needs downward force applied instead of up. This is what has baffled me about your claim.

How can you get a string to apply downward force on the catch inside from the outside while the windows are closed? You can only secure the window onced its closed and once the window is closed you would not even be able to move the string let alone toggle the catch with it.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 26, 2018, 11:56:PM
Julie said Jeremy could bang the window shut. It's not something you'd ordinarily make up unless someone told you.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2018, 12:12:AM
Julie said Jeremy could bang the window shut. It's not something you'd ordinarily make up unless someone told you.

Banging the window shut was AEs idea. So you work out where she got it from.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 27, 2018, 12:14:AM
so the question is who actually did tell her.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 27, 2018, 12:37:AM
Banging the window shut was AEs idea. So you work out where she got it from.
Julie was the academic, not Ann Eaton.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: nugnug on July 27, 2018, 12:59:AM
Julie was the academic, not Ann Eaton.

how is that relvant.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 01:27:AM

You didn't even use a window? Then you have not proved anything. What excuses do I need  ???

The burden of proof is on you not me.

You have moved a catch that's in a position that allows you to fasten the string around it and pull it in the required direction. If this catch is situated behind a closed window you have no such liberties.

From Jeremy's police interview, we know that the catch needed to be forced upwards to be unsecured. Thus to be secured it needs downward force applied instead of up. This is what has baffled me about your claim.

How can you get a string to apply downward force on the catch inside from the outside while the windows are closed? You can only secure the window onced its closed and once the window is closed you would not even be able to move the string let alone toggle the catch with it.

You haven't seen the video, you don't need a piece of glass to prove the point. It can be both opened and closed. I have no idea what you're on about, you simply WRAP the string around the catch a couple of times. Of course you would be able to move the string when the window is closed. You use ordinary string, not rope for gods sake! If you don't have the capacity to be able to visualise, that's not my problem - nevertheless, a sash window can be closed and secured with a simple piece of string!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 01:32:AM
We have modern windows in this house and I was still able to pull the string free even when the window was locked. The window in question at WHF was not modern. I would like to know exactly what kind of catch it had but I a 100% certain that it could be locked from the outside - no problem.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 27, 2018, 01:38:AM
Banging the window shut was AEs idea. So you work out where she got it from.

Julie got it from Bamber. Who she spent 18 months with. Before & after the massacre.

So sorry AE did not ring up Julie.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2018, 02:03:AM
You haven't seen the video, you don't need a piece of glass to prove the point. It can be both opened and closed. I have no idea what you're on about, you simply WRAP the string around the catch a couple of times. Of course you would be able to move the string when the window is closed. You use ordinary string, not rope for gods sake! If you don't have the capacity to be able to visualise, that's not my problem - nevertheless, a sash window can be closed and secured with a simple piece of string!

You cannot pull a piece of string through a sealed window. Once the window is shut the string is squashed and jammed in the frame. If you want to create a fictional event that's in the realm of possibility you probably could do it if you lubricated the window frame then used a threat of monofilament string. You could also drill a small diagonal hole under the catch and push a tooth pick through to move the latch. You could even cut the entire window out the frame and stick it back on from the outside with the latch secured.

But what good are these ideas? Extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions with no evidence to support them do not prove anything.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 07:05:AM
You cannot pull a piece of string through a sealed window. Once the window is shut the string is squashed and jammed in the frame. If you want to create a fictional event that's in the realm of possibility you probably could do it if you lubricated the window frame then used a threat of monofilament string. You could also drill a small diagonal hole under the catch and push a tooth pick through to move the latch. You could even cut the entire window out the frame and stick it back on from the outside with the latch secured.

But what good are these ideas? Extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions with no evidence to support them do not prove anything.


Really? Didn't they do tests on pigskin which was supposed to prove something similar was done to a human?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: maggie on July 27, 2018, 09:45:AM

Really? Didn't they do tests on pigskin which was supposed to prove something similar was done to a human?
Think again it was thought it may be a possibility and unfortunately the final tests were never carried out.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 11:39:AM
Think again it was thought it may be a possibility and unfortunately the final tests were never carried out.


Nonetheless, tests were carried out on something other than the original.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 11:41:AM
You cannot pull a piece of string through a sealed window. Once the window is shut the string is squashed and jammed in the frame. If you want to create a fictional event that's in the realm of possibility you probably could do it if you lubricated the window frame then used a threat of monofilament string. You could also drill a small diagonal hole under the catch and push a tooth pick through to move the latch. You could even cut the entire window out the frame and stick it back on from the outside with the latch secured.

But what good are these ideas? Extraordinary assumptions and hypothetical conditions with no evidence to support them do not prove anything.

Your whole post is rubbish - I just did so last night and my windows are only a few years old! You took Neil's comment and used it to your advantage - I knew you would, even without seeing the video. Pathetic! But I now know that the whole senario of the house being locked from the inside was BS!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: ngb1066 on July 27, 2018, 11:44:AM
Do we know this was the case at White House Farm?

I have no knowledge of this.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 11:46:AM

Nonetheless, tests were carried out on something other than the original.

The most ridiculous thing is, that Bamber DID use this window to gain entry. There is something VERY odd about someone who is wiling to dismiss EVERY argument against Bamber. David hasn't even seen the video and yet he's pissing his pants in an attempt to dismiss it.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 11:50:AM
I have no knowledge of this.

Well, we know it was slack enough for Bamber to use a hacksaw blade (or something similar) to unlatch the catch and gain entry. A piece of string had no real thickness and can be easily pulled free - I did it on my own windows last night and my windows are pretty new.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 11:52:AM
He may have used the window in September ? when he got his passport ( he'd already handed over his keys to AE ) doesn't mean to say he also got in this way on the night of the murders though. He hadn't been the only one who knew that way in.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 11:58:AM
He may have used the window in September ? when he got his passport ( he'd already handed over his keys to AE ) doesn't mean to say he also got in this way on the night of the murders though. He hadn't been the only one who knew that way in.

Well it's HIGHLY suspicious that he knew how to get in and he had the keys BACK from AE at that point. Also WHO also knew how to get in this way?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 12:05:PM
The most ridiculous thing is, that Bamber DID use this window to gain entry. There is something VERY odd about someone who is wiling to dismiss EVERY argument against Bamber. David hasn't even seen the video and yet he's pissing his pants in an attempt to dismiss it.

As Jeremy has already said he used the window to gain entry, one can only believe David's incontinence is due to senility.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:06:PM
Well it's HIGHLY suspicious that he knew how to get in and he had the keys BACK from AE at that point. Also WHO also knew how to get in this way?





AP knew how to get in that way as did his half-brother while staying at WHF. This information is in one of the books ( could be Claire's book ) As children they climbed in that way too.
Nothing suspicious about entering your own or past home in this way when a key wasn't available.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 12:11:PM




AP knew how to get in that way as did his half-brother while staying at WHF. This information is in one of the books ( could be Claire's book ) As children they climbed in that way too.
Nothing suspicious about entering your own or past home in this way when a key wasn't available.

Yeah! He certainly covered all the bases.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:13:PM
Yeah! He certainly covered all the bases.






Such as ? All ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 12:15:PM
AP knew how to get in that way as did his half-brother while staying at WHF. This information is in one of the books ( could be Claire's book ) As children they climbed in that way too.
Nothing suspicious about entering your own or past home in this way when a key wasn't available.

Never seen ANY indication that AP knew how to enter that way and I don't believe he did! There is nothing suspicious until five members of the family all die in a shooting and claims are made to suggest all windows were secured from inside. Once you find out that the main suspect can actually get in the house regardless - all bets are off!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 12:18:PM





Such as ? All ?

No point is going through them because you won't recognize them as being such.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:20:PM
Never seen ANY indication that AP knew how to enter that way and I don't believe he did! There is nothing suspicious until five members of the family all die in a shooting and claims are made to suggest all windows were secured from inside. Once you find out that the main suspect can actually get in the house regardless - all bets are off!





Like I said-----this case rests on the phone-call from Nevill, all other theories are blown out of the water.
Regardless of who got in through what window.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 12:23:PM




Like I said-----this case rests on the phone-call from Nevill, all other theories are blown out of the water.
Regardless of who got in through what window.

Isn't there a switched off answering machine somewhere in the mix?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 12:28:PM




Like I said-----this case rests on the phone-call from Nevill, all other theories are blown out of the water.
Regardless of who got in through what window.

There was no phone call from Nevil, dead men can't talk!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:29:PM
Well it's HIGHLY suspicious that he knew how to get in and he had the keys BACK from AE at that point. Also WHO also knew how to get in this way?





Even CAL in her book had stated that it would have proved difficult to enter through a window and she was alleged to have " solved " the murders, though remains neutral ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 12:33:PM




Even CAL in her book had stated that it would have proved difficult to enter through a window and she was alleged to have " solved " the murders, though remains neutral ?

No one is denying that such would be easy for anyone who'd never done it before, but Jeremy said he had. Which means he knew how.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:39:PM
No one is denying that such would be easy for anyone who'd never done it before, but Jeremy said he had. Which means he knew how.






Of course he knew how if he'd already stated such  ::) He could have kept his mouth shut but chose not to----anybody else wouldn't have said a word knowing that the police would make mincemeat of them.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 12:47:PM
JB never held back on ANYTHING that was asked of him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 12:58:PM




Even CAL in her book had stated that it would have proved difficult to enter through a window and she was alleged to have " solved " the murders, though remains neutral ?

Where does she say that? However, I'm not bothered what CAL say's BAMBER HIMSELF ADMITTED o usig said window and to be honest, I'm not interested in how he got in because he could have walked thrugh the front door! It's how he got out that's the crux.. The FACT that the window could be secured destoys the notion of all doors and windows being secured - he COULD get out and make it look as though the house was secure!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 02:28:PM





Of course he knew how if he'd already stated such  ::) He could have kept his mouth shut but chose not to----anybody else wouldn't have said a word knowing that the police would make mincemeat of them.

Well just in case one of his fellows had told the police how entry had been accessed, he was covering a base by getting in first, MEANING, he was unlikely to be questioned on it further.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mat on July 27, 2018, 02:29:PM
JB never held back on ANYTHING that was asked of him.

He said "No Comment" quite a bit.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 02:35:PM
JB never held back on ANYTHING that was asked of him.


When he wasn't busy chewing the thread of his sweater whilst contemplating his response which was frequently "No comment".
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 02:58:PM
JB never held back on ANYTHING that was asked of him.

Let slip that he called Julie before the police too!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 03:07:PM
He said "No Comment" quite a bit.






He was entitled to instead of putting words into the mouths of the law.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mat on July 27, 2018, 03:14:PM





He was entitled to instead of putting words into the mouths of the law.

 But "No comment" doesn't quite fit in with your claim of...

JB never held back on ANYTHING that was asked of him.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 03:26:PM
And ??
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2018, 05:12:PM
Your whole post is rubbish - I just did so last night and my windows are only a few years old! You took Neil's comment and used it to your advantage - I knew you would, even without seeing the video. Pathetic! But I now know that the whole senario of the house being locked from the inside was BS!

This is bullshit. My take - What is to stop Jeremy having an underground tunnel from some nearby farm land leading to the basemnet at white house farm? Did anyone closely examine the basement walls? NO! Has anyone ever posted a photo of the basement showing no tunnel? NO! Has anyone ever got a geographer to scan the ground around the farm and say no tunnels? There is nothing to suggest Jeremy could not have made a tunnel to the basement and its not down to me to prove there was tunnel. Its down to everyone else to prove it was never there!


To find out what happend that night you need to establish facts then draw inferences from them. What you are doing is making up a storyline to work with and around the facts. When you find yourself treating facts as obstacle and have to resort to creative thinking, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 05:22:PM
This is bullshit. My take - What is to stop Jeremy having an underground tunnel from some nearby farm land leading to the basemnet at white house farm? Did anyone closely examine the basement walls? NO! Has anyone ever posted a photo of the basement showing no tunnel? NO! Has anyone ever got a geographer to scan the ground around the farm and say no tunnels? There is nothing to suggest Jeremy could not have made a tunnel to the basement and its not down to me to prove there was tunnel. Its down to everyone else to prove it was never there!


To find out what happend that night you need to establish facts then draw inferences om them. What you are doing is making up a storyline to work with and around the facts. When you find yourself treating facts as obstacle and have to resort to creative thinking, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Tell you what, I'll ask around to see which company he used.................or are you suggesting he did it on his ownio? I wonder how long it would have taken him? Have you ever seen how long it took pow's to dig tunnels? I wonder what Nevill would have said to his request for time off to dig it?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 05:36:PM
Your whole post is rubbish - I just did so last night and my windows are only a few years old! You took Neil's comment and used it to your advantage - I knew you would, even without seeing the video. Pathetic! But I now know that the whole senario of the house being locked from the inside was BS!





How many officers stated that WHF was locked on the inside ? They're all stupid then ? Or blind ?

Why did they have to ram down a perfectly good door ? Using " stealth " ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 05:52:PM





How many officers stated that WHF was locked on the inside ? They're all stupid then ? Or blind ?

Why did they have to ram down a perfectly good door ? Using " stealth " ;D ;D ;D ;D

So what would you have done, having been told there was a mad woman the other side of the door, brandishing a gun? Guess you'd have knocked on the door or tapped on the window and asked said mad woman if you could come in?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 27, 2018, 06:01:PM
This is bullshit. My take - What is to stop Jeremy having an underground tunnel from some nearby farm land leading to the basemnet at white house farm? Did anyone closely examine the basement walls? NO! Has anyone ever posted a photo of the basement showing no tunnel? NO! Has anyone ever got a geographer to scan the ground around the farm and say no tunnels? There is nothing to suggest Jeremy could not have made a tunnel to the basement and its not down to me to prove there was tunnel. Its down to everyone else to prove it was never there!


To find out what happend that night you need to establish facts then draw inferences from them. What you are doing is making up a storyline to work with and around the facts. When you find yourself treating facts as obstacle and have to resort to creative thinking, you are barking up the wrong tree.
The guilters are fully entitled to use Julie's statement to buttress the contention that Jeremy entered White House Farm some time between leaving for home on the evening of 6 August and the telephone call he made to Chelmsford Police in the early hours of the 7th.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mike tesko on July 27, 2018, 06:15:PM
There is a perfectly simple explanation for why the burn marks on Neville Bambers body were made by the barrel of a gun, rather than the muzzle end of a silencer...

This was because two different rifles were used in the shootings - the Pargeter rifle with its silencer fitted, and the Bamber anshuzt rifle minus it's silencer!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Steve_uk on July 27, 2018, 06:19:PM
There is a perfectly simple explanation for why the burn marks on Neville Bambers body were made by the barrel of a gun, rather than the muzzle end of a silencer...

This was because two different rifles were used in the shootings - the Pargeter rifle with its silencer fitted, and the Bamber anshuzt rifle minus it's silencer!
Regardless of what weapon was used with or sans silencer the mystery of why his back was burned at all remains.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 06:49:PM
That burning was an act of sheer spite. Probably inflicted because Nevill had closed ranks and decided to concentrate fully on the welfare of his wife as opposed to him giving all his time to Sheila as he'd done when she used to phone him at all hours of the night/morning.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 07:33:PM





How many officers stated that WHF was locked on the inside ? They're all stupid then ? Or blind ?

Why did they have to ram down a perfectly good door ? Using " stealth " ;D ;D ;D ;D

THEY aren't no but I am wondering about you. What is it that you don't understand about 'the lock can be SECURED from the outside using string?' The is a BIG clue in the sentence!

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 07:36:PM




Sheila wouldn't have been aware of her actions during this time. She had a job with good and evil so her thoughts on reality would also have been confusing.

So she didn't know what she was doing but was able to learn a new skill like fitting the mag to the rifle and chambering a shot, dismantling the mag to refill, fit again, chamber again before spreading love and altruism?  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 07:37:PM
THEY aren't no but I am wondering about you. What is it that you don't understand about 'the lock can be SECURED from the outside using string?' The is a BIG clue in the sentence!






Some job being as you've said that nowhere had been secured from the inside. It's a wonder JB had the time to ring anyone while he was busy with his piece of string.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 07:46:PM





Some job being as you've said that nowhere had been secured from the inside. It's a wonder JB had the time to ring anyone while he was busy with his piece of string.

I didn't say that at all - as usual, you've got hold of the wrong end - stick wise! He didn't ring anyone while securing the window - he did that when he got home. OBVIOUSLY!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 07:47:PM





Some job being as you've said that nowhere had been secured from the inside. It's a wonder JB had the time to ring anyone while he was busy with his piece of string.

Sneer all you like, Lookout. It won't make it less possible to do.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 07:50:PM
Sneer all you like, Lookout. It won't make it less possible to do.

Lookout hasn't even got a clue how it works, she's simply bandwagon hopping. Of course we'll here how she's her own person and doesn't follow ...... blah, blah ..................................  blah!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 07:54:PM
Lookout hasn't even got a clue how it works, she's simply bandwagon hopping. Of course we'll here how she's her own person and doesn't follow ...... blah, blah ..................................  blah!

I wonder, when people maintain they know better than others, have no need for others' input, claim themselves to be their own person, how the hell they ever manage to learn anything?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 08:01:PM
If you'd have said a wire coat hanger then I'd have believed you,but a piece of limp string ? Oh heck.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 08:02:PM
If you'd have said a wire coat hanger then I'd have believed you,but a piece of limp string ? Oh heck.

Not a clue!  ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 08:05:PM
If you'd have said a wire coat hanger then I'd have believed you,but a piece of limp string ? Oh heck.

I take it you know how string is made? Feel free to try it for yourself. But you won't want to find out that it works, will you?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2018, 08:07:PM
This is bullshit. My take - What is to stop Jeremy having an underground tunnel from some nearby farm land leading to the basemnet at white house farm? Did anyone closely examine the basement walls? NO! Has anyone ever posted a photo of the basement showing no tunnel? NO! Has anyone ever got a geographer to scan the ground around the farm and say no tunnels? There is nothing to suggest Jeremy could not have made a tunnel to the basement and its not down to me to prove there was tunnel. Its down to everyone else to prove it was never there!


To find out what happend that night you need to establish facts then draw inferences from them. What you are doing is making up a storyline to work with and around the facts. When you find yourself treating facts as obstacle and have to resort to creative thinking, you are barking up the wrong tree.


Jeremy could have constructed a hidden compact tunnel leading to the basement at White House Farm! Much like a C? Chi tunnel that was dug in the Vietman war! Since such tunnels have been made before its totally possible for Jeremy to dig one! He can hide the entry in the basement behind some boxes and even fill the tunnel in several days after the massacre so no trace of it exists! Just before he leaves back out the tunnel, he gives the gun to Sheila and instucts Sheila to shoot herself as the police break the door down!

The physical laws of nature allow this senario to actually work. Therefore you cant prove this is not what happened!

(http://www.aljanh.net/data/archive/img/327794550.jpeg)

(http://www.getupandgovietnam.com/content/images/thumbs/000/0000203_cu-chi-tunnels-group-tour_350.jpeg)

(https://i2.wp.com/www.learning-history.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/rats-2.jpg)

Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 08:08:PM
I take it you know how string is made? Feel free to try it for yourself. But you won't want to find out that it works, will you?






I would if I had sash windows, but-----------
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: mat on July 27, 2018, 08:09:PM
I wonder, when people maintain they know better than others, have no need for others' input, claim themselves to be their own person, how the hell they ever manage to learn anything?

Before disputing Carolines opinion you'd think some would take the time to at least understand it. David understands the point, but disagrees which is fine, Lookout isn't even sure what she's disagreeing against - she JUST disagrees.


If you'd have said a wire coat hanger then I'd have believed you,but a piece of limp string ? Oh heck.

NGB's seen the video. He didn't "oh heck it." You just don't like the idea because of WHO it comes from, what a strange way to get to the truth of anything.

I've seen the video..... It's a lot easier that I expected. Although I still feel he likely used the kitchen window, but the bathroom window is ACTUALLY more likely than it use to be in my mind because of the string.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Jane J on July 27, 2018, 08:10:PM





I would if I had sash windows, but-----------


Oh well. Another one bites the dust.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 27, 2018, 08:28:PM
Before disputing Carolines opinion you'd think some would take the time to at least understand it. David understands the point, but disagrees which is fine, Lookout isn't even sure what she's disagreeing against - she JUST disagrees.


NGB's seen the video. He didn't "oh heck it." You just don't like the idea because of WHO it comes from, what a strange way to get to the truth of anything.

I've seen the video..... It's a lot easier that I expected. Although I still feel he likely used the kitchen window, but the bathroom window is ACTUALLY more likely than it use to be in my mind because of the string.

I see you avoided a permanant ban for your abuse of another poster this week.

Stand up Mat. You lucky lucky man.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Adam on July 27, 2018, 08:36:PM
Must admit if a window is closed, any string couldn't be moved an inch, let alone several feet.

I suppose if the shut bathroom window still had a gap of several centimetres, it would be possible.

Someone needs to show evidence of the WHF barhroom window. Otherwise the theory is a dead duck.

Bamber's kitchen window exit is supported by two WS's & forensic evidence.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on July 27, 2018, 09:16:PM
Must admit if a window is closed, any string couldn't be moved an inch, let alone several feet.

I suppose if the shut bathroom window still had a gap of several centimetres, it would be possible.

Someone needs to show evidence of the WHF barhroom window. Otherwise the theory is a dead duck.


No you could argue Jeremy used sandpaper or a saw to create a small unnoticeable gap no greater that a half a centimetre wide for the string. This can be done long before August the 7th.  ;D

Caroline has set the bar so low. Anything goes so long as it does not break the laws of science.( I.e magic, teleports or superpowers)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 09:24:PM
No you could argue Jeremy used sandpaper or a saw to create a small unnoticeable gap no greater that a half a centimetre wide for the string. This can be done long before August the 7th.  ;D

Caroline has set the bar so low. Anything goes so long as it does not break the laws of science.( I.e magic, teleports or superpowers)

I don't 'think' the technique works - I KNOW it does and while you simply fire fight with your silly pictures and put downs, I'm more confident than ever that Bamber is guilty and that you probably know it too!
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on July 27, 2018, 09:40:PM
I don't 'think' the technique works - I KNOW it does and while you simply fire fight with your silly pictures and put downs, I'm more confident than ever that Bamber is guilty and that you probably know it too!





It's the same with the innocents when we keep getting " he did it, he's guilty, it was him, he got in through the letter-box and got out through the fanlight, his pupils were dilated, dyed hair, wet-suit, drug farm ( a couple of plant pots ) pedalled into the sunset like ET on a woman's bicycle etc etc etc. 
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: Caroline on July 27, 2018, 10:53:PM




It's the same with the innocents when we keep getting " he did it, he's guilty, it was him, he got in through the letter-box and got out through the fanlight, his pupils were dilated, dyed hair, wet-suit, drug farm ( a couple of plant pots ) pedalled into the sunset like ET on a woman's bicycle etc etc etc.

 ::)
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: IndigoJ on August 08, 2018, 08:37:AM
When you consider the fact that Nevills burns are circular with an area in the centre less burned. Just like the Boyce experiments. There is little room for doubt for what caused them.

PS: Images 4 and 5 I have increased the contrast to make it easier to see.

(https://s8.postimg.cc/5b4a8cfb9/burntrial.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/iphd4vm4l/nb_burn.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/6c4ixe3zp/nb_burn2.png)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/71nb9qp3p/nb_burn3.png.jpg)

(https://s8.postimg.cc/q80idfdgl/muzzle.jpg)

could he have been forced to walk somewhere in the house with the gun prodded into his back , the gun already having been used to kill the twins ? they do look very similar to the experimental marks , although the first oval shaped one does not so much
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on August 08, 2018, 08:47:AM
could he have been forced to walk somewhere in the house with the gun prodded into his back , the gun already having been used to kill the twins ?

No. The gun does not get hot enough by just firing it. It needed to be heated by something. (The AGA cooker by Nevill was found on)


they do look very similar to the experimental marks , although the first oval shaped one does not so much

I believe the oval shape is due to skin elasticity.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on August 08, 2018, 08:51:AM
What's the difference in the diameter of the nozzle of a shotgun against that of a rifle ?
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: David1819 on August 08, 2018, 08:59:AM
What's the difference in the diameter of the nozzle of a shotgun against that of a rifle ?


a lot
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: lookout on August 08, 2018, 09:02:AM

a lot







I'm thinking about the diameter of the burns and also the heated end of whatever weapon had been used would have left a " heat mark " as in when you heat metal.
Title: Re: Nevills burns revisited.
Post by: IndigoJ on August 08, 2018, 10:35:AM
No. The gun does not get hot enough by just firing it. It needed to be heated by something. (The AGA cooker by Nevill was found on)


I believe the oval shape is due to skin elasticity.

for how long would it have needed to be "heated by something" ?

ah yes due to his age then that the shape appeared as it did?