Lest We Forget...................

[Steve_uk]

Julie told 5 people what she knew prior to the massacre - Liz Rimmington, Andy Bishop, Karen Bishop, Malcolm Walters and Susan Battersby.

These people encouraged her to go to the police. Which she did do. She obviously wanted some moral support prior to her approach.

Absolutely. It vindicates her claim that one of the reasons she didn't come forward earlier was that she didn't think she would be believed.

[Adam]

Absolutely. It vindicates her claim that one of the reasons she didn't come forward earlier was that she didn't think she would be believed.

She said Bamber was 'terribly confident' & she would never be believed. Her diaries mention being told he was 'watertight' & it was an 'open & shut case'.

All this while being whisked around the country & to Amsterdam on jolly ups. Hardly having time to breath.

[Jane]

Absolutely. It vindicates her claim that one of the reasons she didn't come forward earlier was that she didn't think she would be believed.

I believe it's in her WS that she claims Jeremy told her no one would believe her. I have a feeling she may have been right. Given that, it's possible that for a while she convinced herself she'd be safer with him than without him?

[Adam]

If the police had approached Julie & said 'we believe Bamber may have been involved, do you have anything else you can tell us, she would have instantly talked.

The police would have eventually approached Julie again. The evidence was piling up against Bamber.

However she approached the police.

[guest29835]

Julie told 5 people what she knew prior to approaching the police - Liz Rimmington, Andy Bishop, Karen Bishop, Malcolm Walters and Susan Battersby.

Thanks Adam.  I assume all these people went straight to the police, so why didn't the police just arrest Julie?  Or is it that Julie wasn't really imparting any knowledge of the massacre, she was just telling a tale about various things Jeremy had told her and these people didn't take it too seriously?

I know if I had been one of those people, and I was being told that Jeremy did it or was involved in it, I would be straight on to the police.  I wouldn't be relying on Julie to go to the police.  I'd be contacting the police immediately.

While we're here, Adam, perhaps you could also tell us how many of the people you list subsequently socialised with Jeremy?  I've heard a rumour that one of them squirted cream in Jeremy's face at a party, or it could have been the other way round, and this happened after Julie told her Jeremy was the Evil One.

I suppose it must have been exciting attending a party with a mass murderer.  Not something you get to do every day.  Maybe Jeremy regaled them all with how Matthew had done it and how he'd slipped up putting his palm print on the Bible?

Thanks Adam.

[lookout]

One thing she couldn't tell the police was that there was any violence in their relationship.
Which to me is strange considering that a non-violent character can slaughter 5 people including 2 children ?

[Jane]

Apropos of absolutely nothing and totally unrelated. An Essex woman has been jailed for battering her husband to death with a revolver after firing at him six times. All six shots missed.

[guest29835]

One thing she couldn't tell the police was that there was any violence in their relationship.
Which to me is strange considering that a non-violent character can slaughter 5 people including 2 children ?

She also forgot to mention the sticky silencer.  Maybe Matthew forgot to mention it to Jeremy?  These things happen.  Even professionals like Matthew overlook the details.  Why did Matthew put the silencer back in the gun cupboard?  Would he even know where the gun cupboard was?  All very interesting questions.

She also mentioned nothing about marks, cuts and bruises on Jeremy.  He must have had some after that struggle with Nevill.  Wouldn't he have got scratched by Sheila?  No, wait, she was asleep the whole time.  Nevill was asleep too, until he got shot.  That woke him up.  Thanks Adam.

[Adam]

Thanks Adam.  I assume all these people went straight to the police, so why didn't the police just arrest Julie?  Or is it that Julie wasn't really imparting any knowledge of the massacre, she was just telling a tale about various things Jeremy had told her and these people didn't take it too seriously?

I know if I had been one of those people, and I was being told that Jeremy did it or was involved in it, I would be straight on to the police.  I wouldn't be relying on Julie to go to the police.  I'd be contacting the police immediately.

While we're here, Adam, perhaps you could also tell us how many of the people you list subsequently socialised with Jeremy?  I've heard a rumour that one of them squirted cream in Jeremy's face at a party, or it could have been the other way round, and this happened after Julie told her Jeremy was the Evil One.

I suppose it must have been exciting attending a party with a mass murderer.  Not something you get to do every day.  Maybe Jeremy regaled them all with how Matthew had done it and how he'd slipped up putting his palm print on the Bible?

Thanks Adam.

Well she approached the police with Liz Rimmington.

If the days after had turned into weeks, one of these people may have gone to the police. However by then the police would have approached Julie again.

[Adam]

She also forgot to mention the sticky silencer.  Maybe Matthew forgot to mention it to Jeremy?  These things happen.  Even professionals like Matthew overlook the details.  Why did Matthew put the silencer back in the gun cupboard?  Would he even know where the gun cupboard was?  All very interesting questions.

She also mentioned nothing about marks, cuts and bruises on Jeremy.  He must have had some after that struggle with Nevill.  Wouldn't he have got scratched by Sheila?  No, wait, she was asleep the whole time.  Nevill was asleep too, until he got shot.  That woke him up.  Thanks Adam.

There is no reason he would tell Julie about the silencer. He used it, took it off & put it away.

He did tell her about Nevill putting up a big fight. That would have been more memorable to him.

[guest29835]

Well she approached the police with Liz Rimmington.

If the days after had turned into weeks, one of these people may have gone to the police. However by then the police would have approached Julie again.

Or is it that Julie wasn't really imparting any knowledge to her friends, they realised this, and they just discounted what she was saying?  If Jeremy is guilty, then this looks foolish with the benefit of hindsight, but at the time it may have seemed sensible.  Women do tell lies like this, you know, Adam.  It's common knowledge that they do and common experience.  It's really not that hard to extrapolate a scenario based on that premise.

Moreover, looking at this objectively (I hold no brief for Jeremy), Julie's evidence was content-free.  It was a mixture of bad character evidence and hearsay about a fictitious conversation between some fantasist called Matthew Macdonald and Jeremy, who may also have been a total fantasist, albeit a darkly funny one. 

Julie's evidence actually proves nothing at all of any centrality to the case.

[guest29835]

There is no reason he would tell Julie about the silencer. He used it, took it off & put it away.

He did tell her about Nevill putting up a big fight. That would have been more memorable to him.

Jeremy tells Julie about everything, including the Bible, he just forgot to mention the critical fact of the silencer causing the problem of Sheila's arms being too short.

Like you say, Adam, he clean forgot. 

Thanks Adam.

[Adam]

Or is it that Julie wasn't really imparting any knowledge to her friends, they realised this, and they just discounted what she was saying?  If Jeremy is guilty, then this looks foolish with the benefit of hindsight, but at the time it may have seemed sensible.  Women do tell lies like this, you know, Adam.  It's common knowledge that they do and common experience.  It's really not that hard to extrapolate a scenario based on that premise.

Moreover, looking at this objectively (I hold no brief for Jeremy), Julie's evidence was content-free.  It was a mixture of bad character evidence and hearsay about a fictitious conversation between some fantasist called Matthew Macdonald and Jeremy, who may also have been a total fantasist, albeit a darkly funny one. 

Julie's evidence actually proves nothing at all of any centrality to the case.

Obviously she didn't give her friends a 34 page WS. But she wouldn't tell 5 people the basics while still in contact with Bamber, unless it was true.

There were no advantages in trying to implicate an innocent man. The NOTW offer was over a year away.

However the huge amount of massive disadvantages show it would have been the daftest thing ever to attempt.

However if there is a similar example.....

[Jane]

Jeremy tells Julie about everything, including the Bible, he just forgot to mention the critical fact of the silencer causing the problem of Sheila's arms being too short.

Like you say, Adam, he clean forgot. 

Thanks Adam.

Might it not have slipped his memory after a fight with his father, in which he didn't die conveniently, a glove came off, and the rifle stock broke with the force of the beating?

[guest29835]

Obviously she didn't give her friends a 34 page WS. But she wouldn't tell 5 people the basics while still in contact with Bamber, unless it was true.

There were no advantages in trying to implicate an innocent man. The NOTW offer was over a year away.

However the huge amount of massive disadvantages show it would have been the daftest thing ever to attempt.

However if there is a similar example.....

Thanks Adam.  While I've got you, do you think the new information that Jeremy liked HP sauce with his bacon, not ketchup, will be enough for the CCRC, if you add in Peggy and Pat?  Why do you think Stan lied and said it was ketchup?  Do you think the truth will ever come out, Adam?