Suggested reasons the straight forward Bamber scenario does not work:

[Adam]

No problem, Adam, glad to be of help. 

You've got to admire Jeremy's pluck.  I mean, he's out there with no lights (can't be seen, remember) and he only has to run into one person or be seen just once, and his plan is blown.  Mind you, my excuse of training for the Tour de Yorkshire probably would have stood him in good stead and impressed Geoffrey Rivlin, who was from Yorkshire.  Jeremy thinks ahead.

Do you think the court would have believed it, Adam?  Bear in mind here that Geoffrey had a Yorkshire accent too, so that would have made it sound more convincing.

You make a good point there, Adam.  Borrowing June's bike is a sure sign of guilt.  To be honest, I'm surprised he didn't just plead Guilty in the face of that compelling evidence.

Thanks Adam, you've cleared it all up for me.  There won't be any back-pedalling from me, I can tell you!

Bamber thought it was worth the risk. And was right as no one did see him. People do not go on country walks at 2am.

[guest29835]

Bamber thought it was worth the risk. And was right as no one did see him. People do not go on country walks at 2am.

He didn't use the bike.  It's too complicated and risky.  He walked.  And he didn't use paths or public highways, except in the immediate vicinity of Bourtree Cottage.  The route he will have taken is over fields.  He would have been intimately familiar with the area and that aspect of it would not have presented any special difficulty for him.  He may even have gone about preparing a route beforehand, including clearing a makeshift path in certain parts.  In all seriousness, he may have done that.

The issue for me is the potential for him to be seen around Goldhanger, both on the outward and return walks.  If he is seen on the outward walk, that raises the issue of whether he can make another attempt in the future, knowing he has been seen out at that time.  If he is seen on the return walk, he is in effect caught. 

You could argue that he would disguise himself, but unless he wears a mask, that's of limited use and he still has to access a house that is overlooked with the risk of being seen.  He has to return to Bourtree Cottage to be able to drive back in his Astra.

[lookout]

I'm sure he felt like walking, killing then walking back after already having spent 15-17 hours harvesting that day       Must be superman or superhuman, at 24 ?

[guest29835]

I'm sure he felt like walking, killing then walking back after already having spent 15-17 hours harvesting that day       Must be superman or superhuman, at 24 ?

At about that age, I was cycling 60 miles a day to and from work, getting up at 4 a.m. in the morning and returning late at night, then doing it again the next day, five days a week.  Young men are fit and can cope with a lot.

[lookout]

Why did he even bother going home ? His bedroom was still vacant at WHF.

[guest29835]

Why did he even bother going home ? His bedroom was still vacant at WHF.

Because he needed an 'alibi', why else?  He needed to be able to say he was elsewhere.  So he made sure he was seen (or heard) leaving White House Farm and that his Astra was parked up outside Bourtree Cottage. 

[lookout]

At about that age, I was cycling 60 miles a day to and from work, getting up at 4 a.m. in the morning and returning late at night, then doing it again the next day, five days a week.  Young men are fit and can cope with a lot.

But in between you weren't hurtling around up and downstairs killing people as well were you ? Moving their bodies and generally staging them. Cleaning/clearing where you can, burning your clothes in the Aga, then showering afterwards in readiness to be up for a 3am call ?

[guest29835]

But in between you weren't hurtling around up and downstairs killing people as well were you ? Moving their bodies and generally staging them. Cleaning/clearing where you can, burning your clothes in the Aga, then showering afterwards in readiness to be up for a 3am call ?

Yes, but I'm not Jeremy. 

Jeremy may have had a motivation to do so.

[lookout]

Yes, but I'm not Jeremy. 

Jeremy may have had a motivation to do so.

Such as ? Don't say money.

[guest29835]

Such as ? Don't say money.

I have no idea.  I said 'may'.  Personally I'm sceptical about the inheritance motive theory.  Motive is not dispositive anyway.

The point is that he could have walked to and from the farm, though it would have been risky as it involved leaving and returning to an overlooked cottage and its environs in Goldhanger, which means there was a realistic chance of being seen.  He must have known this, which has to raise doubt.  Would he really have risked it?  Naturally from this, the question arises: Is there some way he could have done this and not returned to Bourtree Cottage?  No, because he needed to be seen returning there as part of his cover story.  So how did he do it?  I just don't know.  I can't figure it out.

The access/egress to and from the house is not an issue.  He could have accessed the house while leaving investigators with the impression it was locked from the inside, though it cannot be proved he did so that night, only that he had a means to do so and had done so on other occasions, which he admitted to police.  There's also the fact that he left no blood traces of having been there.  Why were there no blood prints on the windows or in the back hallway or the den or the gun cupboard where he is supposed to have left the silencer?

[lookout]

I have no idea.  I said 'may'.  Personally I'm sceptical about the inheritance motive theory.  Motive is not dispositive anyway.

The point is that he could have walked to and from the farm, though it would have been risky as it involved leaving and returning to an overlooked cottage and its environs in Goldhanger, which means there was a realistic chance of being seen.  He must have known this, which has to raise doubt.  Would he really have risked it?  Naturally from this, the question arises: Is there some way he could have done this and not returned to Bourtree Cottage?  No, because he needed to be seen returning there as part of his cover story.  So how did he do it?  I just don't know.  I can't figure it out.

The access/egress to and from the house is not an issue.  He could have accessed the house while leaving investigators with the impression it was locked from the inside, though it cannot be proved he did so that night, only that he had a means to do so and had done so on other occasions, which he admitted to police.  There's also the fact that he left no blood traces of having been there.  Why were there no blood prints on the windows or in the back hallway or the den or the gun cupboard where he is supposed to have left the silencer?

The reason why you can't figure it out is because it wasn't him who committed the murders.
No fingerprints/blood/sweat/fibres/saliva . No forensic evidence whatsoever or any other evidence.

[guest29835]

The reason why you can't figure it out is because it wasn't him who committed the murders.
No fingerprints/blood/sweat/fibres/saliva . No forensic evidence whatsoever or any other evidence.

You say. 

He was certainly cooking up something with that 3 a.m. [3.15 a.m./3.30 a.m.*] phone call to Julie And Friends.  Douglas answered.  Then he didn't.  It turns out it was Julie who answered after all.  Jeremy, sorry Jerry, had told her 'tonight's the night' [did he like Rod Stewart?].  Helpfully, Julie was up later for that early hours of the morning phone call.  Good of her.

Then Julie tells Susan that Jeremy did it, but Susan doesn't mind if Jeremy and Brett come along to her 21st. birthday party.  Susan must be a very broad-minded gal.  Personally, I would have been running to the nearest police station, and if I caught sight of Jeremy, I might have made a citizen's arrest.

But Susan's a modern, independent woman and mass murder is water off a duck's back.

Then we have our friend, Steve, who posts on here defending Julie as if his life depends on it, and he's touchy about Colin too.  Touchy touchy.  Mustn't upset Julie or Colin!

It's all very curious.

Anyway!  Must dash...

[guest29835]

He didn't use the bike.  It's too complicated and risky.  He walked.  And he didn't use paths or public highways, except in the immediate vicinity of Bourtree Cottage.  The route he will have taken is over fields.  He would have been intimately familiar with the area and that aspect of it would not have presented any special difficulty for him.  He may even have gone about preparing a route beforehand, including clearing a makeshift path in certain parts.  In all seriousness, he may have done that.

The issue for me is the potential for him to be seen around Goldhanger, both on the outward and return walks.  If he is seen on the outward walk, that raises the issue of whether he can make another attempt in the future, knowing he has been seen out at that time.  If he is seen on the return walk, he is in effect caught. 

You could argue that he would disguise himself, but unless he wears a mask, that's of limited use and he still has to access a house that is overlooked with the risk of being seen.  He has to return to Bourtree Cottage to be able to drive back in his Astra.

Just as an addendum to this.  One potential reason the bike had mud on it, and the reason he needed the bike, is that he could have been using it during the daytime and early evenings to scope out routes.  He could have gone along the farm tracks and the sea wall path on it, but are there any eye witnesses to him on that bike, at all, ever?  Did anybody see Julie on the bike?

[Adam]

Just as an addendum to this.  One potential reason the bike had mud on it, and the reason he needed the bike, is that he could have been using it during the daytime and early evenings to scope out routes.  He could have gone along the farm tracks and the sea wall path on it, but are there any eye witnesses to him on that bike, at all, ever?  Did anybody see Julie on the bike?

Bamber had spent most of his life living at WHF & his cottage. So knew the various footpaths he could use. Which he could cycle down.

Using June's bike gives him lots of advantages -

He saves energy. It had been & was going to be a long day.

He can leave his cottage later. Meaning he is less likely to be seen.

He can leave WHF later. Meaning he can spend more time staging the scene.

He gets back to his cottage quicker. Meaning he has more time to change clothes.

He spends less time travelling. So less chance of being seen.

Massive difference in time & energy between cycling and walking around 3 miles.

He can do a trial run. Which I believe Julie said he did.

----------

Obviously it was not a coincidence that he took June's bike just before theassacre.

[guest29835]

Bamber had spent most of his life living at WHF & his cottage. So knew the various footpaths he could use. Which he could cycle down.

Using June's bike gives him lots of advantages -

He saves energy. It was going to be a long day.

He can leave his cottage later. Meaning he is less likely to be seen.

He can leave WHF later. Meaning he can spend more time staging the scene.

He gets back to his cottage quicker. Meaning he has more time to change clothes.

He spends less time travelling. So less chance of being seen.

Massive difference in time & energy between cycling and walking around 3 miles.

He can do a trial run. Which I believe Julie said he did.

----------

Obviously it was not a coincidence that he took June's bike just before theassacre.

Which route did he take?  Was it across fields?