Suggested reasons the straight forward Bamber scenario does not work:

[guest29835]

What scouting missions?

So there are no complications. Just advantages which I have already listed in reply 28. 

He may have walked if it was a 10 minute walk. But 45 minutes.

I think I know now why you need him to have used the bike.  It's clicked in my head.  He can't have done it by car, and you need him to have worked quickly.  I think this could be another potential flaw in the prosecution case.  I'll probably start a thread on this, but don't have time right now.

[David1819]

Interestingly, Adam and other guilters seem mad keen on this bike. 

If we start from the premise that Jeremy is guilty, to me it just seems so obvious that he walked there and back.  A bike is too complicated and would cause too many problems.  Walking is ideal. 

Why are guilters not pursuing the line of least resistance?  It's a golden rule that you 'keep it simple stupid'.  I'm intrigued by this now.  Is this just a case of mindlessly shoehorning all the evidence in to the case?  Or is there some fundamental problem with him walking to and from the farmhouse that I have not surmised?  It certainly would be risky and difficult as it is, and I'm perplexed as to why he would want to make it still more risky and difficult by going on a ladies' push bike.

The lack of rigor mortis and livor mortis on Sheila's body when the crime scene photos were taken rules Jeremy out period. Even more so if you want to argue he walked home.

[guest29835]

The lack of rigor mortis and livor mortis on Sheila's body when the crime scene photos were taken rules Jeremy out period. Even more so if you want to argue he walked home.

See above.  I'm intrigued by Adam and other guilters' fascination with this bike.  To me, a fit 24 year old man can run that distance in, say, 30 minutes.  Bear in mind he knows the land, and maybe he planned it all out.  I think I now know why they need him to have used the bike and I think there's another problem with the prosecution case.

[David1819]

See above.  I'm intrigued by Adam and other guilters' fascination with this bike.  To me, a fit 24 year old man can run that distance in, say, 30 minutes.  Bear in mind he knows the land, and maybe he planned it all out.  I think I now know why they need him to have used the bike and I think there's another problem with the prosecution case.

None of it really matters. When you consider Sheila's TOD. Its not possible for Jeremy to have done it.

[guest29835]

None of it really matters. When you consider Sheila's TOD. Its not possible for Jeremy to have done it.

Well let me decide what I think matters.  I think it does matter because if the timings and sequencing don't hang together, then it just reinforces why I have doubt.

[Steve_uk]

I think I know now why you need him to have used the bike.  It's clicked in my head.  He can't have done it by car, and you need him to have worked quickly.  I think this could be another potential flaw in the prosecution case.  I'll probably start a thread on this, but don't have time right now.

You remind me of that Victoria Wood joke when she comes on stage with her coat on and announces to the audience: "I won't take my coat off..I'm not stopping.."

[JackieD]

You remind me of that Victoria Wood joke when she comes on stage with her coat on and announces to the audience: "I won't take my coat off..I'm not stopping.."

I understand why you are getting shirty Steve because QC is challenging all the reasons he thought JB was guilty
Good job QC

Steve I will probably be posting some statements from Suzette Ford who knew Jeremy very well

An independent witness who was not after the Bamber money

[lookout]

None of it really matters. When you consider Sheila's TOD. Its not possible for Jeremy to have done it.

David, you're next on the list of ignoramus's, irrationals and pretenders 

[Steve_uk]

I understand why you are getting shirty Steve because QC is challenging all the reasons he thought JB was guilty
Good job QC

Steve I will probably be posting some statements from Suzette Ford who knew Jeremy very well

An independent witness who was not after the Bamber money

Go ahead Jackie. We have nothing to fear, we give of our time freely and we back up our observations with sources if so required to do.

[JackieD]

I think I know now why you need him to have used the bike.  It's clicked in my head.  He can't have done it by car, and you need him to have worked quickly.  I think this could be another potential flaw in the prosecution case.  I'll probably start a thread on this, but don't have time right now.

I think I know now why you need him to have used the bike.  It's clicked in my head.  He can't have done it by car, and you need him to have worked quickly.  I think this could be another potential flaw in the prosecution case.

[Roch]

None of it really matters. When you consider Sheila's TOD. Its not possible for Jeremy to have done it.

Consider or establish?  I wish someone could establish for once and all.

[JackieD]

Go ahead Jackie. We have nothing to fear, we give of our time freely and we back up our observations with sources if so required to do.

You can’t get a better source than Suzy
He loved farming and his family
Fact

As far as I know Suzy never carried out any kind of fraud like your source. 

[Steve_uk]

You can’t get a better source than Suzy
He loved farming and his family
Fact

As far as I know Suzy never carried out any kind of fraud like your source. 

No but Jeremy did, presenting her with a Cartier watch stolen from an Antipodean jeweller's.

[lookout]

No but Jeremy did, presenting her with a Cartier watch stolen from an Antipodean jeweller's.

I don't know how he ever got through customs without producing a receipt, then paying for the privilege.

[JackieD]

I don't know how he ever got through customs without producing a receipt, then paying for the privilege.

Thanks Lookout