Louis Theroux

[David1819]

It might be extremely relevant to you but I dont think the review body will share your views.  They are interested in what the jury was told at trial.  At trial both patholgoists concluded, to some extent, they could not be certain the marks were burns or what caused them.  Therefore it played no part in the jury's decision making.

The defence at trial never had the original autopsy notes.

Moreover I am more interested in what actually took place that night than the legal arguments.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9528.msg441998.html#msg441998

[Adam]

The 2012 CCRC submission was based on the murderer inflicting the burn marks on Nevill minus silencer. Suggesting the silencer was not used.

If proved, it would just mean Bamber took the silencer off upstairs. Went downstairs & put it away. Then burned Nevill's back to check for life.

Bamber would complete his shooting before doing any staging or burning.

[Roch]

The only other possibility is that the police accidentally discharged the murder weapon upon removing it from the body.  However there's no evidence that anyone interfered with the scene until some considerable time after Sheila was found

There was no rifle on top of Sheila, when the TFG last witnessed her crime scene. The Bible and her head were also in different positions..

Therefore Jeremy Bamber was prosecuted and convicted by using a police-constructed crime scene. The jury were not told this. If they had have been told this, I would imagine it would have led to an electric moment in British crown court history.

[Roch]

Moreover I am more interested in what actually took place that night than the legal arguments.

Now you sound like me. I hate all that legal twaddle. What matters is what happened. If anyone uses legal twaddle in an attempt to prevent what actually happened from being discovered, explored, exposed etc, I can't help but feel my regard for them is diminished.

[lookout]

I tend to veer from the legal matters of a crime too. Too " bookish " for me, as I like to start from the beginnings in what led to a murder being committed.

[Rob_]

Trial judge re the windows

As the trial Judge said (at page 10E):

"… how he got there and out again whether by the kitchen window or any other means, though of interest, cannot affect the outcome of the case"

Judge gave a clear direction to the jury.

If there is no known way of getting out how did he do it then? It's highly relevant to me anyway.

[killingeve]

I am not the architect of the judicial system but I do know that if Bamber wants his conviction overturned he will need to be mindful of the system and processes.

[killingeve]

If there is no known way of getting out how did he do it then? It's highly relevant to me anyway.

It might be highly relevant to you but it's not highly relevant in terms of Bamber overturning his conviction. It's dead in the water. 

[Adam]

If there is no known way of getting out how did he do it then? It's highly relevant to me anyway.

He got out through the kitchen window. Then banged it shut from outside.

The housekeeper said things around the kitchen window had been moved.

[Rob_]

He got out through the kitchen window. Then banged it shut from outside.

The housekeeper said things around the kitchen window had been moved.

I watched the one and half hour YouTube program last night and they were saying there is a secondary latch that cannot be locked from outside on this window? Is this correct do you know?

[Adam]

I watched the one and half hour YouTube program last night and they were saying there is a secondary latch that cannot be locked from outside on this window? Is this correct do you know?

No idea. He just needed one latch to partially fall into place.

[lookout]

He got out through the kitchen window. Then banged it shut from outside.

The housekeeper said things around the kitchen window had been moved.

You can bang a window shut from the outside, but it can't lock itself ! It has to be secured from the inside and all windows had been secured from the inside---stated " Taff "Jones. No sign of a forced entry.

Articles around the kitchen window were moved by AE when she was rinsing bloodied clothes.

[Adam]

You can bang a window shut from the outside, but it can't lock itself ! It has to be secured from the inside and all windows had been secured from the inside---stated " Taff "Jones. No sign of a forced entry.

Articles around the kitchen window were moved by AE when she was rinsing bloodied clothes.

Banging the latch down from outside means the window is 'secure'.

Keep up.

[lookout]

Banging the latch down from outside means the window is 'secure'.

Keep up.

You cheeky article !!

It does NOT mean that type of latch is secure at all.

[Rob_]

No idea. He just needed one latch to partially fall into place.

It sounds like the latch you use to hold the window open at a certain angle? These cannot be shut from outside, if there is a withheld photo the defense never had at trail showing this latch closed then this is more than interesting.