Podcast by Bamber's support group containing information about 03/21 submission

[Roch]

The review commission are not interested in looking at submissions from a neutral viewpoint.  They want fresh evidence or argument that is going to stand up to scrutiny in the appeal court. 

Please re-listen to the podcast.  @ l.00 in the female claims Sheila made a 999 call.  @ 1.06 in she then claims a suicide note was found.

Regardless of whether there was or wasn't a call at 6.09, what makes you think that such a call precludes Sheila having or acting out suicidal intentions? 

[guest29835]

My post contained 5 very brief sentences so hardly a lecture but I apologise if it came over as mini sermon.

We clearly have different interpretations on the female's claims.  My interpretation is that she, along with others in Bamber's support group, have put together the submissions. 

In any event back to my post you find objectionable.  The female clearly states @ l hour in Sheila made a 999 call.  @ 1 hour 6 mins in she claims a suicide note was found. You claimed she said neither.

No I bloody didn't!  You're the one who keeps stupidly saying that they have claimed Sheila wrote a suicide note after killing herself.  They haven't said that.

[David1819]

Thanks Adam.  It's good that you're here to put me through my paces.

Maybe if I can produce a Perfect Sheila Scenario, you'll finally recognise my brilliance and recommend me for the CT?

For now, here's me sulking after being overlooked by you and Myster, the Cluedo Supremo:

They should have had the Mythster on the mindhouse series explaining how JB is guilty because he always "won at Cluedo as a wee lad"   

[guest29835]

They should have had the Mythster on the mindhouse series explaining how JB is guilty because he always "won a Cluedo as a wee lad"   

Thanks David.  I think, for me, that would have been the clincher, and instead of 94.5% guilty, I would have come on here boasting of how I had now joined the guilters.

It was a missed opportunity for Myster.

[lookout]

A question for QC.

If it had been initially proven that Sheila had committed suicide, would there have been any legal implications because she'd originally have been a beneficiary of her parent's Will ?Such as immediate or delayed access to what would have been her funds if the parents had died before her ?

[lookout]

Would the process of probate have taken longer than the usual 4 months ? How much more complicated could it have been ?

Taking all this into consideration I imagine it was far less complicated to go for a straight murder case.!?

( this is my mind working overtime )

[guest29835]

A question for QC.

If it had been initially proven that Sheila had committed suicide, would there have been any legal implications because she'd originally have been a beneficiary of her parent's Will ?Such as immediate or delayed access to what would have been her funds if the parents had died before her ?

Actually, this is a brilliant question you raise, but it requires us to go off on a tangent.  Bear in mind I'm not a lawyer, never mind a probate lawyer, but I will give you my thoughts.

First, to answer you directly, I shouldn't have thought it would make any difference, as long as there is a clear and prompt coronial verdict that Sheila's death was not an unlawful killing and as long as that is not then overturned by a criminal investigation and verdict at trial.

The more interesting issue would be that of Sheila's sons, had either or both survived.

If Sheila's sons had survived, then it would be more complicated for Jeremy because Colin as the father would then come into it and Colin's lawyers would then need to to do things:

(i). read the wills and check to see if there was a survivorship clause - i.e. a clause that requires Sheila to survive for, say, 30 days before she can inherit.  Such a clause was and is quite common in taxable estates such as this, for technical reasons we needn't discuss here;

(ii). consider the effect of the forfeiture rule and whether this could be waived in Sheila's case on the grounds of mental incapacity.

Both would be crucial points because the twins were not clearly dependents of their grandparents, so there is no clear right to an inheritance if there is a survivorship requirement, and also no clear basis to waive the forfeiture rule.

Assuming survivorship doesn't apply, then there is at least a half-decent argument for waiving the forfeiture rule on the basis of the mental incapacity of Sheila (and maybe also, at a stretch, you could argue the twins were dependents), so Jeremy would probably have been advised by his lawyers to reach a settlement with Colin, which may have taken the form of some sort of trust for the twins held in the joint names of Jeremy and Colin or just Colin.

Anyway, that's what I think.

Would the process of probate have taken longer than the usual 4 months ? How much more complicated could it have been ?

Taking all this into consideration I imagine it was far less complicated to go for a straight murder case.!?

( this is my mind working overtime )

No, I think the murder case complicated things greatly.  Remember that there was already a coroner's verdict of suicide, so you had a contradictory situation and a lot of uncertainty.

Yet even in the more certain circumstances of everybody accepting Sheila has committed murder-suicide, probate overall would have taken a long time anyway, as it was a complex estate and it sounds like the relatives would then have taken steps to dispute the estate with Jeremy. 

[Bubo bubo]

No, I think the murder case complicated things greatly.  Remember that there was already a coroner's verdict of suicide, so you had a contradictory situation and a lot of uncertainty.

I thought the original inquest was adjourned pending on going police investigations at the time. I believe it was said to be looking strongly as a case of murder suicide but investigations were on going. Clearly after JB's conviction the inquest verdict would be a forgone conclusion. I do not believe there was ever an inquest verdict before JB was charged

[lookout]

Many thanks for your reply QC.
 During the first month the situation was in the coroners hands so do you think that he'd prepared any documentation pertaining to a suicide ? Under the circumstances at that early stage and after the inquest, it wasn't a situation that could be fast-tracked because of the involvement of the shooting of others.

I'd be curious to know if any documentation would have been written within that first month/ 6 weeks, but sadly I doubt if we'd ever get to know, though my scant knowledge tells me that notes/ preparations are in place, leaving an open verdict if no known cause of suicide is found and burial/ cremation is delayed.

Sheila's swift burial tells me that for reasons unknown that the case was indeed fast-tracked because there WAS evidence of suicidal tendencies. This was within a couple of weeks of the tragedy.

[lookout]

During my work at the hospital, part of my job was dealing with case notes containing notes from those who'd died from suicides, which were retained for a number of years because of cases like this one in the event that someone in the future would ask questions. 
I wonder where Sheila's hospital notes are ?

[lookout]

You can bet your life that the relatives had all this worked out as RWB hurtled to his solicitor when changing the grannie's Will !!

[Bill Robertson]

The female presenter made a number of claims including a phone call from Mr Bamber Snr to the police; Sheila making a 999 call and writing a suicide note 'I have just killed myself'; Can someone provide me with any evidence to support these allegations?

The documentation won’t be released until after the CCRC has made a decision on referral. I can tell you what the evidence is though. The 2002 Metropolitan Police Stokenchurch enquiry uncovered a lot of evidence that has been suppressed. One item was an ‘action’ requiring an officer to investigate the 999 call made from WHF at 06:09. It states this as fact; the call was made. They interviewed PC Millbank who was the officer who received the call. When this became known around 2018, Millbank was contacted by a Guardian journalist who asked him if he received the 999 call. Millbank replied that if the document said he did, then he must have.

The suicide note reference was discovered by me. During the course of interviewing Stan Jones about the kitchen telephone, DCI McDairmid asked a question and Jones said in effect that they didn’t search more thoroughly because they had a suicide note from Sheila saying that she was going to kill her self. Jones said, it was four murders and a suicide, we didn’t need to search for evidence. McDiarmid ignored this admission from Jones that there was a suicide note; she just asked another question about the telephone.

Thus, the Metropolitan Police knew in 2002 that Jeremy was innocent and they buried the information. It was never intended to become public knowledge.

[David1819]

The documentation won’t be released until after the CCRC has made a decision on referral. I can tell you what the evidence is though. The 2002 Metropolitan Police Stokenchurch enquiry uncovered a lot of evidence that has been suppressed. One item was an ‘action’ requiring an officer to investigate the 999 call made from WHF at 06:09. It states this as fact; the call was made. They interviewed PC Millbank who was the officer who received the call. When this became known around 2018, Millbank was contacted by a Guardian journalist who asked him if he received the 999 call. Millbank replied that if the document said he did, then he must have.

The call in question here was the BT operator Jean Rowe who directed the WHF phone over the 999 line to the police station so they can listen in. There was nobody in the house actually physically making a call.

[killingeve]

No I bloody didn't!  You're the one who keeps stupidly saying that they have claimed Sheila wrote a suicide note after killing herself.  They haven't said that.

I think others can make of the posts what they will. 

[killingeve]

The documentation won’t be released until after the CCRC has made a decision on referral. I can tell you what the evidence is though. The 2002 Metropolitan Police Stokenchurch enquiry uncovered a lot of evidence that has been suppressed. One item was an ‘action’ requiring an officer to investigate the 999 call made from WHF at 06:09. It states this as fact; the call was made. They interviewed PC Millbank who was the officer who received the call. When this became known around 2018, Millbank was contacted by a Guardian journalist who asked him if he received the 999 call. Millbank replied that if the document said he did, then he must have.

The suicide note reference was discovered by me. During the course of interviewing Stan Jones about the kitchen telephone, DCI McDairmid asked a question and Jones said in effect that they didn’t search more thoroughly because they had a suicide note from Sheila saying that she was going to kill her self. Jones said, it was four murders and a suicide, we didn’t need to search for evidence. McDiarmid ignored this admission from Jones that there was a suicide note; she just asked another question about the telephone.

Thus, the Metropolitan Police knew in 2002 that Jeremy was innocent and they buried the information. It was never intended to become public knowledge.

I think you misunderstand the weight of evidence Bamber needs for an acquittal.

Any suicide note will go the same way as the photo depicting the wardrobe with the inscription "I hate this place".  If you care to read the 2002 appeal you will get an understanding of the judges' thinking.  They will argue Bamber was not prejudiced as jurors heard evidence from the defence and its experts (Drs Findlay and Bradley) about Sheila's mental state.  Dr Findlay stated Sheila discussed suicide ideation with him which the defence had access to. 

With regard to the 999 call I believe this is contained in the open log and was something to do with the GPO/police making checks on the line.