Burning down of the caravan park shop.

[ILB]

Thanks ILB,so you would describe him as someone with an average IQ,by no means backward,shall we say? Its just that I have noticed a few digs about not being the sharpest,but this may just be from guilters being nasty.

He was definitely not intellectually challenged. I would just say of average intelligence. He was sociable, very confident guy as I've alluded to

[snow66!]

He was definitely not intellectually challenged. I would just say of average intelligence. He was sociable, very confident guy as I've alluded to

Thank you very much ILB,that is all I wanted to know.

[ILB]

Thank you very much ILB,that is all I wanted to know.

No problem

[Cambridgecutie]

Thanks ILB,so you would describe him as someone with an average IQ,by no means backward,shall we say? Its just that I have noticed a few digs about not being the sharpest,but this may just be from guilters being nasty.

Meeeow!  Very passive aggressive.

IQ is meaningless when talking about someone's intelligence.  The IQ test mostly concerns logical questions, that you can improve on significantly if you practice them a lot, and work out the type of logic that's involved in those types of questions.

But there is emotional intelligence as well.

There are things like attention to detail.  The ability to Dot all the  I's and cross all the t's.

Having a good memory or a bad memory.  Different types of memory, Short term memory, long term memory.

Charm, charisma, the ability to make friends and acquaintances, and the ability to make the right friends and acquaintances, at the right time of your life. 

Driving good people away, or attracting good people to you. 

or behaving in a clever way, or a stupid way.

There are many, many aspects to what constitutes intelligence,  of some description.

Intelligence and clever are two different things.  So you can be intelligent, but incredibly stupid at the same time.

Anyway, Jeremy fails to impress when judging him on many of the above traits.

And that's what makes me notice that he's not the sharpest person in the world.

------

For example, what sort of person would lean back on his chair and floss his teeth with fibres from his jumper, whilst being interviewed as a suspect for murder?

It's that behaviour that makes him stupid; his total and complete inability to accurately judge the tone of the moment,  to read the room and so on.

It's got nothing to do with age, it's his personality and innate ability to screw everything up.  Everywhere he goes, there is a little whirlwind of chaos that swirls around him. And that is as true now, as it was long before the murders took place.

You see that crazy and reckless behaviour everywhere with Bamber.  I mean, it is literally everywhere.

To sum it up in one word would be stupidity.  Two words; pure stupidity.

[snow66!]

Meeeow!  Very passive aggressive.

IQ is meaningless when talking about someone's intelligence.  The IQ test mostly concerns logical questions, that you can improve on significantly if you practice them a lot, and work out the type of logic that's involved in those types of questions.

But there is emotional intelligence as well.

There are things like attention to detail.  The ability to Dot all the  I's and cross all the t's.

Having a good memory or a bad memory.  Different types of memory, Short term memory, long term memory.

Charm, charisma, the ability to make friends and acquaintances, and the ability to make the right friends and acquaintances, at the right time of your life. 

Driving good people away, or attracting good people to you. 

or behaving in a clever way, or a stupid way.

There are many, many aspects to what constitutes intelligence,  of some description.

Intelligence and clever are two different things.  So you can be intelligent, but incredibly stupid at the same time.

Anyway, Jeremy fails to impress when judging him on many of the above traits.

And that's what makes me notice that he's not the sharpest person in the world.

------

For example, what sort of person would lean back on his chair and floss his teeth with fibres from his jumper, whilst being interviewed as a suspect for murder?

It's that behaviour that makes him stupid; his total and complete inability to accurately judge the tone of the moment,  to read the room and so on.

It's got nothing to do with age, it's his personality and innate ability to screw everything up.  Everywhere he goes, there is a little whirlwind of chaos that swirls around him. And that is as true now, as it was long before the murders took place.

You see that crazy and reckless behaviour everywhere with Bamber.  I mean, it is literally everywhere.

To sum it up in one word would be stupidity.  Two words; pure stupidity.

You dont happen to be one of Bambers psychologists do you?

[Adam]

The police interviews did not mention a lot of the forensic evidence which was in the COA - silencer, nightdress, hands, feet, nails, fingers.

It probably had not been processed yet.

He was questioned about the windows, bike & his calls to Julie. All of which had been put forward by Julie. 

If confronted with the COA evidence, he may have admitted it.

[ILB]

Meeeow!  Very passive aggressive.

IQ is meaningless when talking about someone's intelligence.  The IQ test mostly concerns logical questions, that you can improve on significantly if you practice them a lot, and work out the type of logic that's involved in those types of questions.

But there is emotional intelligence as well.

There are things like attention to detail.  The ability to Dot all the  I's and cross all the t's.

Having a good memory or a bad memory.  Different types of memory, Short term memory, long term memory.

Charm, charisma, the ability to make friends and acquaintances, and the ability to make the right friends and acquaintances, at the right time of your life. 

Driving good people away, or attracting good people to you. 

or behaving in a clever way, or a stupid way.

There are many, many aspects to what constitutes intelligence,  of some description.

Intelligence and clever are two different things.  So you can be intelligent, but incredibly stupid at the same time.

Anyway, Jeremy fails to impress when judging him on many of the above traits.

And that's what makes me notice that he's not the sharpest person in the world.

------

For example, what sort of person would lean back on his chair and floss his teeth with fibres from his jumper, whilst being interviewed as a suspect for murder?

It's that behaviour that makes him stupid; his total and complete inability to accurately judge the tone of the moment,  to read the room and so on.

It's got nothing to do with age, it's his personality and innate ability to screw everything up.  Everywhere he goes, there is a little whirlwind of chaos that swirls around him. And that is as true now, as it was long before the murders took place.

You see that crazy and reckless behaviour everywhere with Bamber.  I mean, it is literally everywhere.

To sum it up in one word would be stupidity.  Two words; pure stupidity.

It's not the same for any crime or the same for every criminal

The Stephen Lawrence case is a good example. In the first 48 hours 26 separate observations naming the same five youths of being responsible. These youths have no alibis.

As of 2022, only two of them have been convicted. The other three remain free men and as of such in the eyes of the law are innocent men. Appreciate the first police investigation back in 1993 was a bungled one. And apparently there was allegations of corruption

There have been cases where individuals have had rock solid alibis that seem unimpregnable and tip to at first glance. Closer investigation has been able to strip away the alibis and then that individual has been convicted.

There have been cases where the " suspects" "perpetrators" have no used any intelligence, been reckless but remain free without charge because the CPS can't quite muster the evidence to put before a jury.

[ILB]

The police interviews did not mention a lot of the forensic evidence which was in the COA - silencer, nightdress, hands, feet, nails, fingers.

It probably had not been processed yet.

He was questioned about the windows, bike & his calls to Julie. All of which were put forward by Julie. 

If confronted with the COA evidence, he may have admitted it.

He didn't falter. He gave explinations. He said no comment to some questions perhaps on at his own behest. Perhaps from legal advice.

He didn't come out of the interview scathed so to speak. He was bailed hours later

[ILB]

Guarantee to you he was only charged with the osea robbery from a tactical point of view to try and get him remanded. The robbery pales into insignificance when five charges of murder hang in the balance. Would have failed anyway. He would have got bail. Having no previous convictions etc

[Cambridgecutie]

You dont happen to be one of Bambers psychologists do you?

No, I just observe the facts.

[Adam]

He didn't falter. He gave explinations. He said no comment to some questions perhaps on at his own behest. Perhaps from legal advice.

He didn't come out of the interview scathed so to speak. He was bailed hours later

Have you read the interview transcripts?

Bamber was trying to be as uncoperative as possible.

Do you think he would have admitted it if confronted with the mountain of COA evidence?

[ILB]

Have you read the interview transcripts?

Bamber was trying to be as uncopetative as possible.

Do you think he would have admitted it if confronted with the mountain of COA evidence?

Some of the police questions were ridiculous. Asking him what kind of household goods he had in his house. Threatening to kick his brief out of the room.

He may have came across as arragont. If he is innocent, why shouldn't he? He answered questions.

Yes I think he would have still denied it. 

Are you familiar with how long GSR lasts for?

[Adam]

Have you read the interview transcripts?

Bamber was trying to be as uncoperative as possible.

Do you think he would have admitted it if confronted with the mountain of COA evidence?

Suspect the 'no comments' would increase. He can't dispute experts from an interview room.

He would still have nothing to lose by going to trial. Admitting it would not result in a lesser sentance. It was 5x murder.

He couldn't make a deal & become supergrass. He had worked alone. 

[Adam]

Some of the police questions were ridiculous. Asking him what kind of household goods he had in his house. Threatening to kick his brief out of the room.

He may have came across as arragont. If he is innocent, why shouldn't he? He answered questions.

Yes I think he would have still denied it. 

Are you familiar with how long GSR lasts for?

You need to cut the 'if's.

The 200+ pieces of evidence shows he is guilty. Nothing shows he is innocent.

But an interesting case to discuss.

[ILB]

Suspect the 'no comments' would increase. He can't dispute experts from an interview room.

He would still have nothing to lose by going to trial. Admitting it would not result in a lesser sentance. It was 5x murder.

He couldn't make a deal & become supergrass. He had worked alone.

He wouldn't be disputing experts from a police interview room. That would be his QC'S job at any subsequent trial