My view on what time Bamber called his AM.

[ILB]

If Jeremy bamber owned a bike himself which was something for example he had bought in July 1978. It holds the same weight as June's bike being at his cottage

[ILB]

I don't read much into the bike. I do believe ep got the idea from the relatives as David pointed out.

[Adam]

I don't read much into the bike. I do believe ep got the idea from the relatives as David pointed out.

Yes the relatives & Julie would have mentioned the bike to EP.

Resulting in the prosecution case being that Bamber cycled to/from WHF.

[Adam]

If Jeremy bamber owned a bike himself which was something for example he had bought in July 1978. It holds the same weight as June's bike being at his cottage

Probably. 

Going by the circumstantial evidence,  the prosecution case is he stole June's bike just before the massacre as Bamber did not have his own bike.

[Adam]

Why do we discuss the bike in so much detail? Why is empathise put upon it.

Even if guilty. He had the options of two other modes of transport. He could drive. He could also walk.

Driving was not an option. Too much risk of people seeing or hearing him leave/arrive.

[Adam]

Why do we discuss the bike in so much detail? Why is empathise put upon it.

Even if guilty. He had the options of two other modes of transport. He could drive. He could also walk.

Walking was not an option. Too long a walk.

He had to ring the police after phoning his AM from WHF within a realistic timescale. June's bike gave him that option.

[ILB]

Walking was not an option. Too long a walk.

He had to ring the police after phoning his AM from WHF within a realistic timescale. June's bike gave him that option.

It's not to long a walk is it for a fit and healthy 24 year old man.

Timescale wise if gulity he had a three hour window from midnight

[ILB]

Driving was not an option. Too much risk of people seeing or hearing him leave/arrive.

The whole thing is risky.

Anybody could have seen him walking bike or car. It didn't even have to be a conclusive ID. Just " a man out and about in the early hours "

[ILB]

Probably. 

Going by the circumstantial evidence,  the prosecution case is he stole June's bike just before the massacre as Bamber did not have his own bike.

I will check now. Cannot remember answered six to eight weeks from the time of the massacre. Or from when the September interviews

[Adam]

The whole thing is risky.

Anybody could have seen him walking bike or car. It didn't even have to be a conclusive ID. Just " a man out and about in the early hours "

Least risk & effort cycling. A risk he was prepared to take.

He had to phone the police within a realistic time after phoning his AM from WHF. Impossible without a bike.

[Adam]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10043.0.html

Page 23.

Julie said she first saw June's bike on the 4th August. Two days before Bamber committed the massacre.

[snow66!]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10043.0.html

Page 23.

Julie said she first saw June's bike on the 4th August. Two days before Bamber committed the massacre.

ILB is correct Adam,Julie's statements are full of strange inconsistencies,non more so in the details about the bike.

Allegedly in June 1985 just a couple of months before the crime JB tells Julie that he hopes Sheila will come to stay at the farm and that he will use a bike to carry out the murders.Ok,fair enough. 

Fast forward to 4th Aug and this is what Julie also says in her statement-----

I can say that when I arrived at Jeremy's house on Sunday 4th August 1985 I saw a ladies cycle by the toilet of Jeremy's house.I asked Jeremy why it was there and where had it come from and he told me that it was his mothers and he had got it so I could use it.I had not previously asked him to get me a bike although I think I might have suggested it might be handy sometime the previous summer.--------

Ok,lets just think about it,Bamber tells Julie that when Sheila hopefully comes to stay at the farm he will use a bicycle to carry out the murder of his family.

So,lo and behold on the 4th of Aug Sheila is staying at the farm and Jeremy has a bike at his house.Now,was Julie too dumb to realise what this meant? Couldn't she remember what was said by Bamber,did she need it spelled out,- Sheila visiting WHF + bike =MURDERS!!!

If not,had Bamber a temporary loss of memory too when she asked what the bike was for?

Why didn't he say something like- Cant you guess why its here? Its for cycling to the farm to kill my family ,I told you my plan just weeks ago remember? Dont tell me you forgot! You really are a dozy cow Julie.

No,no such dialogue whatsoever.WHY?

All that Julie does is more or less confirm what JB said,that the bike was taken to the cottage for her use which she admits requesting herself the previous summer.

[snow66!]

The prosecution case was that Bamber used the bike and that was the sole purpose of it being at his cottage,indeed he had told Julie he was going to use a bike to carry out the murders just weeks before it appeared.Yet,when Julie asked for confirmation as to why the bike was at his cottage he replied for her use.

Why didn't JB tell her it was for transport to the farm to kill his family? He had already told her his plan,why try to tell her the bike was for her,she was more or less his accomplice whom he allegegly gave a running commentary about the shooting.

So why would JB deny what the bike was for to Julie? Doesn't make much sense does it? He told her everything else in the run up to the murders didn't he?

[Adam]

The prosecution case was that Bamber used the bike and that was the sole purpose of it being at his cottage,indeed he had told Julie he was going to use a bike to carry out the murders just weeks before it appeared.Yet,when Julie asked for confirmation as to why the bike was at his cottage he replied for her use.

Why didn't JB tell her it was for transport to the farm to kill his family? He had already told her his plan,why try to tell her the bike was for her,she was more or less his accomplice whom he allegegly gave a running commentary about the shooting.

So why would JB deny what the bike was for to Julie? Doesn't make much sense does it? He told her everything else in the run up to the murders didn't he?

Because he was going to tell her MM committed the massacre.

[Adam]

ILB is correct Adam,Julie's statements are full of strange inconsistencies,non more so in the details about the bike.

Allegedly in June 1985 just a couple of months before the crime JB tells Julie that he hopes Sheila will come to stay at the farm and that he will use a bike to carry out the murders.Ok,fair enough. 

Fast forward to 4th Aug and this is what Julie also says in her statement-----

I can say that when I arrived at Jeremy's house on Sunday 4th August 1985 I saw a ladies cycle by the toilet of Jeremy's house.I asked Jeremy why it was there and where had it come from and he told me that it was his mothers and he had got it so I could use it.I had not previously asked him to get me a bike although I think I might have suggested it might be handy sometime the previous summer.--------

Ok,lets just think about it,Bamber tells Julie that when Sheila hopefully comes to stay at the farm he will use a bicycle to carry out the murder of his family.

So,lo and behold on the 4th of Aug Sheila is staying at the farm and Jeremy has a bike at his house.Now,was Julie too dumb to realise what this meant? Couldn't she remember what was said by Bamber,did she need it spelled out,- Sheila visiting WHF + bike =MURDERS!!!

If not,had Bamber a temporary loss of memory too when she asked what the bike was for?

Why didn't he say something like- Cant you guess why its here? Its for cycling to the farm to kill my family ,I told you my plan just weeks ago remember? Dont tell me you forgot! You really are a dozy cow Julie.

No,no such dialogue whatsoever.WHY?

All that Julie does is more or less confirm what JB said,that the bike was taken to the cottage for her use which she admits requesting herself the previous summer.

Because he was going to tell her MM committed the massacre.