Jeremy Bamber "I can only surmise" (as to why Robert Boutflour would lie)

[Jane]

Be interesting to know from the guilt perspective just how long he had been thinking about doing what he did.

Perhaps from childhood or teenage years.

Would have been long before Julie

Undoubtedly. Who knows what he might have tried to convey were his dreams for the future, and to whom. I doubt his dreams would have been considered, even IF they'd been heard. Imagine the frustration.

[Adam]

Would have been thinking about it after he started working at WHF.

[Steve_uk]

Be interesting to know from the guilt perspective just how long he had been thinking about doing what he did.

Perhaps from childhood or teenage years.

Would have been long before Julie

I think it was after Nevill and June threatened to disinherit if he didn't relinquish Suzette. I don't know for sure, but that would be my guess.

[Adam]

Julie said he first started speaking about it in late 1984.

So would have been thinking about it before this.

Would have been when he started working on the farm & knew he was not going to get any more trips abroad paid for. So mid 1984.

[Adam]

A lot would have happened between mid 84 - mid 85. A lot behind closed doors.

We do know he robbed the caravan site & considered burning down WHF. Seems Sheila & the twins were going to be constantly supported for years & decades.

[Steve_uk]

A lot would have happened between mid 84 - mid 85. A lot behind closed doors.

We do know he robbed the caravan site & considered burning down WHF. Seems Sheila & the twins were going to be constantly supported for years & decades.

The tragedy was there was enough money for all of them to lead comfortable lives. Under police interrogation he admitted the lesser felony of robbery, whilst concealing the far greater diablerie of mass murder. He admitted to the motive of greed for the first crime, but has never officially confessed to the second.

[ILB]

The tragedy was there was enough money for all of them to lead comfortable lives. Under police interrogation he admitted the lesser felony of robbery, whilst concealing the far greater diablerie of mass murder. He admitted to the motive of greed for the first crime, but has never officially confessed to the second.

In cross examination at trial he admitted it was part greed. Part " bringing home to the directors it was lackidasical "

In interviews he said it was just due to the 2nd reason I've just stated.

Its obvious he did it for greed £900 was a tidy sum in 1985. However I don't think Julie was an innocent bystander and was as much involved.

Obviously Bamber did the deed and not her because he was intimate with the caravan office.

[ILB]

We can't overlook Julie's dishonest endeavours

That doesn't mean she wasn't a credible witness.

But she's hardly a Florence nightingale character either.

[David1819]

We can't overlook Julie's dishonest endeavours

That doesn't mean she wasn't a credible witness.

But she's hardly a Florence nightingale character either.

The fact her story contains false information she could only have got from either the police or the relatives is in-itself proof the story is a lie.

IIRC there is a NOTW contract signed and dated by her pre-trial contradicting what she said in the witness box also.

[Steve_uk]

The fact her story contains false information she could only have got from either the police or the relatives is in-itself proof the story is a lie.

IIRC there is a NOTW contract signed and dated by her pre-trial contradicting what she said in the witness box also.

It doesn't alter the body of her evidence, even if I accepted what you said is true, which I don't. As for the NOTW deal, I agree it was distasteful, but she was being hounded by Fleet Street and consequently made a deal with the highest bidder to get the pack off her back. It's unclear whether the deal was signed before or after the trial, but it was arranged through a solicitor, who, one would have thought, had given her legal advice on the matter.

[Rob_]

It doesn't alter the body of her evidence, even if I accepted what you said is true, which I don't. As for the NOTW deal, I agree it was distasteful, but she was being hounded by Fleet Street and consequently made a deal with the highest bidder to get the pack off her back. It's unclear whether the deal was signed before or after the trial, but it was arranged through a solicitor, who, one would have thought, had given her legal advice on the matter.

Distasteful? The main witness being paid a large sum of money for a conviction?

[Steve_uk]

Distasteful? The main witness being paid a large sum of money for a conviction?

It was distasteful: the deal, the photographs, the interview. Had he not been convicted there would have been a similar story in The Sun, courtesy of Jeremy Bamber.