What documentation is being withheld which could benefit Jeremy?

[David1819]

All that is known for sure is that he burned Nevill 3 times to check for signs of life.

That's not what the Judge said.

"Included in other matters about which it may be impossible to reach any conclusion are the three marks on Neville Bamber’s back. Are they burn marks as Dr Vanezis thought likely, or are they marks from prodding which was the view to which Professor Knight was inclined, although he said expressly ‘not firmly inclined’. Both pathologists were cautious in their opinion about those marks and Professor Knight himself readily agreed when asked that Dr Vanezis had got the advantage over him in giving an opinion because Dr Vanezis had seen the marks on the skin on the flesh whereas Professor Knight had only seen them much later on a photograph. But whether they were burn or prod marks, neither expert gave any, even, opinion as to how precisely, or with what, it might have been caused so if you speculate: ‘Were they caused with the hot end of the rifle, or the hot end of the silencer?’ we know not. You do not even have an opinion expressed by the experts who saw the photographs or marks. I can only say you may make of that evidence what you can, but it may be that there is really no sufficient basis upon which you can reach any conclusion upon them at all, save that you are likely to take the view that they were somehow inflicted on Neville Bamber during the fight that went on in the kitchen or the shooting that went on in the house that night.”

[Adam]

That's not what the Judge said.

"Included in other matters about which it may be impossible to reach any conclusion are the three marks on Neville Bamber’s back. Are they burn marks as Dr Vanezis thought likely, or are they marks from prodding which was the view to which Professor Knight was inclined, although he said expressly ‘not firmly inclined’. Both pathologists were cautious in their opinion about those marks and Professor Knight himself readily agreed when asked that Dr Vanezis had got the advantage over him in giving an opinion because Dr Vanezis had seen the marks on the skin on the flesh whereas Professor Knight had only seen them much later on a photograph. But whether they were burn or prod marks, neither expert gave any, even, opinion as to how precisely, or with what, it might have been caused so if you speculate: ‘Were they caused with the hot end of the rifle, or the hot end of the silencer?’ we know not. You do not even have an opinion expressed by the experts who saw the photographs or marks. I can only say you may make of that evidence what you can, but it may be that there is really no sufficient basis upon which you can reach any conclusion upon them at all, save that you are likely to take the view that they were somehow inflicted on Neville Bamber during the fight that went on in the kitchen or the shooting that went on in the house that night.”

The judge is right that Vanezis saw the marks.

Why do you think Bamber burnt Nevill?

[snow66!]

That's not what the Judge said.

"Included in other matters about which it may be impossible to reach any conclusion are the three marks on Neville Bamber’s back. Are they burn marks as Dr Vanezis thought likely, or are they marks from prodding which was the view to which Professor Knight was inclined, although he said expressly ‘not firmly inclined’. Both pathologists were cautious in their opinion about those marks and Professor Knight himself readily agreed when asked that Dr Vanezis had got the advantage over him in giving an opinion because Dr Vanezis had seen the marks on the skin on the flesh whereas Professor Knight had only seen them much later on a photograph. But whether they were burn or prod marks, neither expert gave any, even, opinion as to how precisely, or with what, it might have been caused so if you speculate: ‘Were they caused with the hot end of the rifle, or the hot end of the silencer?’ we know not. You do not even have an opinion expressed by the experts who saw the photographs or marks. I can only say you may make of that evidence what you can, but it may be that there is really no sufficient basis upon which you can reach any conclusion upon them at all, save that you are likely to take the view that they were somehow inflicted on Neville Bamber during the fight that went on in the kitchen or the shooting that went on in the house that night.”

Well as i've said a few times now, Dave, I wonder what the likes of Knight and Vanezis have to say about Boyce's theory?
Do you think the CCRC have asked for their opinion? If not why not?
Maybe Heidi should track them down before they kick the bucket too!

[ILB]

It was a spontaneous decision. As Nevill was next to the aga. He was not expecting that.

Didn't effect the verdict.

Bamber himself mentions torture in regards to the burns. He says " I would never torture dad by burning him"

If you believe him the killer which you do that's what more than likely he did burn him for.

[ILB]

The judge is right that Vanezis saw the marks.

Why do you think Bamber burnt Nevill?

Vaneziz said he couldn't conclusively put the burns down to having happened on the night his exact phrasing was " I can't be drawn to their origin "

In fairness if they happened pre massacre I would have expected Jeremy to have known about them.

[ILB]

Bamber apparently according to  Julie said that MM said " The old man put up a good fight "

Which really means he put up a good fight against Bamber.

Nevill in daily life dictated to Jeremy, he played a central role in his life, boss and dad etc. 

Bamber may have been angered by Nevils resistance hence he burned him.

[Hardy Boy]

Well as i've said a few times now, Dave, I wonder what the likes of Knight and Vanezis have to say about Boyce's theory?
Do you think the CCRC have asked for their opinion? If not why not?
Maybe Heidi should track them down before they kick the bucket too!

Knight and Vanezis testified at trial and don’t need to respond every time someone puts a YouTube experiment out, or a new podcast episode is released.  Next you will be wanting them to respond in the comment section,   Suggesting experts should be tracked down before they KICK THE BUCKET is a bit grim snow.

[Steve_uk]

Knight and Vanezis testified at trial and don’t need to respond every time someone puts a YouTube experiment out, or a new podcast episode is released.  Next you will be wanting them to respond in the comment section,   Suggesting experts should be tracked down before they KICK THE BUCKET is a bit grim snow.

Allow members a little humour, Hardy Boy. This site dealing with the Bamber case as it does is grim enough as it is.

[Hardy Boy]

Allow members a little humour, Hardy Boy. This site dealing with the Bamber case as it does is grim enough as it is.

im not stopping anyone having humour, i just thought it was out of character from Snow that’s all?  Just saying it was a bit grim is my opinion?
 
No one enjoys a bit of humour more than me,  But when we’re talking about real experts who are still alive, with families, some comments can stray into being disrespectful,   especially online. We already see posters openly accusing people like Vanezis of lying.   I get the point Snow was trying to make though.

[Hardy Boy]

You could be right ILB about Bamber,  FREEDOM BID UK’s longest-serving woman prisoner who knifed love rival could soon be released after 40 years in jail,   She was told she would serve at least 11 years — but is still behind bars after refusing to attend rehabilitation programmes.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/37737514/britains-longest-serving-female-prisoner-released/

[Adam]

Vaneziz said he couldn't conclusively put the burns down to having happened on the night his exact phrasing was " I can't be drawn to their origin "

In fairness if they happened pre massacre I would have expected Jeremy to have known about them.

Bamber believes they happened on the night.

They do look like recent burns.

[Adam]

Yet he leaves the silencer in the cupboard when all he had to do was leave it beside Sheila.

Rob has always said Bamber would be 'home free' if he had left the silencer next to Sheila. Then again Rob has always said he can't go into his garden at night as it's dark!:

It would make the paint, scratch and grey hair not important. Proof would not be needed that the silencer was used as it was next to Sheila.

If experts checked the blood inside then it would confirm Bamber's guilt. Bamber could not start accusing the relatives from the mid 90's.

[ILB]

You could be right ILB about Bamber,  FREEDOM BID UK’s longest-serving woman prisoner who knifed love rival could soon be released after 40 years in jail,   She was told she would serve at least 11 years — but is still behind bars after refusing to attend rehabilitation programmes.


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/37737514/britains-longest-serving-female-prisoner-released/

Yes they have to programme with the system Hardy, it's cutting your nose to spite your face if you don't.  I suppose in Jeremy's case he has nothing to lose as as he's whole life but I still believe it will be  difficult regime.


A good example of this is Stephen Downing who was convicted of the Bakewell tart murder. ( who I actually believe was guilty)

[ILB]

Rob has always said Bamber would be 'home free' if he had left the silencer next to Sheila. Then again Rob has always said he can't go into his garden at night as it's dark!:

It would make the paint, scratch and grey hair not important. Proof would not be needed that the silencer was used as it was next to Sheila.

If experts checked the blood inside then it would confirm Bamber's guilt. Bamber could not start accusing the relatives from the mid 90's.

At his trial he said the only people he thought was telling lies were Julie and RB,  ( civilian not police)

Saying " It is dangerous my Lord to think what RBs motives may be "

[Adam]

Carpet blood was checked so assume silencer blood would be. It would help Vanezis determine who received contact shots.

If not checked straight away, it could be kept as an exhibit & checked later when Bamber became a suspect. 

If EP just put the silencer away the relatives could still find it. Bamber couldn't claim it was not used as it was next to Sheila!: Although he would claim they fabricated it.