What documentation is being withheld which could benefit Jeremy?

[Adam]

For Jeremy's account to be plausible no gun shots have had to not have taken place before Nevill phoned him.

" Has the gun " Has to literally mean that, on an episode and Nevill wants some kind of assistance

So it wasn't plausible at trial.

There have been hundreds of invented pre shot scenarios since. These have not been plausible either.

[ILB]

So it wasn't plausible at trial.

There have been hundreds of invented pre shot scenarios since. These have not been plausible either.

The witnesses who spoke of the appellant's hatred and dislike of his family were either lying or had misinterpreted what he had said;

ii) Julie Mugford, the jilted girlfriend, had also lied to prevent anybody else being with the man she had loved;

iii) Nobody had seen the appellant cycling to and from the farm in the early hours of 7 August;

iv) Because the appellant had on a number of occasions before and after the killings entered the house by various ground floor windows there was no probative value in the finding of the hacksaw blade etc;

v) Sheila Caffell had killed her parents and children and then taken her own life for the following reasons:

a) She had a very serious mental illness and it was known that even those with no previous history of violence had killed. She had expressed the morbid thought of an ability to kill her own children;

b) Those who carried out "altruistic" killings had been known to indulge in ritualistic behaviour before committing suicide. Sheila Caffell may have replaced the moderator, changed her clothes and washed herself before killing herself, thus explaining the absence of blood staining, the minimum traces of lead on her hands and absence of sugar on her feet;

c) Having lived on a farm and been present at shoots, the appellant's sister would have understood how to load and operate the rifle;

d) The gun, the magazine and the rounds of ammunition had been left close at hand by the appellant in the room where he had heard an argument about placing the children in foster care;

e) The defendant bore no obvious signs of injury;

f) No bloodstained clothing of his had been recovered by the police; and

g) Dr Craig, Dr Vanezis and the first senior investigating officer had all proceeded on the basis that Sheila Caffell was responsible for the killings.

vi) There was a possibility that the blood in the moderator was not from Sheila Caffell, but represented a mixture of Nevill and June Bamber's blood;

vii) In respect of the telephone call from his father, the appellant had not initially appreciated the seriousness of the situation and then had become frightened to go to the farm a

A defence counsels job is to raise doubt. That is the doubt put forward at trial.

[Adam]

Ths crime scene evidence does not support a pre shot conversation. Nevill & June were shot 9 times in bed & found bare footed in sleeping attire. Sheila was found bare footed in sleeping attire.

So the defence were not at a disadvantage in saying Nevill's aledged call was after shot 9 & the kitchen fight. 

[Adam]

The prosecution would also say a fully fit Nevill & June would have instantly negated any escalation. Rather than start phoning Jeremy.

A sleeping Nevill & June could not stop shots 1-9 from Sheila. 

Appreciate the defence would have to go some to convince the jury Nevill then started phoning Jeremy. But they had no choice. Inventing conversations is illegal.

[ILB]

The prosecution would also say a fully fit Nevill & June would have instantly negated any escalation. Rather than start phoning Jeremy.

A sleeping Nevill & June could not stop shots 1-9 from Sheila. 

Appreciate the defence would have to go some to convince the jury Nevill then started phoning Jeremy. But they had no choice. Inventing conversations is illegal.

Is it?

You've just rang me and we've had a twenty minute conversation about surfboarding.

Report me.

[ILB]

Defence counsel offered an alternative suspect in this case. Shelia.

The defendants narrative tied himself to that.

[Adam]

Is it?

You've just rang me and we've had a twenty minute conversation about surfboarding.

Report me.

Think you misunderstood.

It is illegal to invent conversations at trial. As stated by AI.

[snow66!]

The burns were caused between shots 5-8 or after shot 8. This was also after Bamber's brutal kitchen attack. So quite possible after death.

No reason he would beat Nevill after death.

Obviously the CT are talking about Sheila beating Nevill after he was dead, not JB, Adam!

[Adam]

Obviously the CT are talking about Sheila beating Nevill after he was dead, not JB, Adam!

June (if alive) would not agree to help Sheila move a dead Nevill into the different positions for Sheila to inflict his injuries.

[ILB]

The prosecution would also say a fully fit Nevill & June would have instantly negated any escalation. Rather than start phoning Jeremy.

A sleeping Nevill & June could not stop shots 1-9 from Sheila. 

Appreciate the defence would have to go some to convince the jury Nevill then started phoning Jeremy. But they had no choice. Inventing conversations is illegal.

Jez is saying Nevill phoned him.

So they were tied to that narrative.

[Adam]

People are entitled to invent a pre shots escalation scenario. Snow has a 3 hour scenario!

The defence at trial could not do that. Firstly it is not allowed. Secondly the prosecution would rip it apart.

So it had to be Sheila shot an in bed June/Nevill 9 times & Nevill runs downstairs to start phoning Jeremy.

[Adam]

Jeremy said he does not want to think/talk about what happened at WHF.

He will know the flaws of the defence scenario & know he can't start inventing a pre shot escalation scenario.

[ILB]

Jeremy said he does not want to think/talk about what happened at WHF.

He will know the flaws of the defence scenario & know he can't start inventing a pre shot escalation scenario.

Who's inventing pre shots?

Appreciate you are goading.

[Adam]

Who's inventing pre shots?

Appreciate you are goading.

You are.

Fine on forums. Inventing 20 minute - 3 hour pre shot scenarios won't be allowed at trial. Or by the CCRC or COA.

Sheila running upstairs with the rifle while a fully fit Nevill is ringing Jeremy's AM. Both bare footed in sleeping attire. Lol.

[ILB]

You are.

Fine on forums. Inventing 20 minute - 3 hour pre shot scenarios won't be allowed at trial. Or by the CCRC or COA.

Sheila running upstairs with the rifle while a fully fit Nevill is ringing Jeremy's AM. Both bare footed in sleeping attire. Lol.

So you actually believe a defence counsel can't propose an alternative scenario.....