Mindset of Jeremy Bamber, at time he was informed, that all his family was dead

[paulg]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

[Roch]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Fair points.  I'll check this thread tomorrow.

[Kaldin]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Yes, me too. This business about making sweeping statements and then not backing them up is getting a bit silly.

[paulg]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Yes, me too. This business about making sweeping statements and then not backing them up is getting a bit silly.

If Jeremy Bamber is innocent, and these bits of evidence are available, FFS, lets get them out in the open.

If they are genuine, then i'd happily go and turn the key on the cell door myself...i'll even buy you lot a pint at a meet.

[Kaldin]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Yes, me too. This business about making sweeping statements and then not backing them up is getting a bit silly.

If Jeremy Bamber is innocent, and these bits of evidence are available, FFS, lets get them out in the open.

If they are genuine, then i'd happily go and turn the key on the cell door myself...i'll even buy you lot a pint at meet.

I'd love all that stuff to be true, but I've seen too many sweeping statements and claims of "proof" which don't exist.

I'll hold you to that pint if the key is turned though. 

[simong]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Yes, me too. This business about making sweeping statements and then not backing them up is getting a bit silly.

Totally agree Kaldin. I feel sometimes that Mike posts stuff without evidence for the effect of keeping the forum active. He really doesn't need to.

And Bro, agree. If he has this stuff, get it out and then more people will see it and the less chance the CCRC are going to reject the appeal.

[shonapugs]

I think that we're all entitled to our conclusions. And one of us, at least, must be right. No sweeping statements, no conspiracy theories, at the end of the day, someone murdered a decent, god-fearing family that consisted of a hard-working farmer, a kindly, worried wife, a disturbed, beautiful young woman and two innocent little boys. We should never forget that. Whoever was responsible (and it surely wasn't Sheila) decimated an entire generation. Those little boys would be men now.

[chochokeira]

And just to add on the have to be more specific comment.

I don't, have a look at every single thread, where a cherry picked snippet of logs etc have been discussed. Where Mike puts his take on it, other people come along to show contradictions.

I want to see/hear.

Conversation between Sheila and police.
Itemised phone bills from WHF and Jeremy's house.

Yes, me too. This business about making sweeping statements and then not backing them up is getting a bit silly.

Totally agree Kaldin. I feel sometimes that Mike posts stuff without evidence for the effect of keeping the forum active. He really doesn't need to.

And Bro, agree. If he has this stuff, get it out and then more people will see it and the less chance the CCRC are going to reject the appeal.

Sorry, guys, but I think it's all too easy to criticise Mike when we don't have the constant pressure of running this forum day in, day out, answering a constant barage of - often silly and repetitive - questions, constantly buffeted by criticism.

He has to constantly watch what he's saying and avoid undermining the defence's case. All the while, you guys are pressing him to release data that he simply can't at present.

No, Mike isn't perfect - are you? Yes, Mike does tend to make unsupported claims, but what else do you expect under the circumstances? And I do think that some who post here goad him into it at times. I also think you sometimes tend to make unrealistic demands.

Under the circumstances, and with the provisos I've mentioned, I think Mike does a good job. So, would it harm to give him an occasional break, guys?

[shonapugs]

Whoah, Chochy, I actually think that we give Mike a fair trot, considering the huge pants that he sometimes delivers. He has this ultimate mind-set thing that JB is innocent, when there are folk like me who are convinced that a truly terrible crime has been commited, and poor, frail, tiny Sheila had nothing to do with it. You have to give my theory as much credence........

[simong]

Keira, he only gets pressed to post stuff when he states or presents something as fact but does not back up with evidence. As for the criticism, Most posters on here get more than their fair share back in return from him and others.

I agree about the perfection part of your post, yes, none of us are.  As for the unrealistic demands to his unsupported claims..... well, just don't make the unsupported claims and he won't get the unrealistic demands!

I do agree that Mike does a good job though.

[Jackiepreece]

I totally understand why JB made a strange remark the police had killed his family. If he is innocent one minute he is talking to his father on the phone and then a few hours later he is told his whole family is dead. I think that's important his reaction on the news.  Why whenever points are discussed here do people paulg dismiss stuff that should be debated and paulg when you have the proof JB was responsible for the murders I will buy you a drink but I wont hold my breath. You would be a very rich man if you had proof JB carried out the murders and you must also know something the ccrc don't. The more time goes on it becomes blatantly obvious JB did not have a fair trial and the jury were mislead and evidence from one of the main witnesses was hearsay and on top of that the appeal judges bought out the old chesnut the more they looked at JB's case it was more obvious he was guilty. Same phrase used for the Birmingham 6. Remember them Paul remind me how long were they all locked up for.  It seems to me if in the original trial if you don't have the right defence team and some matters are witheld under PII you could be in a lot of trouble because if you are found guilty then you have to find the evidence to proof you are innocent a big change from the original trial re beyond reasonable doubt. Mike is accused of not supplying all the information asked for on this forum so Paul I look forward to seeing the evidence tomorrow that you have proving JB s guilt.

[Jackiepreece]

I totally understand why JB made a strange remark the police had killed his family. If he is innocent one minute he is talking to his father on the phone and then a few hours later he is told his whole family is dead. I think that's important his reaction on the news.  Why whenever points are discussed here do people paulg dismiss stuff that should be debated and paulg when you have the proof JB was responsible for the murders I will buy you a drink but I wont hold my breath. You would be a very rich man if you had proof JB carried out the murders and you must also know something the ccrc don't. The more time goes on it becomes blatantly obvious JB did not have a fair trial and the jury were mislead and evidence from one of the main witnesses was hearsay and on top of that the appeal judges bought out the old chesnut the more they looked at JB's case it was more obvious he was guilty. Same phrase used for the Birmingham 6. Remember them Paul remind me how long were they all locked up for.  It seems to me if in the original trial if you don't have the right defence team and some matters are witheld under PII you could be in a lot of trouble because if you are found guilty then you have to find the evidence to proof you are innocent a big change from the original trial re beyond reasonable doubt. Mike is accused of not supplying all the information asked for on this forum so Paul I look forward to seeing the evidence tomorrow that you have proving JB s guilt.

[Jackiepreece]

Just wanted to add something else I constantly get accused on here of sticking up for JB because I fancy him ridiculous because I have never even met him.

JB had a good job working on the family farm, he was given a beautiful little cottage in a beautiful village right opposite a nice country pub and restaurant he owned shares in the family caravan park and he was due some inheritance through an ailing grandmother.
He was tall dark and very handsome and had practically every girl he ever met falling at his feet


Does this sound like someone who had to carry out a mass murder to enhance his life

Paul feeling a bit jealous of JB because that's what it sounds like to me

[simong]

How do you know he had a good job? He might have hated it. Look at it from the greedy point of view because that is what the prosecution said was his motivation.....Goldhanger is boring for any 24 year old. If he had every girl falling at his feet, his judgement in having criminal/evil mugford as a girlfriend is odd to say the least. What did he immediately get from shares? He robbed his parents caravan park out of greed, why wouldn't he arrange the death of/ or kill his other heirs out of greed?

[chochokeira]

How can his initial reaction be a red herring?  It is what it is, or rather, what it was... his initial reaction.

Because even if he thought the police had shot them, he clearly thought that it was Sheila who initially had the gun.

"Stages of Grief"

"1. SHOCK & DENIAL-
You will probably react to learning of the loss with numbed disbelief. You may deny the reality of the loss at some level, in order to avoid the pain. Shock provides emotional protection from being overwhelmed all at once. This may last for weeks."

I recall sitting on the floor next to the dead body of a close member of my family, drinking a cup of tea as though nothing had happened as I waited or the coroner's assistant to arrive. I remember wondering I apparently felt nothing, no sadness, no grief, no emotion whatsoever. When the coroner's assistant arrived, I was calm and organised...or so I thought.

Then, as he was about to leave, I asked the CA, "Are you sure she's dead, only she's still breathing."

The CA looked at me with concern and asked if I would be ok to wait alone for the undertaker to arrive. I told him I was fine.

"No you're not", he said, "you're in shock." I said that was silly, I was fine.

I continued to feel fine with no feelings of grief or mourning for week or so. I remember feeling proud of myself for being so calm and strong, yet I also now I felt seriously guilty that I wasn't at all upset and was coping so well. I couldn't understand why I couldn't cry.

Shock, sends us to a strange place, one where time stands still or even reverses, as our brains struggle to protect us from the initial pain of unbearable grief. In that strange place, our brains convince us that the trauma we've witnessed hasn't really happened at all. Shock makes us feel and appear to be astonishingly rational in the most irrational of situations. Shock also turns emotions upside down. Within hours of my beloved father's sudden and very premature death, my mother and sat eating a large meal in the kitchen. We laughed and joked as though nothing had happened. We were like that for a couple of days...until we were suddenly overwhelmed by grief.

Does that ring any bells regarding the behaviour of Jeremy Bamber following the deaths of his family? He was in shock, plain and simple, Kaldin, and that's not a rational place to be.

Yes good post.  Regardless as to whether Jeremy prompted the police about Sheila's mental health or the police prompted Jeremy, upon being informed of the deaths inside the farmhouse, his inital reaction was not to link the deaths with Sheila.  Either he was in shock or he was dubious about the police operation.  He certainly does not appear to be following any cunning plan to pin it all on his sis.

Thanks, Rocky.