Author Topic: Mindset of Jeremy Bamber, at time he was informed, that all his family was dead  (Read 37925 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
yes but they had been separated for ages so perhaps she went back to using her maiden name.

Why would that make a difference? The boys were called Caffell. Forgetting her married name shows how much interest he took, you don't forget things like that unless you had no interest in the first place.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Why would that make a difference? The boys were called Caffell. Forgetting her married name shows how much interest he took, you don't forget things like that unless you had no interest in the first place.

Ha Ha - that just shows my feelings then - my sister changed her name back but the children kept her married name and I find it confusing - because funnily enough I don't use the surnames very often - they are my family and I use their first names. But there you go - you have revealed my true feelings.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Ha Ha - that just shows my feelings then - my sister changed her name back but the children kept her married name and I find it confusing - because funnily enough I don't use the surnames very often - they are my family and I use their first names. But there you go - you have revealed my true feelings.

You might ineed find it confusing, but you KNOW what their name is!  ;)
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44382
I don't know!!  I'm not saying I believe it but all things are possible just a suggestion but you dontvthink outside the box, you just repeat, repeat unproven scenarios etc.
Would be great if you tried to discuss instead of just insisting you are always right.

There is not much point in thinking outside the box. It is quite simple how he committed the crime.

The prosecution never said he hid inside WHF, and someone else drove his car to his cottage.

He drove home, then cycled back to WHF on the bike he had err borrowed from June just beforehand.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
You might ineed find it confusing, but you KNOW what their name is!  ;)

If you asked me quickly in a stressful situation I might get it the wrong way round though.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
There is not much point in thinking outside the box. It is quite simple how he committed the crime.

The prosecution never said he hid inside WHF, and someone else drove his car to his cottage.

He drove home, then cycled back to WHF on the bike he had err borrowed from June just beforehand.

He could of  - or perhaps not . Unfortunately because there is no forensic evidence - for whatever reason ( you don't have to go into one of your referring to threads on this one)  There is no proof whatsoever that this happened.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44382
He could of  - or perhaps not . Unfortunately because there is no forensic evidence - for whatever reason ( you don't have to go into one of your referring to threads on this one)  There is no proof whatsoever that this happened.

The proof is from Jeremy himself. Who said he left WHF at around 10am. After supper. The Foakes's also heard him drive off.

Jeremy then said he rang the police from his cottage and then drove to WHF.

There is also proof that he had the opportunity to cycle to WHF. On the bike he had borrowed from June. Jeremy confirming this.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
There is not much point in thinking outside the box. It is quite simple how he committed the crime.

The prosecution never said he hid inside WHF, and someone else drove his car to his cottage.

He drove home, then cycled back to WHF on the bike he had err borrowed from June just beforehand.

Adam maybe the prosecution did not think outside of the box ;D

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
If you asked me quickly in a stressful situation I might get it the wrong way round though.

It doesn't matter, Jeremy said he didn't 'remember' her married name.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
There have already been threads on the dogs. And the windows.

The window had been loosened with the found hacksaw beforehand. Or Jeremy had left it open at the last supper. Ready for his return a few hours later.

There is no reason Crispy would prevent Jeremy's massacre attempt. Even the OS has not suggested this.

Jeremy would know his way around WHF. Whether it was dark or not. Maybe the hallway light was left on. My parents used to leave it on for my sister when she was around 6 years old. She was scared of total darkness. That would be more than enough light.
[/quote
Hi Guys

Sheila may have been awake and let Jeremy in not knowing what was going to happen


Another good point Susan!

He's hardly going to tell the police this....
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 03:07:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44382
Another good point Susan!

He's hardly going to tell the police this....

Yes, another good point.

Perhaps Jeremy knocked on the WHF door at 2am. Not sure why he would do this. Unless he had bumped his head on his sun bed and wanted his mummy.

It's lucky Sheila answered and everyone else remained asleep.  Neville may have been a bit suspicious.

« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 03:26:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Hi Patti, I agree we were told several lights were on, I was just going by Adams belief of complete darkness to argue his point.
It's hard to be sure if lights were switched on and off while Jeremy was outside with the police or whether various police had inaccurate memories as some would explain it
So many different scenarios can be suggested, only Scorpio knows all the answers :'(

I wasn't there, I can't say which lights were on and which were not.  Unless police took time at the scene to record precisely which lights were on and off, which they didn't, we are stuck with them trying to recollect later and it is not an issue that they would likely remember with precision.  Remembering the light of a room they focused on all night is far more believable than recognizing everything in the house.

It is clear some were on and off, we will never know which ones were on and which ones off because the officers disagree with one another and it is not in issue that would stand out sufficiently in their memories later.  Which they left on and which they didn't doesn't particularly matter anyway.  It doesn't help add anything to knowledge about how the crimes went down since lights could have been turned on/off after the murders.

Aside from the fact the evidence proves they all died before the police arrived, the police were positioned too far away from the house to realistically see any movement in the windows regardless of whether lights were on and off. You can only see someone in a upper floor window if the person is directly in the window looking out and you are close enough to be able to see clearly inside.  I can't even see inside my own windows from the end of my driveway I have to be pretty close.  From my the end of the driveway at best I can see light cast from my computer or a television that is on but nothing more. I had to be rather close to the window to see my wife watching me take the garbage out.  Because of the angle you can't see anything unless it is directly in the window. If you are in at the same elevation or higher then you can see deeper inside a window but from below you can't see that deep.

They didn't get close to the ground floor windows to look in either.  Only after they decided to go in and commenced recon of the structure to figure out the best entry point did they approach the building and look in the ground floor windows hence seeing Nevill's body which they thought was June.

The only room that really matters at all is the master bedroom light because why would she close the lights to kill herself in the dark and yet be reading a Bible? But that still could be explained by the claim she wasn't reading it and just took it to leave near her. I don't know why someone would kill themselves in the dark but it is no out of the question to do so.  Someone dying then removing the moderator, putting it away, going back to the same location where they died but positioning their body in a different manner than when they died, having a pool of blood for then placing the bible in the pool of blood are things that are out of the question in contrast.  They are things that matter.     

 

Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Another good point Susan!

He's hardly going to tell the police this....

Hello Steph

whilst I do lean towards Jeremy's guilt I always accept I could be entirely wrong.  I have different thoughts on how the murders were carried out but I sometimes wonder if Jeremy totally brainwashed Sheila in to killing her parents  with his backing she then had a shower whilst he started to set the scene he then double crossed her and shot her twice and maybe he killed her boys.  This is the only explanation I can come up with to account for how clean Sheila was  this may account for how he passed the polygraph test because although he was responsible for their deaths he was not involved first hand other than Sheila and as I said I am not sure about the wee boys.  He then left through a window and went home to wait for the right moment to call the police.  Think Scipio is going to wrap me up and throw me away ;D ;D ;D ;D



Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Yes, another good point.

Perhaps Jeremy knocked on the WHF door at 2am. Not sure why he would do this. Unless he had bumped his head on his sun bed and wanted his mummy.

It's lucky Sheila answered and everyone else remained asleep.  Neville may have been a bit suspicious.

Adam when you have stopped playing the smart alec read my latest post and don't respond unless it is with some sensible comments ;D

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Hello Steph

whilst I do lean towards Jeremy's guilt I always accept I could be entirely wrong.  I have different thoughts on how the murders were carried out but I sometimes wonder if Jeremy totally brainwashed Sheila in to killing her parents  with his backing she then had a shower whilst he started to set the scene he then double crossed her and shot her twice and maybe he killed her boys.  This is the only explanation I can come up with to account for how clean Sheila was  this may account for how he passed the polygraph test because although he was responsible for their deaths he was not involved first hand other than Sheila and as I said I am not sure about the wee boys.  He then left through a window and went home to wait for the right moment to call the police.  Think Scipio is going to wrap me up and throw me away ;D ;D ;D ;D

I don't know what brainwashing you think he could do.  Not only would he have to brain wash her to kill them he would have to hope and pray she didn't then turn the gun on him.  Making someone crazy so they kill people and remaining on scene trusting them not to kill you as well is something few people would risk.  Indeed she had a poor relationship with Jeremy the ones she would be most likely to spare would be Nevill or her kids.

In any event if he had managed to get her to kill everyone else he would have rapidly killed her before she could get rid of the evidence.  The whole point in brain washing her to do it instead of doing it himself would be so that she would get evidence on her that proves she did it.  To allow her to wash the evidence away before killing her would defeat the whole purpose.  Furthermore why would he remove the bloody clothes she wore from the scene?  No such clothes were found at the scene. He would have left them in a very conspicuous location as opposed to taking them away. 

« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 04:08:PM by scipio_usmc »
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry