Guilty?

[susan]

Hi Sparkle  I think you are right about good looking young men they are often arrogant and full of themselves especially when they have had such an upbringing as Jeremy private school own house at a young age car all provided by his Father I think they are brought up thinking they are special as his Father did not like him mixing with local lads that he may have to employ one day I know a situation exactly the same not a 2 miles from where I live.

[mertol22]

Hi Sparkle  I think you are right about good looking young men they are often arrogant and full of themselves especially when they have had such an upbringing as Jeremy private school own house at a young age car all provided by his Father I think they are brought up thinking they are special as his Father did not like him mixing with local lads that he may have to employ one day I know a situation exactly the same not a 2 miles from where I live.

For the time jeremy reminds me of a Aramis man.

[lookout]

Hi Sparkle,,,,you can't convict someone because of their attitude though. Yes,,he was like all 24 year olds with a few bob in their pockets,showing off,,,an untouchable,,all the usual traits of a cocky young man,,,but it doesn't make them murderers,,even disregarding some of the things he got up to,,,such as growing " weed " in his garden,,which he actually confessed to the police about.
Doesn't this tell you something about his openness.? He had nothing to hide.

[Jane]

I'm sorry if I offend anyone by my anti June stance but I can't help it.  I know I never met the woman, thank goodness, but everything I know leads me to conclude she had few, if any, redeeming qualities in my eyes.  And no she's nothing like my adoptive mother.  When I first joined the forum I think I soon got the measure of her.  I'm pleased other posters have recently read Colin's book and that Colin's view aligns with my own re June.  After all he should know shouldn't he?  However, she didn't deserve the end she met.

I think it unlikely she was involved in the murders.  With these high profile cases eg Kennedy, Marilyn M, Princess Di, 9/11 etc bizarre conspiracy theories emerge.  When the victims are attractive and/or affluent etc, people seem to find it difficult that their lives can be cut short instead wanting to see them as invincible.  At the end of the day we're all just mere mortals.

egap1, you most certainly won't offend me over your stance on June, I've been at the epicentre of a similar situation!!!! As to whether she was involved in the murders, whilst I don't think it impossible that there may have been an altercation of some kind between her and Nevill, perhaps he defended Sheila against one of her mothers' tirades, I can't see her causing a fatality.
 

[susan]

Hi egap1  Mike stated on this forum that Jeremy was still arrogant and selfish but did have some good points.  During his Trial some of his remarks to the Prosecution were rather silly and arrogant i.e. he was asked Mr Bamber are you telling lies and his reply was that is for you to prove this is not a verbatim account of events just trying to get the gist of it over.  People with Jeremy,s upbringing don,t need impressive jobs to make them feel superior he could do that working in a chippy he had so much confidence he could never feel belittled.  Other incidences have been written about and I am sure of the other members will enlighten you.  I have never never thought Jeremy to be a bad person I am sure he had some nice qualities and could be very kind I think is upbringing made him how he was.

[mertol22]

I should have added engaged in low-paid work whilst employed at Little Chef and Sloppy Joes.

but he never spent every night getting sloshed at home like many do he did work .

[lookout]

Both June and Nevill had " fingernail marks in their arms,so it would have appeared that Sheila had a go at both of them. Nails,5mm/6mm would suffice for the types of marks that were made.
When you're faced with the barrel of a gun,,nobody's going to fight back,,hence the fact that Sheila didn't have any marks on her body,,apart from the shots.
Neither did Jeremy have any marks on his body,,as that was something Julie Mugford actually told the truth about.
Apparently,there wasn't a struggle going on with Nevill,he was simply being beaten,burnt and shot.

[Patti]

I'm kind of new to all this so please forgive me if I'm writing this in the wrong place or anything.

From what I've read about this case, there seems to be nothing but circumstantial evidence to support both guilty and non guilty theories, however I'm struggling to see how the opinion that JB could be guilty can be formed.

I feel that there is no forensic evidence, and even guesswork would lead me to think that Jeremy did not commit these murders. Can anyone give me a believable, convincing argument or evidence to the contrary? I've had a look round the Internet and pretty much all I've seen from the guilty camp goes along the lines of "HE IS AN EVIL CHILD KILLER, LET HIM ROT!" with nothing to back up these wild statements!

I had a really snotty tweet the other week telling me to "check your facts, he is guilty" if anyone c

In my opinion there is not sufficient evidence to say JB committed any crime.....One has to prove he got in and out of the house first and that was never proved.

I also feel there is not enough evidence to say Sheila committed any crime either.....but, if one can't prove someone got in and out of the house, then it would have to have been someone from the inside....

[Sparkle]

Hi Sparkle,,,,you can't convict someone because of their attitude though. Yes,,he was like all 24 year olds with a few bob in their pockets,showing off,,,an untouchable,,all the usual traits of a cocky young man,,,but it doesn't make them murderers,,even disregarding some of the things he got up to,,,such as growing " weed " in his garden,,which he actually confessed to the police about.
Doesn't this tell you something about his openness.? He had nothing to hide.

Lookout, that is exactly what I am saying. You can't "prove" someone guilty of murder just because you don't like their attitude!

This guy needs a fair trial, this case alone makes me thank god that we don't have the death penalty in this country.

[simong]

Both June and Nevill had " fingernail marks in their arms,so it would have appeared that Sheila had a go at both of them. Nails,5mm/6mm would suffice for the types of marks that were made.
When you're faced with the barrel of a gun,,nobody's going to fight back,,hence the fact that Sheila didn't have any marks on her body,,apart from the shots.
Neither did Jeremy have any marks on his body,,as that was something Julie Mugford actually told the truth about.
Apparently,there wasn't a struggle going on with Nevill,he was simply being beaten,burnt and shot.

Hello Lookout, Where is it documented that June and Nevill had fingernail marks on their arms?

[mertol22]

To carry out these crimes a high burden of error would have been at stake, when jeremy said his father had called him , upon storming the house for anyone to still be alive and said different jeremy would be guilty end of, the shooting could not have been comitted on that risk knowing one error is all thats needed or forgetting something on leaving or a minor injury .

[lookout]

Patti,,there's no evidence at all to incriminate Jeremy. Even all the needless debate on the phone calls.
After a trauma like that,,who would remember anything.? If Jeremy had taken any part at all,,he'd have made sure that calls,and everything that was said,,matched up. In this case it didn't and that's how you know he was telling the truth.
Sorry to Jeremy for saying it,,,but he wasn't clever enough to be a murderer.

[Bridget]

Hi Sparkle,,,,you can't convict someone because of their attitude though. Yes,,he was like all 24 year olds with a few bob in their pockets,showing off,,,an untouchable,,all the usual traits of a cocky young man,,,but it doesn't make them murderers,,even disregarding some of the things he got up to,,,such as growing " weed " in his garden,,which he actually confessed to the police about.
Doesn't this tell you something about his openness.? He had nothing to hide.

He wasn't very open about burgling the caravan site though was he?

[Roch]

By his phone call he made it him or Sheila, and there's no evidence it was her.

It we take the case down to this simple equation (overly simple in my opinion), it begs the question as to why he would leave her with 'no evidence' of being culpable for the incident?  I suspect given the original stance of the police, the pathologist and the reviewing detective Keneally, it's not that there was no evidence, it's more likely that police managed to later present a case that there was no evidence.  This is probably one of the main reasons for the use of PII.

[Bridget]

It we take the case down to this simple equation (overly simple in my opinion), it begs the question as to why he would leave her with 'no evidence' of being culpable for the incident?  I suspect given the original stance of the police, the pathologist and the reviewing detective Keneally, it's not that there was no evidence, it's more likely that police managed to later present a case that there was no evidence.  This is probably one of the main reasons for the use of PII.

Are you honestly suggesting that the police have hidden the clothing Sheila was wearing when she shot everyone?