Sheila's feet

[Kaldin]

Even if it was last minute, i think he would have gotten as far away from the house as possible or made sure there where plenty of people around him to give him an alibi!

Unless that was impossible as he was running around whf with a gun.

Alternatively if he is innocent, then an alibi, whether needed or not, could not be planned.

Well yes - it's difficult to organise an alibi when you're running around shooting people.

[Kaldin]

Well it was in the kitchen certainly. What I don't know is who put it there and when. It's very convenient for the killer that there was no phone in the bedroom at the time isn't it?

Yes that's something which there hasn't been to much discussion over. The bedroom phone was in the kitchen (the one left of the hook). But wasn't there another phone in the kitchen hidden under some files/papers?

It was reported that it was under some magazines. Whether it was "hidden" is another matter. I suspect the house wasn't habitually tidy anyway.

[Hartley]

Well it was in the kitchen certainly. What I don't know is who put it there and when. It's very convenient for the killer that there was no phone in the bedroom at the time isn't it?

Yes that's something which there hasn't been to much discussion over. The bedroom phone was in the kitchen (the one left of the hook). But wasn't there another phone in the kitchen hidden under some files/papers?

It was reported that it was under some magazines. Whether it was "hidden" is another matter. I suspect the house wasn't habitually tidy anyway.

Yes sorry didn't mean to imply that someone had hidden it, I just meant that it was hidden from view.

But why would the other phone have been put in the kitchen if one was already there?

[Kaldin]

Well it was in the kitchen certainly. What I don't know is who put it there and when. It's very convenient for the killer that there was no phone in the bedroom at the time isn't it?

Yes that's something which there hasn't been to much discussion over. The bedroom phone was in the kitchen (the one left of the hook). But wasn't there another phone in the kitchen hidden under some files/papers?

It was reported that it was under some magazines. Whether it was "hidden" is another matter. I suspect the house wasn't habitually tidy anyway.

Yes sorry didn't mean to imply that someone had hidden it, I just meant that it was hidden from view.

But why would the other phone have been put in the kitchen if one was already there?

Well now you're asking the right question. I don't know the answer. I've read that Jeremy said the kitchen phone was broken but someone else denied that. I can't remember where I saw that - sorry.

The point is - the phone was removed from the bedroom, and that would prevent anyone phoning from there. Convenient eh?

[Hartley]

Well now you're asking the right question. I don't know the answer. I've read that Jeremy said the kitchen phone was broken but someone else denied that. I can't remember where I saw that - sorry.

The point is - the phone was removed from the bedroom, and that would prevent anyone phoning from there. Convenient eh?

Reading through the 2002 Appeal Judgement again, there always were two phones in the kitchen, the hidden one mentioned above and the the cordless one which was sent off to repair.

Why they need two in the kitchen and why the bedroom one was brought down I don't know.

[chelmsey]

Yes,I have always regarded that as odd.A telephone sent away for repair? I have never known anyone to do that as they are pretty cheap to replace?

[Kaldin]

Yes,I have always regarded that as odd.A telephone sent away for repair? I have never known anyone to do that as they are pretty cheap to replace?

Yes. I don't bother having phones fixed, I just get a new one. Perhaps it was different then though.

[andrea]

a cordless phone may have been expensive back then.

[shonapugs]

Moving/hiding phones shows signs of premeditation. If Sheila suddenly "snapped," it's doubtful (in my opinion) that she could have done this without one of her parents questioning what she was doing when she should have been in bed. If the family (plus dog) were settled for the night, I find it hard to imagine Sheila moving about the house, unplugging a phone and hiding it.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

I'm not sure it's so strange that a wireless phone was in the kitchen with a normal one.

I can remember my parents having such a system around that era.

A fixed line and a wireless one in the bedroom, on a cradle on the wall (as was the fashion then). Often that phone would be in the bedroom charging at night, and brought down to the main room during the day... IF the Bambers tended to use the kitchen a lot, it's not so crazy that the phone was there in case anybody wanted to answer the phone, then disappear into a quieter room.

And, it doesn't look like their home was particularly 'tidy' (by many people's standards).

I'm not saying it sounds like a common situation, but not so strange either.

And, if I remember rightly at my parents, if you unplugged the phone cable from the socket, the phone would 'chirp' once (can't say that the Bamber's would).

If Bamber moved the phone downstairs the previous day, it's pure luck it remained there I'd suggest.  So I can't really think he'd hide it to stop it being used during the murders.

Was Nevill heading for the phone when he went downstairs? rather than following the killer?


Wireless phones had telescopic aerials back then, anybody remember them? ;-)

[shonapugs]

I think that Ralph probably WAS going downstairs, either to use the phone or even, possibly, to escape and go for help. How can any of us know what we'd do in such a desperate situation?

[chelmsey]

To say JB couldnt have been moving phones around,setting things up so to speak.........well I certainly disagree with that.He was at the farm all evening,had supper with the family and didnt leave for home until between 9.30 and 10.00pm!

[TheBrilliantMistake]

I'm not saying he couldn't... I'm just saying it leaves a LOT to chance
What if the gun he left had been put away? or even put in a place where it wasn't to be found usually?
Or if the phone had been found and moved back upstairs?

I just don't know...  however it happened, it seems a lot went to plan, but a few things didn't

[mike tesko]

There was not much if any blood found on the soles of June Bambers feet, which is consistent with the claim that there was little or no blood on the soles of Sheila's feet, so what significance if any, can be attached to this?

[TheBrilliantMistake]

There was not much if any blood found on the soles of June Bambers feet, which is consistent with the claim that there was little or no blood on the soles of Sheila's feet, so what significance if any, can be attached to this?

a lot

people (in this case the prosecution) are trying to have it both ways... sheila's feet were clean, so was 'innocent' - because any moving around the house would end up with them standing in blood etc etc...

Well, ok, maybe June didn't move over the entire house, but IF she stood and walked around a room where at least one person (herself) had been shot, two people shot (fairly likely) or even THREE (less likely , but possible), then surely SHE should have the same blood on her feet that the prosecution are claiming.

Even if not on June's feet, as I've stated in earlier posts:

IF the prosecution claim that sheila ought to have blood on her feet if she's a murderer, then it also stands that Jeremy should have had blood on his feet as the murderer.
Now of course, they couldn't swap his feet / shoes etc (cos they screwed up), but you can reasonably assume some bloodied footprints should show up... or did Jeremy hover?

I don't like this aspect of the prosecution's case... it's not wrong, but it's not applied equally.