Jeremy's Alibi...

[Steve_uk]

Such a cold and calculating individual would never tell a woman of his plans and then end the relationship so in answer to your question(s) between Jeremy and Julie, I believe Jeremy! There are blatant lies in Julie's statements and what kind of a person would keep such a secret after the event and after identifying the bodies? It's BS that she decided to tell all because it just all got too much, she did it because she was jilted. Somewhere along the line a seed was planted (most likely by the relatives) that Jeremy may have done it and it grew with her desire for revenge. Perhaps she thought he would never be convicted but she can't go back and admit to lying because she would face perjury charges and her career would be over. As for the relatives, they don't have to be lying; I believe that they really do think he's guilty and looked for things (no matter how outlandish) to back up their theory. This is also what you do. I actually started from the premise that JB was as guilty as sin but after spending a LONG time raking over everything I think he is no more guilty than I am.

You're probably a really nice guy Steve but you seem to have a canny knack of winding people up - this is probably not your intention but let me point you to the example in red above. If his "glee" was "secret" how the hell do you know about it or anyone else for that matter? You seem to make up a lot of what you have to say and embroider the rest into a flowery narrative that would be more at home in pulp fiction than on a forum dealing with a real tragedy. Just my opinion but others seem to agree. Perhaps it might help your case (as suggested by Martin) if you indicate that it is just your opinion and that you supply references to the information you post from other sources - just as other people do.

Caroline I posted only minutes after that post in response to petey and my response is there for all to read. Of course as Patti said we can go round in circles discussing this crime,which is why I am continuing to read up on it and look forward to more of Mike's disclosures. I still wonder as to the reason for Jeremy's three telephone calls to Julie a few hours before the murders,the second call probably just after the murders had occurred and the third at 5-30am..to my mind the second telephone call is the most suspicious and needs to be explained,as do all of them if Julie is such a nonentity as the Jeremy supporters claim.

Incidentally I didn't take kindly to you posting the link to the other site,though as I say I have nothing to hide. A private message beforehand either to warn me what you were about to do or to ask permission would have been appreciated,as you had really no way of knowing whether it was me or not..

[mertol22]

It's the balance of probabilities in this scenario with the ridiculous assertion that Sheila discharges 25 rounds of a .22 anschutz rifle with no gun oil on her nightie or lead traces on hands,bashes brutally a man to incapacity,shoots herself once,does her ablutions,proceeds upstairs and shoots herself again...well now we are going round in circles again..
[/quote
I never knew Sheila Caffell and i never will, one thing i noticed during reading the book Colin wrote is it may have come from either her school days or her modeling days or both she always looked immaculate.

[mertol22]

He's frightened of what would befall him in prison by other inmates if he finally admitted to being a child killer,he doesn't want to renounce any legal redress he might have against relatives if he admitted culpability,and of course,the religious path which might be available to many people in his position is closed off because of the bad connotations it had with his upbringing and its confusion with mental illness present in both his mother and Sheila. He has to keep up the pretense of innocence,especially since he became subject to a life tariff,which in his mind now means he is either let out a free man or ends his days in prison.

The passage of time offers an alternative view on how jeremy is thought of in jail,there are many pointers i will name a few , he is fighting daily for freedom , he by all accounts causes no trouble, he keeps himself fit, makes/binds books for the blind, some fellow prisoners believe he is innocent.

[Steve_uk]

Steve the rifle could have been used by a child, the recoil was very small..anyone could have discharged 25 rounds from that rifle, even I could use it...its not rocket science to load a magazine, shove it in a rifle, pull the clip back and shoot the thing....

Fact is there were no microscopic inspection or forensics done on her nightie Steve. Elliot used a visual method, which would never be excepted in a court of law today....A quick look is not evidence.

Particles of residue can fall....The fact is the swabs were not taken at the crime scene. Her hands were bagged...but particles can fall off...The other fact is that the hand swabs were rejected by the lab, due to cross contamination, for they arrived at the lab with guns....They were resubmitted some 4 weeks later....but the lab was not aware that they had already been rejected on their first submission.  One would think having been in a room and having her hand on a rifle, she would have residue all over her....But no....she had nothing, which is very suspect....she only had a similar amount of lead as anyone would in a normal day.....

I don't believe that she had been shot downstairs, the evidence doesn't point to that...

You're still selective with the evidence Patti because the swabs though firstly rejected did show on second examination low levels of lead not consistent with somebody who had fired 25 rounds. You also fail to mention the severe beating which Ralph(Nevill)received,so brutal that part of the rifle butt broke off,which to my mind corroborates Julie Mugford's testimony that a glove had come off in that exchange where probably the lightshade had got smashed.

[mertol22]

sorry i did include my sheila quote within yours, it would be easier if all posters changed to guilty and put out the light and get on with something else everyone is happy all exept jeremy, it was up to a year before i joined the forum , before then i did visit the forum , taking notes and listening what posters were saying, my view has not changed, something not right in this case.

[Steve_uk]

Hi Steve

I think you joined around the time I bowed out for some exam study.  I seem to recall you had a bit of a thing about PB describing SC as a "zombie" which is completely inaccurate as it appears are most of your posts.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1188.0.html

JB and JM met at Sloppy Joes in Colchester not a London bar. 

JB took JM to WHF about a week after they started dating late Dec '83 to meet his adoptive family.  Therefore JM was aware of the farming connection pretty much straight away.  What she was not aware of was the fact that JB was a bit of a grafter working on the farm whilst also working at Sloppy Joes.

JM met June long before the akward encounter at Goldhanger.  June offered to buy JM a flat in London or Colchester so she could live there and the neighbours wldn't talk  .  The offer was not to buy a property for JB and JM.  JM declined the offer and was very offended.

Steve I've just gone through the first para of your post.  I don't propose to go through it all as it's too ridiculous for words.  Please can you familiarise yourself with the witness statements etc before posting your assertions.

I will end with your assertion of the "bleak Canadian landscape".  Having visited Canada on many occasions, mainly for skiing, I would describe the landscape as anything other than bleak.  But I do acknowlege that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.  Perhaps you think the county of Essex/city of London is preferable?

Your post numbered 74 on the 'Rucked up nightdress beneath Sheila's stage managed body" states

"Jeremy was nobody's fool, but he liked a stronger woman, preferring a maternal figure whom he could hug rather than the act of sexual penetration itself". 

Your post numbered 167 on the 'Jeremy's Alibi' thread states:

"No Jeremy used Julie; he used her for sex..."

Steve what is it in your opnion?  Did JB prefer hugs or use Julie for penetrative sex?

I would point out that JM's wit stats state that their sex life was 'normal'.

Egap 1 firstly I wish you well in your studies. I try not to be personal about any individual on this site and whether my posts are embellished slightly for dramatic effect I don't really see how the material outcome of the case hinged on whether Jeremy and Julie met at McDonald's or Wendy's burger bar getting on for 30 years ago.. as for the sexual connotation,well couldn't Jeremy have practised both with Julie,just he may have preferred the love,warmth and affection Julie gave him compared to his mother rather than the act of sexual intercourse itself.

[petey]

It's online Maggie as well as Jeremy and Brett simulating sex as a joke at the Maida Vale flat as they believed the secret services had the place bugged. I'm sorry but the main reason the Police have to be attacked on this site is because they believed Jeremy was guilty,the evidence independent of Julie's statement says Jeremy is guilty, Jeremy's demeanour after the murders and his rush to the executors,still telling lies about death duties to Ann Eaton when he knew he would be a wealthy man to my mind makes him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Are you honestly being serious?!

Do you know the rational required for guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (No specific percentage is given, but it is generally thought a belief of over 99.9% guilty is required, if you were unaware of this)

I agree that much evidence has been lost, witheld, destroyed and various parts are still not clear to this day. Forgive me if I am being stupid, but please enlighten me of the evidence which directs your mind to Jeremy being at least 99.9% guilty of these crimes.

I certainly agree that some evidence may point towards his guilt and certain aspects of his behaviour after the tragedy did him no favours. But this cumulative 'evidence' still falls significantly short of the required 99.9% culpability. To be honest I'm baffled how you can be so convinced otherwise.

[Caroline R]

Incidentally I didn't take kindly to you posting the link to the other site,though as I say I have nothing to hide. A private message beforehand either to warn me what you were about to do or to ask permission would have been appreciated,as you had really no way of knowing whether it was me or not..

It was posted on the internet!! You must have put it there for people to read and as far as not knowing if it were you or not - I don't need to be a detective to put those clues together A. It was a piece on JB being guilty, B. It was written in your usual pulp fiction style and C. It was by someone called Steve_UK. You should be thanking me! It probably got more hits in the last few days than for  the whole of it's time on the net!! You can't buy that kind of exposure!! 

[Caroline R]

The passage of time offers an alternative view on how jeremy is thought of in jail,there are many pointers i will name a few , he is fighting daily for freedom , he by all accounts causes no trouble, he keeps himself fit, makes/binds books for the blind, some fellow prisoners believe he is innocent.

As do some prison officers.

[Caroline R]

Egap 1 firstly I wish you well in your studies. I try not to be personal about any individual on this site and whether my posts are embellished slightly for dramatic effect I don't really see how the material outcome of the case hinged on whether Jeremy and Julie met at McDonald's or Wendy's burger bar getting on for 30 years ago.. as for the sexual connotation,well couldn't Jeremy have practised both with Julie,just he may have preferred the love,warmth and affection Julie gave him compared to his mother rather than the act of sexual intercourse itself.

Dramatic effect? They are on par with the heavy stench of stale limburger!! The armchair psychology gets a bit old also!

[Steve_uk]

You're lucky I can't sleep tonight..replying to some of these rather hysterical posts:petey the evidence is put before a jury and it was 10-2 which does not make 99.9% I'm surprised at you coming up with that with your background. Caroline it would have been a courtesy to check with me first;as for the figures the last time I checked it had 200 hits,compared to the 4000 reads my thread on the European Union has received on what is primarily a betting site.

One more point:of course Jeremy Bamber is playing the conscience card(they all do) with some of the younger prison officers who were probably not even born when this crime was perpetrated,and of course the Establishment doesn't like malaise and uncertainty among the workforce. How many times do I have to go through the evidence which is overwhelming that Jeremy Bamber is guilty..please read back because I can't keep saying the same things and finding different words for it all..

[maggie]

You're lucky I can't sleep tonight..replying to some of these rather hysterical posts:petey the evidence is put before a jury and it was 10-2 which does not make 99.9% I'm surprised at you coming up with that with your background. Caroline it would have been a courtesy to check with me first;as for the figures the last time I checked it had 200 hits,compared to the 4000 reads my thread on the European Union has received on what is primarily a betting site.

One more point:of course Jeremy Bamber is playing the conscience card(they all do) with some of the younger prison officers who were probably not even born when this crime was perpetrated,and of course the Establishment doesn't like malaise and uncertainty among the workforce. How many times do I have to go through the evidence which is overwhelming that Jeremy Bamber is guilty..please read back because I can't keep saying the same things and finding different words for it all..

You dont quote evidence you quote fiction, hearsay and speculation. Steve Jeremy Bamber is a real person as were all the others involved in this tragedy. I dont think turning it into some sort of soap opera proves anything and is pretty offensive to all the people involved. imho

[Steve_uk]

You dont quote evidence you quote fiction, hearsay and speculation. Steve Jeremy Bamber is a real person as were all the others involved in this tragedy. I dont think turning it into some sort of soap opera proves anything and is pretty offensive to all the people involved. imho

Maggie I know the devil may be in the detail in this case and that's why I'm willing to trawl through many posts to try and glean snippets of information from others,but the most I am getting is that the Police may have moved a rifle,and this is then embellished to the Police shot Sheila,the Police gave Sheila CPR,the Police withheld photos and so on..and don't accuse me of showing disrespect for anyone(I've already had one apology today from a member..I know it's the early hours but I really do not disrespect anyone except Jeremy Bamber who is leading all of you like the Pied Piper on a merry dance..I disrespect him for that but do believe he should be moved to a permanent facility where he would have more chance of rehabilitation)..I try to answer points in these posts but I have the feeling that others just haven't read or understood my posts.

[Caroline R]

You're lucky I can't sleep tonight..replying to some of these rather hysterical posts:petey the evidence is put before a jury and it was 10-2 which does not make 99.9% I'm surprised at you coming up with that with your background. Caroline it would have been a courtesy to check with me first;as for the figures the last time I checked it had 200 hits,compared to the 4000 reads my thread on the European Union has received on what is primarily a betting site.

One more point:of course Jeremy Bamber is playing the conscience card(they all do) with some of the younger prison officers who were probably not even born when this crime was perpetrated,and of course the Establishment doesn't like malaise and uncertainty among the workforce. How many times do I have to go through the evidence which is overwhelming that Jeremy Bamber is guilty..please read back because I can't keep saying the same things and finding different words for it all..

You put it out there for everyone to read, I simply shared it - if you don't want people to read your pulp fiction, don't put it on the internet!

Yes, I have noticed how you keep regurgitating the same inane, incorrect narrative which rather than reading like evidence from a REAL life crime - is more in-line with a badly written detective type story which can be found yellowing in the corner of a second hand book shop!

I'm beginning to think that you're here with the sole purpose of winding people up - guess it's your time, you can waste it however you like! 

[Steve_uk]

You put it out there for everyone to read, I simply shared it - if you don't want people to read your pulp fiction, don't put it on the internet!

Yes, I have noticed how you keep regurgitating the same inane, incorrect narrative which rather than reading like evidence from a REAL life crime - is more in-line with a badly written detective type story which can be found yellowing in the corner of a second hand book shop!

I'm beginning to think that you're here with the sole purpose of winding people up - guess it's your time, you can waste it however you like! 

You can think what you like Caroline;we live in a democracy but it might have been polite to check with me first to tell me you were going to post that link..we'll let the other forum members judge..I'm really not too bothered,just had the thing been reversed I know what I would have done. As for sticking to the facts well maybe my latest post on Sheila might surprise you a little..