Author Topic: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.  (Read 32174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #15 on: September 09, 2012, 08:11:AM »
Despite Campion's ascerbic digs at certain forum members, I cannot see how it is accpetable to label him as a 'nutter'.  That's out of order.  Forum members can of course defend themselves within reason.

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #16 on: September 09, 2012, 08:41:AM »
Hi Roch

not sure about the posts from campion as I don't read the late posts anymore for obvious reasons.  I think campion is a very very clever humourous gentleman and if he is classed a "nutter" God Help" the rest of us. 

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #17 on: September 09, 2012, 08:47:AM »
I think the questions raised by Campion about the ommision or misrepresentation of the so called back stairs at whf is a very interesting one, and that Essex police had a reason for not providing information to allow other mere mortals to understand and fathom out what went wrong with the firearms operation once police forced entry into the premises from 7:30am, onward...

The intelligence gathered about the layout and accessability to different parts of the farmhouse were not discussed or taken into account when the original six man raid team set off with sledgehammer at the ready to knock the external door in...

We now know of course, that they were met by two major obstacles once they forced the rear external door to the farmhouse in, namely:-

(1) - they couldn't get directly into the main kitchen because the body of Ralph Bamber was sat perched on a large wooden chair directly behind it, and (2) - access upstairs was restricted to the upstairs office and a storeroom because there was no obvious connecting door...
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 09:08:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #18 on: September 09, 2012, 08:55:AM »
So campion are you thi.king of Jimmy Bell, or some other character with a grudge against Ralph Bamber?    How would this person have got from the roof and escaped? 
While I consider it a compliment to be named as a friend of campion......I think he refers to myself as someone who has debated this point on various occasions in the past. I have never ruled out the possibility of a third person unconnected to Jeremy Bamber  ;D

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #19 on: September 09, 2012, 09:00:AM »
Hi Roch

not sure about the posts from campion as I don't read the late posts anymore for obvious reasons.  I think campion is a very very clever humourous gentleman and if he is classed a "nutter" God Help" the rest of us.

I lost my marbles years ago Susan.  Too much acid.  :P

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #20 on: September 09, 2012, 09:06:AM »
Morning Maggie  Whilst I am not disagreeing with you I am wondering why anybody with a grudge against Ralph Bamber would take the life of two innocent children who were sleeping.  If a third person was involved the motive would have to be for another reason other than a grudge.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #21 on: September 09, 2012, 09:18:AM »
I think the questions raised by Campion about the ommision or misrepresentation of the so called back stairs at whf is a very interesting one, and that Essex police had a reason for not providing information to allow other mere mortals to understand and fathom out what went wrong with the firearms operation once police forced entry into the premises from 7:30am, onward...

The intelligence gathered about the layout and accessability to different parts of the farmhouse were not discussed or taken into account when the original six man raid team set off with sledgehammer at the ready to knock the external door in...

We now know of course, that they were met by two major obstacles once they forced the rear external door to the farmhouse in, namely:-

(1) - they couldn't get directly into the main kitchen because the body of Ralph Bamber was sat perched on a large wooden chair directly behind it, and (2) - access upstairs was restricted to the upstairs office and a storeroom because there was no obvious connecting door...

These two features have very serious ramifications concerning how Jeremy Bamber could have removed a silencer from the barrel of the anshulz rifle, and taken it to conceal it in the gun cupboard in the downstairs office, he having to get beyond the body of Ralph Bamber sat in the large wooden chair directly behind the internal kitchen door, and or beyond the panel in the bathroom that gives access to the upstairs rooms beyond, and the back stairs...

How could Jeremy be expected to overcome these two formiddable obstacles to allow him to remove the silencer after he shot and killed Sheila, and take the silencer all the way downstairs by either route, and hide it in a box at the back of the gun cupboard in the downstairs office?
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #22 on: September 09, 2012, 09:20:AM »
Morning Maggie  Whilst I am not disagreeing with you I am wondering why anybody with a grudge against Ralph Bamber would take the life of two innocent children who were sleeping.  If a third person was involved the motive would have to be for another reason other than a grudge.
Morning Susie.....Jimmy Bell was a violent, angry man Susie. He was witnessed throwing bullets at the Bambers while waving a .22 rifle complete with silencer. He told Ralph and June next time the bullets would be in the gun. A year after WHF murders he persued his estranged wife and baby daughter to her mothers house in Suffolk and shot her and then himself. He was known as an extremely cruel man its claimed it was only luck he didnt shoot his baby daughter. .....

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #23 on: September 09, 2012, 09:26:AM »
Hi Maggie  what can I say I dare not disagree with you :) but as I have no knowledge on the Jimmy Bell guy I really can't add or take on your theory. ;)  I shall rest my case.

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #24 on: September 09, 2012, 09:26:AM »
These two features have very serious ramifications concerning how Jeremy Bamber could have removed a silencer from the barrel of the anshulz rifle, and taken it to conceal it in the gun cupboard in the downstairs office, he having to get beyond the body of Ralph Bamber sat in the large wooden chair directly behind the internal kitchen door, and or beyond the panel in the bathroom that gives access to the upstairs rooms beyond, and the back stairs...

How could Jeremy be expected to overcome these two formiddable obstacles to allow him to remove the silencer after he shot and killed Sheila, and take the silencer all the way downstairs by either route, and hide it in a box at the back of the gun cupboard in the downstairs office?

It took at least a couple of burley firearms officers to push against the internal door behind which the body of Ralph Bamber was sat perched on a large wooden chair, which eventually sent his body crashing to the kitchen floor - so how did Jeremy manage to get beyond the body of Ralph Bamber so that he could hide the all important silencer in the gun cupboard?

And do so by going through and beyond (and back) the very door that Ralps body was blocking off?

More or less impossible, in my opinion...
« Last Edit: September 09, 2012, 09:32:AM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33781
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #25 on: September 09, 2012, 09:29:AM »
Morning Susie.....Jimmy Bell was a violent, angry man Susie. He was witnessed throwing bullets at the Bambers while waving a .22 rifle complete with silencer. He told Ralph and June next time the bullets would be in the gun. A year after WHF murders he persued his estranged wife and baby daughter to her mothers house in Suffolk and shot her and then himself. He was known as an extremely cruel man its claimed it was only luck he didnt shoot his baby daughter. .....


Morning Magie/Susie. There were others who were given police protection because of his threats to them and their children just because he perceived them as having betrayed him in some way

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #26 on: September 09, 2012, 09:32:AM »
Hi Maggie  what can I say I dare not disagree with you :) but as I have no knowledge on the Jimmy Bell guy I really can't add or take on your theory. ;)  I shall rest my case.
Haha susie....you are welcome to disagree with me???!  I just do always wonder if we are on the right track or if there was a third person.....it is a puzzle a real whodunnit in many ways ...in my opinion. I know you dont go for it and thats fair enough. :)

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48676
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #27 on: September 09, 2012, 09:38:AM »
Morning Maggie  Whilst I am not disagreeing with you I am wondering why anybody with a grudge against Ralph Bamber would take the life of two innocent children who were sleeping.  If a third person was involved the motive would have to be for another reason other than a grudge.

Morning Susan. Take that ( contract killing,a possibility ) in France.The killer/s have no compunction whatsoever in killing children,or whoever/whatever moves within the vicinity.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2012, 09:38:AM »

Morning Magie/Susie. There were others who were given police protection because of his threats to them and their children just because he perceived them as having betrayed him in some way
Hi April, there are certainly question marks over Jimmy Bell. I read the Rough Justice book and that really convinced me there were possibilities. To me he seems to have had the elements required to be some sort of psychopath/sociopath who would be capable of such a dreadful crime.  He was an intelligent man who may have planned his revenge well. Wasn't he the reason for the installation of the panic alarm?

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The RIDDLE of the BACK STAIRCASE.
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2012, 09:39:AM »
Maggie my friend  you do know that most of my theories are wrong so you could be right :) ;) ;)