Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath

[susan]

Hi steve a true Arran sweater is cream so Jeremy's must have been a copycat version.  Was Julie paid off with a £400 cheque she sold herself cheap if she knew he was responsible for the murders at WHF.  We also have another case scenario to your theories Jeremy did not commit the murders and that is why he was able to dispose of Julie without fear of any comeback.  The £400 was a kind gesture towards her holiday to Malta she cashed the cheque then sold him down the river. In my mind Julie was a woman scorned eaten up with jealousy and she made sure no other woman would become the Lady of the Manor.  I think in fairness to Julie she never expected her actions to go as far as they did but it was too late for a turn around but the £25.000 would help to compensate her guilt for helping to send an innocent man to prison for life.  You must now remember steve I am entitled to my opinion as well as you it is not a one sided opinion on this forum. I respect your views and you must do the same with mine.

[Steve_uk]

Hi steve a true Arran sweater is cream so Jeremy's must have been a copycat version.  Was Julie paid off with a £400 cheque she sold herself cheap if she knew he was responsible for the murders at WHF.  We also have another case scenario to your theories Jeremy did not commit the murders and that is why he was able to dispose of Julie without fear of any comeback.  The £400 was a kind gesture towards her holiday to Malta she cashed the cheque then sold him down the river. In my mind Julie was a woman scorned eaten up with jealousy and she made sure no other woman would become the Lady of the Manor.  I think in fairness to Julie she never expected her actions to go as far as they did but it was too late for a turn around but the £25.000 would help to compensate her guilt for helping to send an innocent man to prison for life.  You must now remember steve I am entitled to my opinion as well as you it is not a one sided opinion on this forum. I respect your views and you must do the same with mine.

I don't accept any financial motive on Julie's part as the newspaper deal must have seemed a long way off and was probably the last thing on Julie's mind as she pondered the aftermath of Jeremy's crimes. It would be strange if after all this time the real psychopath was Julie and not Jeremy,but of course you're entitled to your point of view.

 As they dined together according to Julie Jeremy told her:"I would have gone ahead with it anyway;don't blame yourself.." which I'm sure did not alleviate in any way Julie's troubled conscience. After the murders she was guilty of no more than importuning for the truth,and as she delved deeper into Jeremy's psyche she finally realized that her worst incubus had materialized,and that she was indeed dealing with a true psychopath who felt no remorse whatsoever for the crimes.

All in all I don't blame Julie:she might as well have attempted extrication from the Devil himself.

[killingeve]

Yeah, if you read Susan's post about we all come from god....

I said:  Did you know that we are share the same DNA......therefore one man could have done the first jobbo.....what I mean is that gods DNA was passed on to all of us...

As a non-believer I'll stick to my theory that I evolved, well sort of evolved, from a swamp.  Ty kindly.

[susan]

Hi steve by the sound of it Julie was well rid of Jeremy imagine looking into his eyes and seeing evil poor girl.  You have said Julie is involved in charity work in Canada I would have thought more of her if she had given the £25.000 she was given for selling her story to some charity how could she enjoy spending one penny of that money knowing the man she had tried to please and love was serving life in prison.

[maggie]

Steve this is a p*** take, it has to be. You are speaking about a woman who went out to dinner with someone who she knew had murdered 5 of his closest relatives and it slowly dawns on her that he may be a psychopath........who are you kidding??

[Jane]

So many comments to deal with from the aftermath of the truth,which however Jeremy tries to hoodwink will out in the end. Leaving people in the West country aside and the water to wine story which occurs in only John's gospel,you should all ask yourselves just what was the purpose of Julie in Jeremy's life for a period of almost two years.

You should ask yourself just why Jeremy stuck with her not just before the tragedy(which I have called the "prelude" for the purposes of this thread),but also in the direct aftermath of the tragedy it was Julie whom Jeremy summoned for whatever reason the Jeremy supporters can ascertain you can let me know,when he specifically asked DS Stan Jones and Mick Clark if he could have a few moments alone with his girlfriend at Bourtree Cottage that first morning.

What possible reason could Jeremy have to associate with Julie after the murders? What possible reason did he have to telephone her around 10pm on the Tuesday night,then again around 3am on the Wednesday morning and finally around 5:30am from the callbox at Goldhanger. Was Jeremy so emotionally insecure that he needed Julie for support,this girl who had been fagging away at pleasing Jeremy since November 1983,and who we are led to believe had no knowledge of any murder plot Jeremy may have harboured?

It seems to me the Jeremy supporters want it both ways,which should no longer surprise me knowing this site,but as there are so many of you resolute in your support for Jeremy I would say this:either there never was any murder plan in Jeremy's mind and therefore Julie knew nothing and has made the bulk of her statement to Police up,or Jeremy bounced his murder plans off Julie and Julie is at least implicated to some degree and guilty of omission,but by the same token this also incriminates Jeremy as the source of the evil scheme in the first place. What possible motive does Julie have to admit to the damning evidence that she could have gone to Police,that she was at least an accessory before the fact and that she could have stopped the murders of five people if only she had acted earlier. Any titbits she heard from Ann Eaton and the relatives would not have been dressed up by Julie in a formal statement to Police:who needed all that hassle?

In an answer to my own question I am quite certain in my own mind that the only explanation for Jeremy's conduct in the wake of the murders was to keep Julie on board,to keep her sweet until such time as he could pay her off,the memories of the murders faded and Julie would no longer have a hold on him. He did the same with Charles Marsden whom he must have regretted making the remark about the Farm burning down to,because true to type Jeremy also contacted him shortly after the murders in an attempt to keep him on side.

I believe Julie's statement,it's a statement spoken from the heart of a 19 year old girl who had transgressed and had hoped to avoid contact with Police until her hand was forced. It does not portray her in a perfect light by any means,but the truth is so much easier to cope with in one's inner conscience;a full confession means there's no need for the constant stream of "don't knows" or "no comments" to the more dangerous questions asking why Jeremy telephoned Julie at all three times in a matter of hours,whilst ostensibly nonchalantly picking threads from a red Arran sweater,whilst inside secretly trembling with fear that the truth would surface.

Good evening Steve. If you had asked the question a couple of days ago, I'm not certain that I could have given you a clear answer, but yesterday when I started to see the lengths to which JM was prepared to go for financial gain, it struck me that here was a very determined young woman, who, perhaps had not had those things in life that money can provide, and once given the opportunity, would stop at nothing to obtain it.

Jeremy, a none too strong character, needed a dominant woman in the same way that she, being a strong character, needed a man she could dominate. In that, they were a perfect match. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that she gave him some really interesting ideas of how to make money. She seemed to haver no problems in spending that which he had. The comment you made about her being happy to be with him if he had no money couldn't be tested. Being discalculea, I have problems envisaging amounts, but when I stopped to think how much Jeremy gave/spent on her in the course of that year, it is a mindblowing sum. It might not sound much now, but it was in the mid 80's and we are talking hundreds of £s and that's just what we know about. I believe it possible that he received encouragement from her to accrue more. After the altercation during which June called her a harlot it wouldn't be surprising to learn that she planned some form of revenge which may have been why she refused June's offer. She could have had her eyes on a bigger prize.

I think she was a very clever woman (and maybe a shade more than the 19yrs you give her) and I think if it hadn't been for the promise of money, which despite you telling us she didn't know about, she would have known from what he said and how he said it, I think eventually she would have dumped him because he was never her intellectual equal. However, I don't believe she would have been as willing for him to dump her and as you insist on turning everything Jermy said into something evil, her words in which she said no one else would have him if she couldn't can be seen as being equally so and she made very sure it would happen, didn't she.

[Patti]

Good evening Steve. If you had asked the question a couple of days ago, I'm not certain that I could have given you a clear answer, but yesterday when I started to see the lengths to which JM was prepared to go for financial gain, it struck me that here was a very determined young woman, who, perhaps had not had those things in life that money can provide, and once given the opportunity, would stop at nothing to obtain it.

Jeremy, a none too strong character, needed a dominant woman in the same way that she, being a strong character, needed a man she could dominate. In that, they were a perfect match. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that she gave him some really interesting ideas of how to make money. She seemed to haver no problems in spending that which he had. The comment you made about her being happy to be with him if he had no money couldn't be tested. Being discalculea, I have problems envisaging amounts, but when I stopped to think how much Jeremy gave/spent on her in the course of that year, it is a mindblowing sum. It might not sound much now, but it was in the mid 80's and we are talking hundreds of £s and that's just what we know about. I believe it possible that he received encouragement from her to accrue more. After the altercation during which June called her a harlot it wouldn't be surprising to learn that she planned some form of revenge which may have been why she refused June's offer. She could have had her eyes on a bigger prize.

I think she was a very clever woman (and maybe a shade more than the 19yrs you give her) and I think if it hadn't been for the promise of money, which despite you telling us she didn't know about, she would have known from what he said and how he said it, I think eventually she would have dumped him because he was never her intellectual equal. However, I don't believe she would have been as willing for him to dump her and as you insist on turning everything Jermy said into something evil, her words in which she said no one else would have him if she couldn't can be seen as being equally so and she made very sure it would happen, didn't she.

Brilliant post April.....even I can't add to that 

[susan]

Hi april  brilliant post and Patti lost for words that is a first in my book

[Caroline R]

Good evening Steve. If you had asked the question a couple of days ago, I'm not certain that I could have given you a clear answer, but yesterday when I started to see the lengths to which JM was prepared to go for financial gain, it struck me that here was a very determined young woman, who, perhaps had not had those things in life that money can provide, and once given the opportunity, would stop at nothing to obtain it.

Jeremy, a none too strong character, needed a dominant woman in the same way that she, being a strong character, needed a man she could dominate. In that, they were a perfect match. It wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that she gave him some really interesting ideas of how to make money. She seemed to haver no problems in spending that which he had. The comment you made about her being happy to be with him if he had no money couldn't be tested. Being discalculea, I have problems envisaging amounts, but when I stopped to think how much Jeremy gave/spent on her in the course of that year, it is a mindblowing sum. It might not sound much now, but it was in the mid 80's and we are talking hundreds of £s and that's just what we know about. I believe it possible that he received encouragement from her to accrue more. After the altercation during which June called her a harlot it wouldn't be surprising to learn that she planned some form of revenge which may have been why she refused June's offer. She could have had her eyes on a bigger prize.

I think she was a very clever woman (and maybe a shade more than the 19yrs you give her) and I think if it hadn't been for the promise of money, which despite you telling us she didn't know about, she would have known from what he said and how he said it, I think eventually she would have dumped him because he was never her intellectual equal. However, I don't believe she would have been as willing for him to dump her and as you insist on turning everything Jermy said into something evil, her words in which she said no one else would have him if she couldn't can be seen as being equally so and she made very sure it would happen, didn't she.

Well said April! I think she feared him becoming independent after the deaths of his parents and she could see her hold on him weakening. The way she talks about Brett, you can almost feel the jealously in her words as she tries to suggest that there might be more than just friendship between them, It reminds me of the old clique of a guy asking out a woman and on being rejected he calls her a lesbian. IMO Julie is the kind of person you don't cross and who will stop at nothing to get what she wants!!

[lookout]

I will certainly hand it to Steve. He remains steadfast in his quest to find Jeremy guilty of this crime,,,but has failed to see the many anomalies that clearly exist.
First of all to begin with,from a religious point of view.it was a Wednesday in AD33 that The Last Supper took place,,,as it was a Wednesday that the killings also took place,,possibly after Sheila had taken her last meal.
 (((There is a " not so nice question ",,,,,,so please be warned. My apologies,,but these are visible signs in the deceased,,and there's been no mention of such.))) **
Where is/are the suicide letters that were allegedly inside the bible.?
Why wasn't the blood on the bible forensically tested.?
Whose blood was on who that night.?
Where was the decomposition fluid if the bodies had been dead for the length of time that's been stated? **
What happened to the letter that Sheila had written to her birth mother before Sheilas' death.?
An action was raised during the original investigation to obtain the said letter,however no further action was ever taken.
" Freddie ",friend of Sheila who'd witnessed violence in her company and had put forward to appear in Jeremys' defence ,,wasn't called as a witness.
Sue Ford,,,a former girlfriend also never made it to court after having spoken highly of Jeremy.

Det.Supt. Kinnealy had assured D,Supt Ainsley that Sheila was responsible for the murders. He'd said during a meeting with Cons.R.Bunyard,Mr Peter Simpson( ACC )Det.Supt. Kinnealy and Ainsley that the review of Supt. Kinnealy was that the EVIDENCE indicated that Sheila was responsible.

Jeremy has in his possession,documents which were inadvertantly sent to him. The said documents were never intended for release in the public arena,,,and it was soon discovered  by COLP that Glynis Howard along with her assistant Leslie Tucker,John Hayward and his assistant Louise Float and Malcolm Fletcher,,all signed a set of falsified documents for a second sound moderator to create a chain of evidence capable of deceiving the jury--------------------and it did.

Steve,,,what are your views on the above behaviour given the enormity of the case and a mans' sentence hanging in the balance regarding the corrupt management in bringing this to a court of law,,knowing that it was NOTHING like the truth.?

These are just a drop in the ocean of irregularities involved.

[Patti]

I will certainly hand it to Steve. He remains steadfast in his quest to find Jeremy guilty of this crime,,,but has failed to see the many anomalies that clearly exist.
First of all to begin with,from a religious point of view.it was a Wednesday in AD33 that The Last Supper took place,,,as it was a Wednesday that the killings also took place,,possibly after Sheila had taken her last meal.
 (((There is a " not so nice question ",,,,,,so please be warned. My apologies,,but these are visible signs in the deceased,,and there's been no mention of such.))) **
Where is/are the suicide letters that were allegedly inside the bible.?
Why wasn't the blood on the bible forensically tested.?
Whose blood was on who that night.?
Where was the decomposition fluid if the bodies had been dead for the length of time that's been stated? **
What happened to the letter that Sheila had written to her birth mother before Sheilas' death.?
An action was raised during the original investigation to obtain the said letter,however no further action was ever taken.
" Freddie ",friend of Sheila who'd witnessed violence in her company and had put forward to appear in Jeremys' defence ,,wasn't called as a witness.
Sue Ford,,,a former girlfriend also never made it to court after having spoken highly of Jeremy.

Det.Supt. Kinnealy had assured D,Supt Ainsley that Sheila was responsible for the murders. He'd said during a meeting with Cons.R.Bunyard,Mr Peter Simpson( ACC )Det.Supt. Kinnealy and Ainsley that the review of Supt. Kinnealy was that the EVIDENCE indicated that Sheila was responsible.

Jeremy has in his possession,documents which were inadvertantly sent to him. The said documents were never intended for release in the public arena,,,and it was soon discovered  by COLP that Glynis Howard along with her assistant Leslie Tucker,John Hayward and his assistant Louise Float and Malcolm Fletcher,,all signed a set of falsified documents for a second sound moderator to create a chain of evidence capable of deceiving the jury--------------------and it did.

Steve,,,what are your views on the above behaviour given the enormity of the case and a mans' sentence hanging in the balance regarding the corrupt management in bringing this to a court of law,,knowing that it was NOTHING like the truth.?

These are just a drop in the ocean of irregularities involved.

Another brilliant post where I am lost for words....Crikey! 

[killingeve]

Another brilliant post where I am lost for words....Crikey! 

Yes brill posts from April1 and Lookout.  Well done ladies.

[Jane]

Caroline/Susan/Patti/ Magggie/NaNu, thankyou all SO much for your kind words. Do lookout and I get a prize Answers on a postage stamp, please

[mertol22]

Steve likes what he reads and all of us are enriched by his almost daily  quotes from books, however is steve aware he is easily blinded by what considered the truth, even steve can make a mistake , i very much doubt he knows JM that well, in her eyes i saw £££signs nothing more.

[mertol22]

As a non-believer I'll stick to my theory that I evolved, well sort of evolved, from a swamp.  Ty kindly.

The swamp of the stellar universe NN