If Sheila Did It

[Reader]

I agree. It's much more likely that Sheila went upstairs after the TFG had visited all the unlocked rooms. At that stage, they may, unwisely, have ceased to monitor the whole of the first floor adequately, and they had to make noise to break into an upstairs room that was locked.

[TheBrilliantMistake]

Let's say TFG went in the house expected a count of 5 persons.

They count 2 in the kitchen, one of whom is Sheila...(would they know it's her?... quite probably given Jeremy's description)...

COULD they have 'switched' off at the point thinking "right, two dead, one's the daughter"... then hurriedly looked for the kids and June (and found them).

Let's suppose they relaxed a little at this point and radioed that all 5 found - dead. There's at least 4 in the house, possibly 6, but we'll stick with 4 men, at least ONE of whom is upstairs, but probably 2, and theoretically as many as 4.

It's still quite difficult to see her sneaking past them AND getting into the bedroom and pulling the trigger.I know it's a big house, but the upstairs section is far less so... more like a good sized detached family home. She's just come round from being unconscious, possibly dazed, but possibly not, and she's pretty badly injured. She's luckily managed to have a bullet left in the gun (so she shot herself the first time with at LEAST 2 bullets remaining).

Why is she bothering to sneak past them? she has the gun, she can do it there and then. If she's hell bent on killing herself, why risk being prevented from doing so by TFG (even with a wounding shot)?
She has ALL she needs, right with her in the kitchen.

[Kaldin]

Let's say TFG went in the house expected a count of 5 persons.

They count 2 in the kitchen, one of whom is Sheila...(would they know it's her?... quite probably given Jeremy's description)...

COULD they have 'switched' off at the point thinking "right, two dead, one's the daughter"... then hurriedly looked for the kids and June (and found them).

Let's suppose they relaxed a little at this point and radioed that all 5 found - dead. There's at least 4 in the house, possibly 6, but we'll stick with 4 men, at least ONE of whom is upstairs, but probably 2, and theoretically as many as 4.

It's still quite difficult to see her sneaking past them AND getting into the bedroom and pulling the trigger.I know it's a big house, but the upstairs section is far less so... more like a good sized detached family home. She's just come round from being unconscious, possibly dazed, but possibly not, and she's pretty badly injured. She's luckily managed to have a bullet left in the gun (so she shot herself the first time with at LEAST 2 bullets remaining).

Why is she bothering to sneak past them? she has the gun, she can do it there and then. If she's hell bent on killing herself, why risk being prevented from doing so by TFG (even with a wounding shot)?
She has ALL she needs, right with her in the kitchen.

Yes. I don't understand where the gun is supposed to be in Mike's scenario. Is it leaning against the bedroom window as in Julie Jeapes's statement? If so, then how did Sheila shoot herself in the kitchen?

[TheBrilliantMistake]

she had a long piece of string attached to the trigger and aligned the gun to to make a bullet ricochet off the lamp shade, down the spiral staircase and under the neck. To be fair, it's no wonder it took two goes... tricky shot that ;-)

[mb1]

From the TFG description of entry, it appears they were employing a clear/secure.forward tactic. They opened windows to create exits for officers should they need to retreat.

If SC was alive in the kitchen her only opportunity to move unseen would have been when the TFG began moving upstairs. If she used the kitchen stairs, they would have seen her on the landing. Put frankly, they would have shot her and it wouldn't have been an uppercut to the chin.
Why would they lie if this occurred?
TFUs/TFGs kill people waving chair legs and toy guns without feeling the need to lie.
Why hide the fact that they had shot a woman who had just slaughtered her children and parents?

If Sheila managed to evade them and get to the bedroom, the TFG would have returned to siege mode whether or not they heard a shot. Once again, WHF would have been a no-go area for some considerable time.
Again, why would they lie if this occurred?

Simply cannot see any strand of logic in this line of reasoning.

The problem Bamber has now....  he has come up with that many different stories to say what happened with every little new evidence, he has now lost any little credibility he had.
He has attacked everybody saying they are lying from the farm hands, police and prosecution etc that I'm sure that nothing new released would ever change matters for him now, as why would they if it was only going to drop them in it.
He's tried to dig himself out of a massive hole since day one with his arrogance and all the legal experts who matter in this case can see it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-charged-over-cardiff-three-miscarriage-of-justice-1636833.html Sometimes it takes a long time !!

That terrible case involves bully-boy police officers and supposedly 'bullied' witnesses - helped by the fact that the force later convicted the correct killer, allowing these appellants to be freed and this case to begin.

However, truly bad as it was, it didn't involve collusion of the forensics labs, ballistics experts, relatives, will executor, BT, uncle Tom Cobley and all...

I go back to my original question - if the TFU make a hash of the entry to WHF and allow Sheila to shoot herself, why lie? She had just slaughtered (allegedly) her children and parents. Who would have cared what happened to her?


     

[TheBrilliantMistake]

Actually, they could just have said "she got up, by the time we'd seen, she shot herself" - which is pretty much 'the botch up'.

Exactly as you say... what's to hide?

Even if they'd shot her... what's to hide?

I'm more in favour of the family colluding than I am of the Police covering up a (non) mess.

The only embarrassment the Police needed to ever cover up was the taking of Jeremy at his word about what happened (and they had no evidence to assume anything other than his being truthful), and the woeful gathering of evidence at the crime scene which (probably) actually led to this mess. I believe there was probably a fair good chance of finding tangible evidence that very morning on Jeremy, at his home, and in the house... HAD they treated it as a 5 murders.
They took the easy option (and probably 'tactful' too), and made a mistake.

[mb1]

Actually, they could just have said "she got up, by the time we'd seen, she shot herself" - which is pretty much 'the botch up'.

Exactly as you say... what's to hide?

Even if they'd shot her... what's to hide?

I'm more in favour of the family colluding than I am of the Police covering up a (non) mess.

The only embarrassment the Police needed to ever cover up was the taking of Jeremy at his word about what happened (and they had no evidence to assume anything other than his being truthful), and the woeful gathering of evidence at the crime scene which (probably) actually led to this mess. I believe there was probably a fair good chance of finding tangible evidence that very morning on Jeremy, at his home, and in the house... HAD they treated it as a 5 murders.
They took the easy option (and probably 'tactful' too), and made a mistake.

I agree. They took the easy suicide/murder option and failed to investigate thoroughly - but they have been criticized for this ever since!
It was much harder for them to do a U-turn and admit 5 murders.
Even without the family, the forensics coming back were not supporting suicide so they did have to think again.

I think alarm bells rang for the family when they realised JB had told the police that Sheila 'could shoot and had used all the guns' which they knew to be patently untrue.
If family, it would have made me stop and consider as well, particularly if I thought the police were all too ready to jump to a conclusion that had been planted in their heads by the very person telling fibs...

[jon]

From the TFG description of entry, it appears they were employing a clear/secure.forward tactic. They opened windows to create exits for officers should they need to retreat.

If SC was alive in the kitchen her only opportunity to move unseen would have been when the TFG began moving upstairs. If she used the kitchen stairs, they would have seen her on the landing. Put frankly, they would have shot her and it wouldn't have been an uppercut to the chin.
Why would they lie if this occurred?
TFUs/TFGs kill people waving chair legs and toy guns without feeling the need to lie.
Why hide the fact that they had shot a woman who had just slaughtered her children and parents?

If Sheila managed to evade them and get to the bedroom, the TFG would have returned to siege mode whether or not they heard a shot. Once again, WHF would have been a no-go area for some considerable time.
Again, why would they lie if this occurred?

Simply cannot see any strand of logic in this line of reasoning.

The problem Bamber has now....  he has come up with that many different stories to say what happened with every little new evidence, he has now lost any little credibility he had.
He has attacked everybody saying they are lying from the farm hands, police and prosecution etc that I'm sure that nothing new released would ever change matters for him now, as why would they if it was only going to drop them in it.
He's tried to dig himself out of a massive hole since day one with his arrogance and all the legal experts who matter in this case can see it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-charged-over-cardiff-three-miscarriage-of-justice-1636833.html Sometimes it takes a long time !!

That terrible case involves bully-boy police officers and supposedly 'bullied' witnesses - helped by the fact that the force later convicted the correct killer, allowing these appellants to be freed and this case to begin.

However, truly bad as it was, it didn't involve collusion of the forensics labs, ballistics experts, relatives, will executor, BT, uncle Tom Cobley and all...

I go back to my original question - if the TFU make a hash of the entry to WHF and allow Sheila to shoot herself, why lie? She had just slaughtered (allegedly) her children and parents. Who would have cared what happened to her?


   

Relatives , i take it you didnt believe Sion Jenkins wife or his children when they said he was violent ? So do relatives lie ? Forensics , have gone wrong  many times Frank Skuse , Michael Heath  to name but two , BT if they hid nothing get EP to release the bill of the relevant month , Tom Cobley i will hold my hand up and say he never colluded  , you being a legal liberian i am sure you dont need me to remind you that there have been worse miscarriages of justice than this !!

[TheBrilliantMistake]

It's quite true there have been miscarriages of justice - not sure I'd say "worse", but of course they exist.

But we must be careful not to pull that card out of the hat every time someone says "it was a stitch up guv!"... it's too easy to say "well, the police have done it before!".

Yep the police have done it before, and will again. But it's still a relatively small percentage compared with correct convictions (even assuming there's a few innocents still in prison, or dead).

Personally, if I had to defend Bamber, I'd not be looking at the Police as conspirators, but at the family, and even that would be at a push.
The Police caused all this with their woeful gathering of evidence, but that's known and accepted. It's remotely possible the family witnessed this opportunity and took advantage - but even then, it's quite from suspecting Jeremy to 'framing him' (and thereby risking their own liberty in the process). Not only that, but also getting lucky that other parties contributed to Jeremy's downfall (OR were also in collusion with the family).

[mb1]

From the TFG description of entry, it appears they were employing a clear/secure.forward tactic. They opened windows to create exits for officers should they need to retreat.

If SC was alive in the kitchen her only opportunity to move unseen would have been when the TFG began moving upstairs. If she used the kitchen stairs, they would have seen her on the landing. Put frankly, they would have shot her and it wouldn't have been an uppercut to the chin.
Why would they lie if this occurred?
TFUs/TFGs kill people waving chair legs and toy guns without feeling the need to lie.
Why hide the fact that they had shot a woman who had just slaughtered her children and parents?

If Sheila managed to evade them and get to the bedroom, the TFG would have returned to siege mode whether or not they heard a shot. Once again, WHF would have been a no-go area for some considerable time.
Again, why would they lie if this occurred?

Simply cannot see any strand of logic in this line of reasoning.

The problem Bamber has now....  he has come up with that many different stories to say what happened with every little new evidence, he has now lost any little credibility he had.
He has attacked everybody saying they are lying from the farm hands, police and prosecution etc that I'm sure that nothing new released would ever change matters for him now, as why would they if it was only going to drop them in it.
He's tried to dig himself out of a massive hole since day one with his arrogance and all the legal experts who matter in this case can see it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-charged-over-cardiff-three-miscarriage-of-justice-1636833.html Sometimes it takes a long time !!

That terrible case involves bully-boy police officers and supposedly 'bullied' witnesses - helped by the fact that the force later convicted the correct killer, allowing these appellants to be freed and this case to begin.

However, truly bad as it was, it didn't involve collusion of the forensics labs, ballistics experts, relatives, will executor, BT, uncle Tom Cobley and all...

I go back to my original question - if the TFU make a hash of the entry to WHF and allow Sheila to shoot herself, why lie? She had just slaughtered (allegedly) her children and parents. Who would have cared what happened to her?


   

Relatives , i take it you didnt believe Sion Jenkins wife or his children when they said he was violent ? So do relatives lie ? Forensics , have gone wrong  many times Frank Skuse , Michael Heath  to name but two , BT if they hid nothing get EP to release the bill of the relevant month , Tom Cobley i will hold my hand up and say he never colluded  , you being a legal liberian i am sure you dont need me to remind you that there have been worse miscarriages of justice than this !!

Worse in which way?
Scale of collusion?
Time incarcerated?
Nature of crime/s alleged?

Scale of collusion?
Time spent in incarceration?
Nature of the crimes of which they were accused?

You are asking us to believe that every body - personal, governmental, professional - entered into a deliberate conspiracy, uniting varied motives to achieve a common ill, that of framing and convicting an innocent man. It follows that those succeeding these positions over the last 25 years also stand accused, compromising their roles, personal integrity and - if discovered - their careers and possible freedom.
Not a single whistleblower?   

As for the SJ case - by the time of the Appeals the children A +C had reached an age when the court accepted they understood the concept of 'truth and lie' and LJ had had time to evaluate the case. The children travelled half-way across the world to give evidence on SJ's behalf. Hopefully, it gave the girls some sense of closure. It was certainly emotional and compelling, quite a new 'legal' experience for me.

As you are keen to personalise issues let me explain: my professional concern is the precedence of relevant legal argument. The bulk of my work is commissioned by chambers/counsels specialising in defence.
It is not my job, nor that of solicitors, counsel or judges, to decide guilt or innocence. That rests with juries.
I simply say that legal argument can be inferred from previous cases, but there is no automatic transference of conclusions. Steve Wright is not innocent just because Barry George was. But if you prefer to picture me as a rabid hang-em-all facist, that's fine. I'll sleep. But I will give you a case worth viewing - Gary Critchley... 
 

[jon]

From the TFG description of entry, it appears they were employing a clear/secure.forward tactic. They opened windows to create exits for officers should they need to retreat.

If SC was alive in the kitchen her only opportunity to move unseen would have been when the TFG began moving upstairs. If she used the kitchen stairs, they would have seen her on the landing. Put frankly, they would have shot her and it wouldn't have been an uppercut to the chin.
Why would they lie if this occurred?
TFUs/TFGs kill people waving chair legs and toy guns without feeling the need to lie.
Why hide the fact that they had shot a woman who had just slaughtered her children and parents?

If Sheila managed to evade them and get to the bedroom, the TFG would have returned to siege mode whether or not they heard a shot. Once again, WHF would have been a no-go area for some considerable time.
Again, why would they lie if this occurred?

Simply cannot see any strand of logic in this line of reasoning.

The problem Bamber has now....  he has come up with that many different stories to say what happened with every little new evidence, he has now lost any little credibility he had.
He has attacked everybody saying they are lying from the farm hands, police and prosecution etc that I'm sure that nothing new released would ever change matters for him now, as why would they if it was only going to drop them in it.
He's tried to dig himself out of a massive hole since day one with his arrogance and all the legal experts who matter in this case can see it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-charged-over-cardiff-three-miscarriage-of-justice-1636833.html Sometimes it takes a long time !!

That terrible case involves bully-boy police officers and supposedly 'bullied' witnesses - helped by the fact that the force later convicted the correct killer, allowing these appellants to be freed and this case to begin.

However, truly bad as it was, it didn't involve collusion of the forensics labs, ballistics experts, relatives, will executor, BT, uncle Tom Cobley and all...

I go back to my original question - if the TFU make a hash of the entry to WHF and allow Sheila to shoot herself, why lie? She had just slaughtered (allegedly) her children and parents. Who would have cared what happened to her?


   

Relatives , i take it you didnt believe Sion Jenkins wife or his children when they said he was violent ? So do relatives lie ? Forensics , have gone wrong  many times Frank Skuse , Michael Heath  to name but two , BT if they hid nothing get EP to release the bill of the relevant month , Tom Cobley i will hold my hand up and say he never colluded  , you being a legal liberian i am sure you dont need me to remind you that there have been worse miscarriages of justice than this !!

Worse in which way?
Scale of collusion?
Time incarcerated?
Nature of crime/s alleged?

Scale of collusion?
Time spent in incarceration?
Nature of the crimes of which they were accused?

You are asking us to believe that every body - personal, governmental, professional - entered into a deliberate conspiracy, uniting varied motives to achieve a common ill, that of framing and convicting an innocent man. It follows that those succeeding these positions over the last 25 years also stand accused, compromising their roles, personal integrity and - if discovered - their careers and possible freedom.
Not a single whistleblower?   

As for the SJ case - by the time of the Appeals the children A +C had reached an age when the court accepted they understood the concept of 'truth and lie' and LJ had had time to evaluate the case. The children travelled half-way across the world to give evidence on SJ's behalf. Hopefully, it gave the girls some sense of closure. It was certainly emotional and compelling, quite a new 'legal' experience for me.

As you are keen to personalise issues let me explain: my professional concern is the precedence of relevant legal argument. The bulk of my work is commissioned by chambers/counsels specialising in defence.
It is not my job, nor that of solicitors, counsel or judges, to decide guilt or innocence. That rests with juries.
I simply say that legal argument can be inferred from previous cases, but there is no automatic transference of conclusions. Steve Wright is not innocent just because Barry George was. But if you prefer to picture me as a rabid hang-em-all facist, that's fine. I'll sleep. But I will give you a case worth viewing - Gary Critchley... 
 

I dont think of you as a hang - em -all facist at all , but i think you show some sign's of double standards , LJ said SJ was violent , one of his children told Trevor Mcdonald he hit them with some object think it was a belt but i am not sure , now you fought for his release , now can you answer my question was he violent ? In your opinion ?

[TheBrilliantMistake]

The question 'was he violent' will always result in a subjective answer. It's a matter of opinion.

'Short tempered' - some will say
'Didn't suffer fools gladly' - another will say
'Firm, but gentle giant' - another will say
'Wouldn't harm a fly' - etc etc

In fact I rowed with my daughter this morning - if you were to ask her if I'm nasty there's a fair chance she'd say yes.
Ask her when I've just topped her phone up for her, and you might get a different answer!

I do appreciate that these are trivial examples, but the same principle applies on a much grander scale - a wife saying her husband wasn't violent, and children saying he was. It's a relative term in many respects.

This whole debate whoever originated from the ill-founded suggestion that because Bamber had no 'history' (however that was determined) of violence, that it added to his credibility significantly.

I would strongly disagree. I would suggest it did no harm, but it would not really count for very much when determining if he was capable of the murders. There are simply so many murders with varying degrees of violence, and motives where the perpetrator had no history nor given any indication that they might be capable of murder, that a lack of violent history accounts for nothing.

[jon]

The question 'was he violent' will always result in a subjective answer. It's a matter of opinion.

'Short tempered' - some will say
'Didn't suffer fools gladly' - another will say
'Firm, but gentle giant' - another will say
'Wouldn't harm a fly' - etc etc

In fact I rowed with my daughter this morning - if you were to ask her if I'm nasty there's a fair chance she'd say yes.
Ask her when I've just topped her phone up for her, and you might get a different answer!

I do appreciate that these are trivial examples, but the same principle applies on a much grander scale - a wife saying her husband wasn't violent, and children saying he was. It's a relative term in many respects.

This whole debate whoever originated from the ill-founded suggestion that because Bamber had no 'history' (however that was determined) of violence, that it added to his credibility significantly.

I would strongly disagree. I would suggest it did no harm, but it would not really count for very much when determining if he was capable of the murders. There are simply so many murders with varying degrees of violence, and motives where the perpetrator had no history nor given any indication that they might be capable of murder, that a lack of violent history accounts for nothing.

My question is about Sion Jenkins ! But how much would be made of the fact JB was violent if he had been ?

[mb1]

From the TFG description of entry, it appears they were employing a clear/secure.forward tactic. They opened windows to create exits for officers should they need to retreat.

If SC was alive in the kitchen her only opportunity to move unseen would have been when the TFG began moving upstairs. If she used the kitchen stairs, they would have seen her on the landing. Put frankly, they would have shot her and it wouldn't have been an uppercut to the chin.
Why would they lie if this occurred?
TFUs/TFGs kill people waving chair legs and toy guns without feeling the need to lie.
Why hide the fact that they had shot a woman who had just slaughtered her children and parents?

If Sheila managed to evade them and get to the bedroom, the TFG would have returned to siege mode whether or not they heard a shot. Once again, WHF would have been a no-go area for some considerable time.
Again, why would they lie if this occurred?

Simply cannot see any strand of logic in this line of reasoning.

The problem Bamber has now....  he has come up with that many different stories to say what happened with every little new evidence, he has now lost any little credibility he had.
He has attacked everybody saying they are lying from the farm hands, police and prosecution etc that I'm sure that nothing new released would ever change matters for him now, as why would they if it was only going to drop them in it.
He's tried to dig himself out of a massive hole since day one with his arrogance and all the legal experts who matter in this case can see it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-officers-charged-over-cardiff-three-miscarriage-of-justice-1636833.html Sometimes it takes a long time !!

That terrible case involves bully-boy police officers and supposedly 'bullied' witnesses - helped by the fact that the force later convicted the correct killer, allowing these appellants to be freed and this case to begin.

However, truly bad as it was, it didn't involve collusion of the forensics labs, ballistics experts, relatives, will executor, BT, uncle Tom Cobley and all...

I go back to my original question - if the TFU make a hash of the entry to WHF and allow Sheila to shoot herself, why lie? She had just slaughtered (allegedly) her children and parents. Who would have cared what happened to her?


   

Relatives , i take it you didnt believe Sion Jenkins wife or his children when they said he was violent ? So do relatives lie ? Forensics , have gone wrong  many times Frank Skuse , Michael Heath  to name but two , BT if they hid nothing get EP to release the bill of the relevant month , Tom Cobley i will hold my hand up and say he never colluded  , you being a legal liberian i am sure you dont need me to remind you that there have been worse miscarriages of justice than this !!

Worse in which way?
Scale of collusion?
Time incarcerated?
Nature of crime/s alleged?

Scale of collusion?
Time spent in incarceration?
Nature of the crimes of which they were accused?

You are asking us to believe that every body - personal, governmental, professional - entered into a deliberate conspiracy, uniting varied motives to achieve a common ill, that of framing and convicting an innocent man. It follows that those succeeding these positions over the last 25 years also stand accused, compromising their roles, personal integrity and - if discovered - their careers and possible freedom.
Not a single whistleblower?   

As for the SJ case - by the time of the Appeals the children A +C had reached an age when the court accepted they understood the concept of 'truth and lie' and LJ had had time to evaluate the case. The children travelled half-way across the world to give evidence on SJ's behalf. Hopefully, it gave the girls some sense of closure. It was certainly emotional and compelling, quite a new 'legal' experience for me.

As you are keen to personalise issues let me explain: my professional concern is the precedence of relevant legal argument. The bulk of my work is commissioned by chambers/counsels specialising in defence.
It is not my job, nor that of solicitors, counsel or judges, to decide guilt or innocence. That rests with juries.
I simply say that legal argument can be inferred from previous cases, but there is no automatic transference of conclusions. Steve Wright is not innocent just because Barry George was. But if you prefer to picture me as a rabid hang-em-all facist, that's fine. I'll sleep. But I will give you a case worth viewing - Gary Critchley... 
 

I dont think of you as a hang - em -all facist at all , but i think you show some sign's of double standards , LJ said SJ was violent , one of his children told Trevor Mcdonald he hit them with some object think it was a belt but i am not sure , now you fought for his release , now can you answer my question was he violent ? In your opinion ?

I have said Sheila threw things and struck Colin while their relationship was breaking up.
I have said JB twisted JM's arm behind her back during an argument.
As I argued, neither of these demonstrate any prior history of 'violence' in my opinion. They were aggressive, emotional acts but I do not conclude that they actively enjoyed hurting others.

My Mother once slapped me around the face. Not a violent person at all.

Is a man who routinely beats his wife guilty of domestic violence? YMorally, yes. Legally - only if convicted.
Is the teacher who never canes a child a better teacher than the one who does? I have no idea, as we are evaluating their ability to teach, not beat.

If one of the Guildford 4 liked a Saturday night fight did that make them a bomber? No.

Are you suggesting I have to accept every criminal conviction is a potential conspiracy, otherwise I cannot accept any individual miscarriage of justice?
Would it not be equally sound to regard criminal convictions as safe unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary?

I cannot see where I am applying a double standard.





 
 

[TheBrilliantMistake]

plenty would be made of it, and that's perfectly understandable.

It sounds like double standards, but it's not -

Very often the first time someone's caught for a serious crime, there's no previous on them.
Once they have previous, it's quite common for them to continue in the same vein somewhere down the line.

Crimes similar to the Bamber murders rarely have any prior indication (although they do subsequently invoke claims of 'he was always odd') type insights.