Because her relatives had been slaughtered.
I don't know Ann, but I don't think it's possible to judge her character from police or witness statements. The contents of those statements tend to be limited to matters relevant to the crime and any suspects, and don't dwell on matters such as the witness's own emotions. For that reason such statements can of course seem cold.
It seems obvious to me that right from the off Ann was suspicious of Jeremy, mainly because his account of his relationship with his family (among other things) didn't tie in with what her perception of what it was. Of course to counter this argument supporters will say that the families weren't close, and cite the frequency of the caravan park meetings, the fact that it is said somewhere that Ann and Peter hadn't visited since Christmas, and the fact that Ann didn't see Sheila or Jeremy in their youth. Surely if they take the blinkers off supporters can see that this is not how families work? I see my sister a lot less often than the Eaton's and Boutflours saw the Bambers, but I defy any of you to tell me I don't know her. Relationships in families can be complex, and no amount of 27-years-after-the-fact analysis is ever going to get anywhere close.
Morning Ms Bridget
I don't really understand your post above.
JB may have had a crap relationship with every member of his adoptive family - immediate and extended - doesn't mean he would have dreamt of killing them for any reason.
People believe what they want to believe. Last night I saw on the news that the parents of the suspected Boston bombers are in complete denial that their sons were involved albeit the law enforcement agencies seem to have considerable evidence although I accept that the survivor has yet to be tried.
Same happened with the lead suicide bomber in 9/11 attacks in that his father refused to believe that his son was involved.
Imo the same is true of the Boutflours/Eatons ie they refuse to believe Sheila was responsible despite, according to Colin Caffell, having no idea about the severity of her mental illness.
Excerpt from Colin's book:"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam. Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden. Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it? I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence. They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong. These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".
"Their lack of awareness was probably a tremendous blessing, because without a full appreciation of her illness - which, for me, had acted like a smoke-screen to the truth - they were absolutely convinced Bambs couldn't have done it and, unbeknown to me then, were already pressing the police into further investigations, albeit with little initial success."
