"All People Are Bad And Should Be Killed"

[killingeve]

Quite correct April. Criminology is indeed the study of crime and its prevention, including examination of the environmental, hereditary, or psychological causes of crime. I also study behavioural science and the links from behaviour, deviant or otherwise to the above.
What drew me to this case was the psychological aspects of this crime which I saw were twofold - If you take the view that Sheila committed the crime then what aspects of schizophrenia were missed by her doctors? Was that terrible night only the result of her neglecting to take her medication? or were there other reasons involved? As a full-blown mental ilness would she have been committed if she survived and was arrested for this crime?
Equally, Jeremy Bamber has been suspected of being a psychopath. A life-long personality disorder that if true, would almost certainly prove him capable of committing a crime of this callousness and magnitude. If he is guilty - and I do believe he is - it would explain why he could act so casually after the murders. The callousness - if that's what it was - is a key feature of psychopathy as is lack of empathy but most telling of all, highly manipulative, a lack of conscience and a complete inability to take responsibility for their own actions. What is surprising, is that psychopathy, is not as rare as one would first think - 1 in 10 are thought to have psychopathic tendencies, but only 1 in 100 display 'high end' psychopathy. These will murder without compunction if they deem it necessary.

So april, you know my stand. I believe Bamber to be guilty and - I want you to reflect on that point - this therefore must follow that he is indeed a psychopath. Now take what I have said and amplify this. If he committed these murders what sort of a person is he? It means he has lied to so many well-meaning people, disseminated, manipulated and cheated. But of course, ONLY, and I emphasise that word deliberately - if you believe him to be guilty. If truth be known, you do not know, I do not know, no-one apart from Jeremy Bamber knows the truth of what happened that night. I may be guilty of arguing to keep an totally innocent man locked in prison for the rest of his life, something I have thought long and hard about. Equally so, you may be directly assisting a psychopathic child-murderer avoid his just punishment and put the lives of others in mortal danger. This is what I hope this forum is all about - debating these two diametrically opposed beliefs.

Hi Daniel

One of the features of the case I find remarkable is that it wasn't just SC that suffered from serious mental illness but June too.  As you are probably aware SC and JB were both adopted from different biological families so this is even more remarkable if JB is a psychopath:

June Bamber - Serious mental illness requiring in-patient treatment 1959 and 1982 - confirmation as per psychiatrist.

Sheila Caffell - Serious mental illness requiring in-patient treatment 1983 and 1985 - confirmation as per psychiatrist.

Jeremy Bamber - Psychopath and mass murderer 1985 - no confirmation from any professional - please see following link which confirms JB has never shown any signs of psychopathy

http://jeremybamber.org/psychological-reports/

Daniel what do you think the statistical chances are of 3 of 4 members of an immediate adoptive family being mentally ill/personality disordered are?

If you believe JB to be guilty and I think you do then can you shed any light on why this middle class family seems to have been so troubled or was it just a coincidence?  Obviously we can't blame it on some genetic propensity towards mental illness/personality disorder.

[Lugg]

Oh dear.........are we trying to be a little sarcastic?  I am afraid you will have to get over it rather than try to continually make silly comments because I have a point of view diametrically opposed to yours. What should I actually look for in your posts Susan that will help me with the case?
I would absolutely love to know what you consider to be 'exciting new takes' since in 27 years there doesn't seem to have been any. Do you think that was a fair thing to ask me Susan? Maybe you also have an 'open mind'

Daniel I think if you expect respect from others then you should show a little of that respect for others. It is not what you say that offends me, because all that you have said has been stated many times by others who are well respected long standing members of the forum. Those I respect. But is the way you say these things that concerns me. You say things in such a know it all way and in such a way that you are it appears attempting to make others look small. Calling them judgmental etc. I just think you should start showing others a bit more respect. Then perhaps by so doing you may encourage people to respect you and not feel as if they are being spoken down to?

[lookout]

Well that's a fair enough synopsis.
I was also reading today,,about fathers who murder their children is on the increase. Men do it out of sheer " spite " after a marriage break-up and don't usually take their own lives as a woman would do.

 Jeremy wasn't obviously the father of the twins,,though if he had have been,then I'd have said yes,he did carry out the murders.

Mothers who murder their children have different reasons for murdering them in that they usually believe that they'll be better off " in another world ".

In the 80's,,there was only 1 of such a murder,,but it's increased to 3 or even 4 a year.

To my mind,,unless  proved,,which it hasn't been,,then Jeremy would have to be a raging psychopath to carry out the murders of two children who were not his own.
Surely 27 psychiatrists/psychologists couldn't escape from the symptoms of a mad-man.? That being so,,then why are they employed at all if they can't differentiate between a sane person and a mad one.?
I'd understand if one consultant,or even two,,got it wrong,,but not 27.
Also,,,though controversial,,the polygram didn't falter,,either with heart-rate,blood-pressure or sweat ( skin )

[Lugg]

I will be most impressed if that was NOT directed solely at me.

This is the kind of think I am talking about. It is not what you say that is so offensive. But the way you say it that offends. We do not direct things at you because your views are diametricaly opposed to others. But rather because you seem to consider those same people to be idiots (even though you have not said it in so many words) that puts their backs up. Indeed you give the impression that it is you who are the one who is being judgmental towards others because they disagree with you? Just saying that's all.

[Lugg]

Patti, I know you mean well but I am saddened and frustrated by the sniping I am receiving from people like April and Lugg. What am I supposed to do? It's like being in a school playground where the kids are ganging up. I am utterly disgusted. All I wanted to do was debate. My opinion is different to theirs and I know they find that difficult to deal with. Fine if they have a go at my opinions but they are getting personal - especially' Lugg' whom I distrust and dislike and want nothing whatsoever to do with, as the only words he has exchanged with me are derogatory and demeaning. Can you kindly ask him to leave me alone?

Get real. What is so important about you. You've behaved like a child as soon as you started posting about the case. Indeed it is you who are the one doing the sniping. You even took Patti's post personally. Especialy when I though it was me she was talking to and not you. All you seem to do when you post your views is try and belittle others by saying that they are against you JUST because of your opposite views.Which is rediculous. As far as I'm concerned you are just a troll who is here to cause trouble. You vertainly have added absolutely nothing to any debate here.

[Patti]

Sometimes it's difficult being a moderator and I do try to see things two ways rather than one way.  I'm not here to preach, nor am I here to tell people off, I am here as a moderator to request an end to a situation before it gets out of hand.  I am not singling anyone out either, but I really would like some support on this, please. That is all I am asking for. 

[Lugg]

Sometimes it's difficult being a moderator and I do try to see things two ways rather than one way.  I'm not here to preach, nor am I here to tell people off, I am here as a moderator to request an end to a situation before it gets out of hand.  I am not singling anyone out either, but I really would like some support on this, please. That is all I am asking for.

Ok Patti. But if my suspicions are right then he is a troll. To make me sure that he is genuine he must start showing some respect for not only long standing members who have proved themselves. But who also have opposing views to his own. That is all I ask.

[Jane]

Quite correct April. Criminology is indeed the study of crime and its prevention, including examination of the environmental, hereditary, or psychological causes of crime. I also study behavioural science and the links from behaviour, deviant or otherwise to the above.
What drew me to this case was the psychological aspects of this crime which I saw were twofold - If you take the view that Sheila committed the crime then what aspects of schizophrenia were missed by her doctors? Was that terrible night only the result of her neglecting to take her medication? or were there other reasons involved? As a full-blown mental ilness would she have been committed if she survived and was arrested for this crime?
Equally, Jeremy Bamber has been suspected of being a psychopath. A life-long personality disorder that if true, would almost certainly prove him capable of committing a crime of this callousness and magnitude. If he is guilty - and I do believe he is - it would explain why he could act so casually after the murders. The callousness - if that's what it was - is a key feature of psychopathy as is lack of empathy but most telling of all, highly manipulative, a lack of conscience and a complete inability to take responsibility for their own actions. What is surprising, is that psychopathy, is not as rare as one would first think - 1 in 10 are thought to have psychopathic tendencies, but only 1 in 100 display 'high end' psychopathy. These will murder without compunction if they deem it necessary.

So april, you know my stand. I believe Bamber to be guilty and - I want you to reflect on that point - this therefore must follow that he is indeed a psychopath. Now take what I have said and amplify this. If he committed these murders what sort of a person is he? It means he has lied to so many well-meaning people, disseminated, manipulated and cheated. But of course, ONLY, and I emphasise that word deliberately - if you believe him to be guilty. If truth be known, you do not know, I do not know, no-one apart from Jeremy Bamber knows the truth of what happened that night. I may be guilty of arguing to keep an totally innocent man locked in prison for the rest of his life, something I have thought long and hard about. Equally so, you may be directly assisting a psychopathic child-murderer avoid his just punishment and put the lives of others in mortal danger. This is what I hope this forum is all about - debating these two diametrically opposed beliefs.

Daniel, thank you for that. You and I now have a solid base from which we can discuss this case like adults. It might surprise you to know that our position is not dissimilar. My background is in psychology. There may just be something here about cause and effect. You mentioned that you felt that I was sniping, possibly so, but the reason would have been that I felt we, as a forum, were being sniped at and I am nothing if not loyal to my friends.

Let's talk about Sheila. My feeling is that she may simply have had the misfortune of being in the wrong environment but I realise that over simplifying. She had a history of a dysfunctional relationship with her adopted mother. There is a suggestion that schizophrenia can afflict adopted children who are subjected to a "double bind" situation. It may or not be so. However, if I was asked if June bonded with Sheila, I would have to say "No." From what I've read, her love wasn't unconditional. There is also the troubling aspect that June suffered psychological trauma/breakdown, supposedly within a short time and because of adopting Sheila, during which time Sheila was placed with a carer, thus suffering a second rejection. Let's jump to her illness and its management.

The Bambers were very private people. Mental illness in any family was a scourge and an embarrassment. The family doctor was likely to have been a friend so Nevill chose for her care the same private psychiatrist who had cared for June and Sheila was sent to the same private clinic. It is unlikely that anyone else in the family knew of this. Dr Ferguson diagnosed her as suffering paranoid schizophrenia with a poor prognosis. She was admitted to the clinic twice within 6 months and I think that had she been treated under the NHS she would undoubtedly have been sectioned. Once again she discharged herself early and that was the last time Dr Ferguson saw her, 18 weeks prior to her death. She left his care without her meds being stablized but despite having written a letter saying how she had found God and she was sure he loved her, she had expectations of rekindling her relationship with her ex husband. During this time she also met with her biological mother. She also asked her GP to reduce her meds which were 200mgs of Haliperidol, an anti psychotic. The GP wrote to Dr Ferguson who , despite in his statement saying Sheila was difficult to treat because she failed to keep follow up appointments and forgot to take her meds, agreed to reduce the dose to 150mgs. The locum who administered the dose decided to reduce it to 100mgs!!! There is now, IMO, a very loose cannon wandering about. An accident looking for a place to happen. It seems the relationship with her biological mother came to nothing. None of her new family knew anything of Shelia's existence. The hoped for reconciliation with her ex husband came to nothing, either, as on the way to what was to be her last visit to the farm, he told her of his love for Heather and presumably revealed plans which didn't include her.

We don't know what happened at the farm. We do know that Sheila was there with the mother who had called her "Whore" and "Devils child" at a time when it may have seemed as if every door which may have lead to a "normal" independent life was being closed to her.

In answer to you question "Would she have been committed", with her history, undoubtedly, IMO.

I haven't forgotten Jeremy and I will be perfectly happy to discuss him with you later.

[Caroline R]

Just echoing Patti, any more personal mud slinging and we will have to trim back the thread!! It completely destroys the topic and the whole point of the discussion just gets lost. Play nice 'everyone' 

[Lugg]

Just echoing Patti, any more personal mud slinging and we will have to trim back the thread!! It completely destroys the topic and the whole point of the discussion just gets lost. Play nice 'everyone' 

Go ahead. Why should I care?

[Jane]

Go ahead. Why should I care?

Dear Lugg, that's unworthy of you. You're much bigger than that

[Patti]

Go ahead. Why should I care?

Because we care Lugg...thats why! 

[Steve_uk]

Oh dear me! For the hundreth time even Ron Cook admitted that he did not believe there had been any "violent fight" in the kitchen as Neville would simply have been too badly wounded to have put up any kind of a fight. With regards to fingerprints or rather lack of them on the rifle,nobody is saying that there were not more on there originally,its just that EP couldn't lift anymore than they did as so many coppers handled the rifle that morning that I would imagine that most of the original prints were smudged,wiped etc. If JB had wiped the rifle,then how come there were still blood smears all over it? It hadn't been wiped by anyone,it had just been overhandled that morning by EP...without gloves!

Because the incident with Jeremy facing his father was before the rifle was used to kill Sheila.

[Steve_uk]

How do you account for the bloodied fingerprints on the side of the blue and white chequered worktop but no blood on the telephone?

[Steve_uk]

That's an interesting point, NaNu. Wasn't it RB or AE who said that prior to purchasing the all singing, all dancing weapon, Jeremy had shown no previous interest in shooting, which would be odd, to say the least for a champion standard shooter and it also means, SURELY, that he would have chosen to use a weapon which assured one clean accurate shot.

No Ann Eaton specifically relates an incident where Jeremy was going to buy a 12 bore shotgun because he "fancied himself as the country squire". It had to be the .22 anschutz for the murders under the pretext of shooting rabbits,left fully loaded of course because Sheila with her coordination issues could not have done it.