2002 appeal judgement...

[lookout]

Robert Boutflour was removed also from the trial.

Good gracious.What did he shout out.? No-------don't tell me,,I can imagine. How ill-mannered.

[Caroline R]

Good gracious.What did he shout out.? No-------don't tell me,,I can imagine. How ill-mannered.

Her didn't shout anything, it was while giving evidence, he was saying stuff he hadn't been asked and having been told to just answer the questions, he continued and so was removed.

[lookout]

Her didn't shout anything, it was while giving evidence, he was saying stuff he hadn't been asked and having been told to just answer the questions, he continued and so was removed.

Oh,,I see.Probably about the " puf " ( sic )  and other irrelevancies.

[Steve_uk]

A damning indictment of Jeremy which has been painstakingly researched. I could pick out many points but the following caught my immediate attention: 117,118,119 where all witnesses must have lied for Jeremy to assert that he did not resent his parents in some way. 135: Jeremy had been used to gaining entry to White House Farm via entrances other than the doors. 518: It's plain to me that Jeremy shot Sheila quickly upon entry to the master bedroom then angered by not killing her outright he threw her to the floor,pulled her legs and shot her a second time..

[lookout]

You're pulling our legs,Steve.

[mike tesko]

The summing up

153. When Drake J. summed up to the jury, he suggested that there were three "crucial questions". The first, and he made clear that they were not in any order of importance, was whether they believed Julie Mugford? If they were sure that she had told the truth it meant the appellant had planned and carried out the killings. The second was whether they were sure that Sheila Caffell did not kill the members of her family and then commit suicide? The third was whether there was a telephone call in the middle of the night from Nevill Bamber to his son? If there was no such call then it inevitably undermined the whole of the appellant's story and he could have had no reason to have invented it, save to cover up his responsibility for the murders.

[mike tesko]

The summing up

153. When Drake J. summed up to the jury, he suggested that there were three "crucial questions". The first, and he made clear that they were not in any order of importance, was whether they believed Julie Mugford? If they were sure that she had told the truth it meant the appellant had planned and carried out the killings. The second was whether they were sure that Sheila Caffell did not kill the members of her family and then commit suicide? The third was whether there was a telephone call in the middle of the night from Nevill Bamber to his son? If there was no such call then it inevitably undermined the whole of the appellant's story and he could have had no reason to have invented it, save to cover up his responsibility for the murders.

The first, and he made clear that they were not in any order of importance, was whether they believed Julie Mugford?

Mugford lied about monies due to her as agreed in a contract with NOTW should Jeremy be convicted of the murders, should stood to benefit by £25,000 and therefore her testimony was motivated by greed. She told a deliberate lie to the jury about this arrangement she had, because she knew if the truth be known the jury would not have entertained anything she said as being reliable...

The second was whether they were sure that Sheila Caffell did not kill the members of her family and then commit suicide?

She had a bloodied handprint on the front part of her nightdress and bloodied fingermarks on her throat, as well as bloodied marks on the top part of her right hand/wrist and her right forearm which is consistent with sheila having been involved in some sort of a struggle with someone before she died, so the trial judge obviously got it wrong by suggesting otherwise...

The third was whether there was a telephone call in the middle of the night from Nevill Bamber to his son? If there was no such call then it inevitably undermined the whole of the appellant's story and he could have had no reason to have invented it, save to cover up his responsibility for the murders.

Prosecution failed to prove such a call had not taken place. More crucially, police had evidence which they deliberately withheld that was capable of indicating that Ralph Bamber had called police himself at 3:26am, and that when Ralph had made this call, he himself had not dialled 999...

[killingeve]

One thing the jury didn't hear was the evidence of Martyn Ismail (paras 514 - 520)

Good morning Miss Bridget

A potential point scorer for the prosecution IF SC was photographed as found by the police ie not moved!  Can you prove that she was not moved or that her nightie was not moved for dignity?

[Bridget]

Good morning Miss Bridget

A potential point scorer for the prosecution IF SC was photographed as found by the police ie not moved!  Can you prove that she was not moved or that her nightie was not moved for dignity?

Can you prove that she was? None of the police statements mention moving her and I believe several said in evidence that they didn't. Of course you could say that they are all lying..

[killingeve]

Can you prove that she was? None of the police statements mention moving her and I believe several said in evidence that they didn't. Of course you could say that they are all lying..

Oh I thought one or two said she was found on the bed?  AE/JM thought she was on the bed?

[jon]

Did not one police officer tell COLP , SC body was not as he remembered it or seen it ?

Why would the police officer , who informed AE , SC body was on the bed deny telling her so , if it was just a simple case of being mistaken ?

[Bridget]

Oh I thought one or two said she was found on the bed?  AE/JM thought she was on the bed?

I don't think it was ever established who told either of them that. Certainly no one said that in either a statement or in evidence. It was probably nothing more than a misinterpretation of the old "on the far side of the bed" phrase we see on here so often.

[killingeve]

I don't think it was ever established who told either of them that. Certainly no one said that in either a statement or in evidence. It was probably nothing more than a misinterpretation of the old "on the far side of the bed" phrase we see on here so often.

Yes quite probably along with all the other 'misinterpretations' 

As an aside I have always found the overall resting place of SC a little odd.  Perhaps I'm thinking too rationally (some might say for a change  ) but why would she have taken her life in her parents' bedroom and close to a woman by all accounts she hated?  Why not in the twins' room or her own or even the lounge?  Why in a room that appears to resemble a war zone when it seems she was quite particular about things eg her flat was apparently immaculate?  If she showered etc why end up in a bloody/dishevelled room?  Was this room away from view in terms of police outside?  Or was she roaming around and when police entered ended up trapped in the main bedroom/parents' room?

[mike tesko]

Of course, the team of training officers who were responsible for actually moving Sheila's body in the bedroom had never testified at court, or made witness statements which have been disclosed to the defence confirming what they did, so it is not suprising that those officers who might have been asked if they had moved or touched her body to say they had'nt, but oddly enough none of them have ever been asked if they know of anyone who did...

[Bridget]

Yes quite probably along with all the other 'misinterpretations' 

As an aside I have always found the overall resting place of SC a little odd.  Perhaps I'm thinking too rationally (some might say for a change  ) but why would she have taken her life in her parents' bedroom and close to a woman by all accounts she hated?  Why not in the twins' room or her own or even the lounge?  Why in a room that appears to resemble a war zone when it seems she was quite particular about things eg her flat was apparently immaculate?  If she showered etc why end up in a bloody/dishevelled room?

All very good questions.



 

Was this room away from view in terms of police outside? 

No more so than her own room was.

Or was she roaming around and when police entered ended up trapped in the main bedroom/parents' room?

If you favour the 4 murders and a suicide theory I suppose that's not impossible, but you'd have to ask why she went in there. If it was because she'd just killed June then did first she kill the twins, then chase Neville downstairs leaving June alive and well upstairs? If so, wouldn't you expect June to have gone into the twins room?