The bedroom phone, phone calls & Neville.

[Jane]

I still believe that only a person suffering a psychotic episode or someone who has an extreme personality disorder could be capable of murdering their mother and father, sister and 6 year old nephews in cold blood and then turn up outside the farmhouse as cool as a cucumber, showing absolutely no sign of stress or trauma.  It's unbelievable in my eyes.

I'm with you all the way on that one Maggie, and I fail to comprehend how a person with a mental history such as Sheila's, when she'd voiced fears pertaining to evil surrounding her children and her fears of what she might do to them, should be overlooked for someone with NO mental history and so little against him that motives have to be contrived.

[maggie]

I'm with you all the way on that one Maggie, and I fail to comprehend how a person with a mental history such as Sheila's, when she'd voiced fears pertaining to evil surrounding her children and her fears of what she might do to them, should be overlooked for someone with NO mental history and so little against him that motives have to be contrived.

Exactly April. 

[curiousessex]

I still believe that only a person suffering a psychotic episode or someone who has an extreme personality disorder could be capable of murdering their mother and father, sister and 6 year old nephews in cold blood and then turn up outside the farmhouse as cool as a cucumber, showing absolutely no sign of stress or trauma.  It's unbelievable in my eyes.

Therefore it would appear in the context of the eyes of the law you believe Jeremy to have a suffered from a psychotic episode or having some kind of an extreme personality disorder.

Maybe you just do not want to believe Jeremy could have committed the murders.

[nugnug]

April,the family would still have blamed Jeremy,on the pretext that he used his sisters' illness. You can't win with some people no matter how much it's explained to them,,they're firmly fixated with his guilt,there'd be no shifting them.

well they had a very good financial reason to fixate on his guilt

[Jane]

Therefore it would appear in the context of the eyes of the law you believe Jeremy to have a suffered from a psychotic episode or having some kind of an extreme personality disorder.

Maybe you just do not want to believe Jeremy could have committed the murders.

Why do you want to believe he did? We have Sheila who had previously voiced fears that her children were evil and would commit certain acts on her, She had previously stated that "all people are evil and should die/be killed" We know that her meds were unstable. We know that her prognosis, because of slow onset of psychosis, was poor. We know that during her last 18 weeks her world must have fallen apart AND YET it was chosen to lay this deed on Jeremy, who apart from being a bit more than a Jack the Lad, had done little to suggest that he could possibly commit this crime.

[maggie]

Therefore it would appear in the context of the eyes of the law you believe Jeremy to have a suffered from a psychotic episode or having some kind of an extreme personality disorder.

Maybe you just do not want to believe Jeremy could have committed the murders.

I do not believe any such thing because Jeremy has not got a mental illness or a personality disorder, if he did have there would be more reason to believe his guilt was likely.  It is one of the reasons I do not believe him guilty because I believe a person of sound and healthy mind would not contemplate going into a house to kill 3 adults and two children with no more protection than a vermin gun and crossed fingers.  Neither do I believe anyone of healthy sound mind would be able to stand up to the horror and grotesque scenario of killing these people at close range and then coolly turning up outside the farmhouse and chatting to the police.  Only a person with a psychopathic personality could behave in such a way imo.
You obviously believe differently but this is my opinion.

[lookout]

well they had a very good financial reason to fixate on his guilt

Indeed they did nugs,,and that reason shouts down your ear for all it's worth.

[Jane]

I do not believe any such thing because Jeremy has not got a mental illness or a personality disorder, if he did have there would be more reason to believe his guilt was likely.  It is one of the reasons I do not believe him guilty because I believe a person of sound and healthy mind would not contemplate going into a house to kill 3 adults and two children with no more protection than a vermin gun and crossed fingers.  Neither do I believe anyone of healthy sound mind would be able to stand up to the horror and grotesque scenario of killing these people at close range and then coolly turning up outside the farmhouse and chatting to the police.  Only a person with a psychopathic personality could behave in such a way imo.
You obviously believe differently but this is my opinion.

Yes Maggie, people tend to forget that such carnage would remain in the perpetrators eyes, ears, nose and mouth. God knows for how long they'd smell it and taste it. Yet they have Jeremy, free of psychopathy and with no other personality disorder, apparently cool as a cucumber.

[curiousessex]

Why do you want to believe he did? We have Sheila who had previously voiced fears that her children were evil and would commit certain acts on her, She had previously stated that "all people are evil and should die/be killed" We know that her meds were unstable. We know that her prognosis, because of slow onset of psychosis, was poor. We know that during her last 18 weeks her world must have fallen apart AND YET it was chosen to lay this deed on Jeremy, who apart from being a bit more than a Jack the Lad, had done little to suggest that he could possibly commit this crime.

None of the things you have mentioned regarding Sheila make her a murderer or prove Sheila to be a murderer. On the other side it is often stated Jeremy's arrogance, greed and behaviour post events do not make him a murderer. However, in both cases they may provide some clues.

I have re stated tonight if what Mike says he has is true then there is categorical physical proof Jeremy could not have committed the murders which means it must have been Sheila. However, for some unknown reason Mike will not or does not want to physically reveal or share what he says he has alleged he has in his possession.

Currently and consistently, I believe the answer as to whom committed the murdres lies in the timing and the sequence of the telephone calls. Such events all occured before any silencers were found and do not involve any relatives. For me Jeremy's explanations of these events remains inconsistent with both a number of other independent witness statements and the physical telephone technology that was in place at both the telephone exchange and WHF / Goldhanger at the time.

As soon as Jeremy made contact with the police on the morning of 7th August 1985 the murders could only have heavily involved Jeremy or Sheila.

Jeremy got his defence in first when he specifically names Sheila to the police and outside world.

[Jane]

None of the things you have mentioned regarding Sheila make her a murderer or prove Sheila to be a murderer. On the other side it is often stated Jeremy's arrogance, greed and behaviour post events do not make him a murderer. However, in both cases they may provide some clues.

I have re stated tonight if what Mike says he has is true then there is categorical physical proof Jeremy could not have committed the murders which means it must have been Sheila. However, for some unknown reason Mike will not or does not want to physically reveal or share what he says he has alleged he has in his possession.

Currently and consistently, I believe the answer as to whom committed the murdres lies in the timing and the sequence of the telephone calls. Such events all occured before any silencers were found and do not involve any relatives. For me Jeremy's explanations of these events remains inconsistent with both a number of other independent witness statements and the physical telephone technology that was in place at both the telephone exchange and WHF / Goldhanger at the time.

I don't believe that anything said here on the forum is likely to unlock Jeremy's cell door, HOWEVER I fee certain that you can't be unaware that one of our braver members cut themselves and allowed their blood to drip into a surface which they photographed over several hours as it oxidized thus proving that after several days blood couldn't look like a blob of jam.

Regarding the timing of the calls, I can only say that if they are being held it is more than likely that it will be IN Jeremy's favour rather than against it. WHY hold onto something which could provide unassailable proof of his guilt.

[curiousessex]

I don't believe that anything said here on the forum is likely to unlock Jeremy's cell door, HOWEVER I fee certain that you can't be unaware that one of our braver members cut themselves and allowed their blood to drip into a surface which they photographed over several hours as it oxidized thus proving that after several days blood couldn't look like a blob of jam.

Regarding the timing of the calls, I can only say that if they are being held it is more than likely that it will be IN Jeremy's favour rather than against it. WHY hold onto something which could provide unassailable proof of his guilt.

What Mike says he has is nothing to do with the timing of the telephone calls. Mike says he has a photograph of Sheila on the bed with a single gunshot wound to her neck. Such a photograph would prove Jeremy's innocence. Holding onto and not revealing such an item, in my opion, is hardly working in Jeremy's favour as Jeremy remains in prison. According to Mike he has had the alleged photograph for a number of years.

Maybe your opinion is that this is helping Jeremy and will ultimately be in his favour. If the alleged photograph had been revealed when first discovered then a brave forum member may not have had to harm themselves in donating their blood for a photographic experiment.

[Jan]

None of the things you have mentioned regarding Sheila make her a murderer or prove Sheila to be a murderer. On the other side it is often stated Jeremy's arrogance, greed and behaviour post events do not make him a murderer. However, in both cases they may provide some clues.

I have re stated tonight if what Mike says he has is true then there is categorical physical proof Jeremy could not have committed the murders which means it must have been Sheila. However, for some unknown reason Mike will not or does not want to physically reveal or share what he says he has alleged he has in his possession.

Currently and consistently, I believe the answer as to whom committed the murdres lies in the timing and the sequence of the telephone calls. Such events all occured before any silencers were found and do not involve any relatives. For me Jeremy's explanations of these events remains inconsistent with both a number of other independent witness statements and the physical telephone technology that was in place at both the telephone exchange and WHF / Goldhanger at the time.

As soon as Jeremy made contact with the police on the morning of 7th August 1985 the murders could only have heavily involved Jeremy or Sheila.

Jeremy got his defence in first when he specifically names Sheila to the police and outside world.

Or perhaps what he said was true?

Otherwise it makes him a bit of a simpleton rather than a clever /evil/calculating murderer

[Jan]

None of the things you have mentioned regarding Sheila make her a murderer or prove Sheila to be a murderer. On the other side it is often stated Jeremy's arrogance, greed and behaviour post events do not make him a murderer. However, in both cases they may provide some clues.

I have re stated tonight if what Mike says he has is true then there is categorical physical proof Jeremy could not have committed the murders which means it must have been Sheila. However, for some unknown reason Mike will not or does not want to physically reveal or share what he says he has alleged he has in his possession.

Currently and consistently, I believe the answer as to whom committed the murdres lies in the timing and the sequence of the telephone calls. Such events all occured before any silencers were found and do not involve any relatives. For me Jeremy's explanations of these events remains inconsistent with both a number of other independent witness statements and the physical telephone technology that was in place at both the telephone exchange and WHF / Goldhanger at the time.

As soon as Jeremy made contact with the police on the morning of 7th August 1985 the murders could only have heavily involved Jeremy or Sheila.

Jeremy got his defence in first when he specifically names Sheila to the police and outside world.

on your reasoning the police have no reason not to release the information they have either?

And why did they destroy evidence against a court order - and was the original file lost in a burglary as they alleged?  And why was one police officer in tears when being questioned in the subsequent investigation. Nothing to hide? then release the info and let JB ( in your eyes ) waste his time.

[curiousessex]

Or perhaps what he said was true?

Otherwise it makes him a bit of a simpleton rather than a clever /evil/calculating murderer

If it was true then it would be consistent with what three other independent witnesses have stated.

If it was true then what Jeremy has said would be consistent with the telephone technology that was at WHF and his cottage in Goldhanger.

Unfortunately what Jeremy has said is inconsistent with both........ not just one but both the above and all the above.

[Jane]

What Mike says he has is nothing to do with the timing of the telephone calls. Mike says he has a photograph of Sheila on the bed with a single gunshot wound to her neck. Such a photograph would prove Jeremy's innocence. Holding onto and not revealing such an item, in my opion, is hardly working in Jeremy's favour as Jeremy remains in prison. According to Mike he has had the alleged photograph for a number of years.

Maybe your opinion is that this is helping Jeremy and will ultimately be in his favour. If the alleged photograph had been revealed when first discovered then a brave forum member may not have had to harm themselves in donating their blood for a photographic experiment.

You're addressing these points to the wrong person. I suggest you take them up with Mike.