Why does Jeremy protest his innocence ?

[Adam]

People have said Jeremy must be innocent as he has always protested his innocence. However there are lots of reasons why he protests his innocence.

After having the determination to committ the massacre, there was no way Jeremy was going to crack under police pressure. He had told Julie he was 'watertight' & it was an open & shut case. Jeremy was confident any trial would result in him being a free man. He was nearly right.

The police criticism after the trial & the slim chance Sheila was guilty saw Jeremy make a quick, rejected appeal.

After protesting his innocence & appealing, there was no way Jeremy was going to make an embarressing u turn & admit his guilt. This stance became stronger after the 1994 'Life means Life' order. Jeremy knowing a release will only happen by going through the COA.

The internet has given Jeremy some momentum. And he now has a small amount of fiercely loyal supporters who can support his innocence claims. 

Other reasons Jeremy has protested his innocence -

He thought he was clever enough to committ the perfect crime. So is embarressed to admit he was not.

A release could result in huge compensation. Jeremy could also claim back the inheritence he lost. At 25 upon conviction he could have resumed to living the high life as young play boy in the 80's & 90's. Now he would enjoy being a rich media celebrity.

Jeremy had complete contempt for his family. So feels he should not be in prison for his crime . Espescially not for 29 years.

Jeremy really believes he is innocent. A defence psychiatrist said Jeremy showed the perfect signs of a certain kind of psychopath. Able to blank out the crime completely. So 29 years later he really believes in his innocence.

His family said Jeremy protests his innocence because he has nothing better to do. He would not be the first prisoner to be bored.

Jeremy likes the attention. Roger Wilkes book said Jeremy enjoyed the attention at trial. He no doubt enjoys the attention he gets on the internet & in the media.

The final reason is Jeremy may really be innocent. And a very unlucky man.

[lookout]

Could you sit in a police car like Jeremy did for hours,,knowing that you had committed the massacre,while the police were talking to you,,and you answering as though you hadn't known what had gone on inside ?

You'd have to be pretty damn mercenary in order to face police under those circumstances. Even the SAS would struggle to stay as composed.

[guest154]

Could you sit in a police car like Jeremy did for hours,,knowing that you had committed the massacre,while the police were talking to you,,and you answering as though you hadn't known what had gone on inside ?

You'd have to be pretty damn mercenary in order to face police under those circumstances. Even the SAS would struggle to stay as composed.

People do it all the time. How many people have killed someone and played innocent? Hundreds of cases. Daily occurence.

People have said Jeremy must be innocent as he has always protested his innocence. However there are lots of reasons why he protests his innocence.

After having the determination to committ the massacre, there was no way Jeremy was going to crack under police pressure. He had told Julie he was 'watertight' & it was an open & shut case. Jeremy was confident any trial would result in him being a free man. He was nearly right.

The police criticism after the trial & the slim chance Sheila was guilty saw Jeremy make a quick, rejected appeal.

After protesting his innocence & appealing, there was no way Jeremy was going to make an embarressing u turn & admit his guilt. This stance became stronger after the 1994 'Life means Life' order. Jeremy knowing a release will only happen by going through the COA.

The internet has given Jeremy some momentum. And he now has a small amount of fiercely loyal supporters who can support his innocence claims. 

Other reasons Jeremy has protested his innocence -

He thought he was clever enough to committ the perfect crime. So is embarressed to admit he was not.

A release could result in huge compensation. Jeremy could also claim back the inheritence he lost. At 25 upon conviction he could have resumed to living the high life as young play boy in the 80's & 90's. Now he would enjoy being a rich media celebrity.

Jeremy had complete contempt for his family. So feels he should not be in prison for his crime . Espescially not for 29 years.

Jeremy really believes he is innocent. A defence psychiatrist said Jeremy showed the perfect signs of a certain kind of psychopath. Able to blank out the crime completely. So 29 years later he really believes in his innocence.

His family said Jeremy protests his innocence because he has nothing better to do. He would not be the first prisoner to be bored.

Jeremy likes the attention. Roger Wilkes book said Jeremy enjoyed the attention at trial. He no doubt enjoys the attention he gets on the internet & in the media.

The final reason is Jeremy may really be innocent. And a very unlucky man.

It's his only way out, admitting guilt and trying to come across as being rehabilitated won't work due to his whole life tariff. His only hope is proving innocence - all he has left. Admitting guilt would favour him in no way.

[lookout]

Why admit guilt at this late stage ? Why admit guilt at all if he didn't do it,,or he'd have tried that stint ( like they ALL do ),from the very beginning,,or certainly not beyond 10 years. 

[maggie]

Could you sit in a police car like Jeremy did for hours,,knowing that you had committed the massacre,while the police were talking to you,,and you answering as though you hadn't known what had gone on inside ?

You'd have to be pretty damn mercenary in order to face police under those circumstances. Even the SAS would struggle to stay as composed.

I agree Lookout, I cannot believe that anyone but a total narcissistic psychopath could have behaved the way Jeremy did that night, if he was guilty of carrying out the killings. We are told he has been tested 27 times plus tests to check he isn't over compensating, all tests were negative showing no signs of psychopathy, personality disorders or mental illness. Neither has he a history of violence with animals, girlfriends, children or people in general. That is what I always come back to, don't see how a rational well balanced young man could be guilty of this crime.

[grahameb]

I agree Lookout, I cannot believe that anyone but a total narcissistic psychopath could have behaved the way Jeremy did that night, if he was guilty of carrying out the killings. We are told he has been tested 27 times plus tests to check he isn't over compensating, all tests were negative showing no signs of psychopathy, personality disorders or mental illness. Neither has he a history of violence with animals, girlfriends, children or people in general. That is what I always come back to, don't see how a rational well balanced young man could be guilty of this crime.

I have never seen a statement by a defence psychiatrist who said that Jeremy was a psychopath?

[Caroline]

If he admits it, he has no chance of getting out now because his denial has gone on for too long and ANY public sympathy he might have had - hell lose most of it. The campaign keeps him busy and there is always a chance he might just find something that will open his cell. He would also lose any rights to any compensation so IF he did manage to make parole - he'd be penniless.

[maggie]

I have never seen a statement by a defence psychiatrist who said that Jeremy was a psychopath?

Hi grahame, think Adam is alluding to a psychiatrist who the defence at Jeremy's trial consulted. This psychiatrist didn't meet or interview Jeremy just surveyed him from afar and stated he believed he was a psychopath who had forgotten he'd committed the crime.   Cannot see how he could diagnose personality disorders etc. without even speaking to him??

[scipio_usmc]

If he admits it, he has no chance of getting out now because his denial has gone on for too long and ANY public sympathy he might have had - hell lose most of it. The campaign keeps him busy and there is always a chance he might just find something that will open his cell. He would also lose any rights to any compensation so IF he did manage to make parole - he'd be penniless.

If he admits it now in order to try to get paroled then what?

He would have to convince a parole board he is truly sorry and regrets his actions, recognizes his actions were wrong and takes responsibility for his actions.

In light of his vehement denials is he likely to be able to convince the of such?  No

Does he have much of a chance of getting out if he keeps up his denails?  Not really but in his mind he sees more hope and chance in this than he does in getting pareoled for admitting the truth.

He likes attention not only in the press but letters and things to keep him busy and cares about his image to the extent that if he admits guilt then he will go down in hisotry as for sure a murderer as opposed to one who maintained innocence and all those writing and giving him attention will stop doing so.

So either way he will not get out but he has more to lose in the form of people who pay attention to him and give him something to do and he likes having the hope he could get out one day.

People like his sometimes confess on their deathbed for the sake of relatives of victims and they no longer have to worry about what supporters think but i don't even see any of that applying here.

I even think he has tried to convince himself he is innocent and didn't do it and tries to block out what really happened.

I see a greater chance of hell freezing over than him ever confessing. 

[Caroline]

If he admits it now in order to try to get paroled then what?

He would have to convince a parole board he is truly sorry and regrets his actions, recognizes his actions were wrong and takes responsibility for his actions.

In light of his vehement denials is he likely to be able to convince the of such?  No

Does he have much of a chance of getting out if he keeps up his denails?  Not really but in his mind he sees more hope and chance in this than he does in getting pareoled for admitting the truth.

He likes attention not only in the press but letters and things to keep him busy and cares about his image to the extent that if he admits guilt then he will go down in hisotry as for sure a murderer as opposed to one who maintained innocence and all those writing and giving him attention will stop doing so.

So either way he will not get out but he has more to lose in the form of people who pay attention to him and give him something to do and he likes having the hope he could get out one day.

People like his sometimes confess on their deathbed for the sake of relatives of victims and they no longer have to worry about what supporters think but i don't even see any of that applying here.

I even think he has tried to convince himself he is innocent and didn't do it and tries to block out what really happened.

I see a greater chance of hell freezing over than him ever confessing.

Did you read my post? I said he is UNLIKELY to admit it now and would almost certainly NOT get parole if he did because his denial has gone on for too long. You have gone on to say the same thing I already did but less succinctly. 

[scipio_usmc]

Did you read my post? I said he is UNLIKELY to admit it now and would almost certainly NOT get parole if he did because his denial has gone on for too long. You have gone on to say the same thing I already did but less succinctly. 

I expounded upon what you wrote.  I weighed the 2 choices to show which offered the greater potential gain.  I think people underestimate how much criminals care about their legacy and enjoy attention from others.  How many marry in prison?  They love receiving mail and visitors.  This is what he has to lose most.

In terms of odds of his freedom he actually has a better chance at parole than his conviction being overturned but that slim chance would make him lose attention he likes. With his celeb status gone if he did get out who would want to help him?  He doesn't want to work as a dishwasher somewhere for peanuts till he dies.   

   

 

[maggie]

People do it all the time. How many people have killed someone and played innocent? Hundreds of cases. Daily occurence.

A massacre of a family of 5 is hardly a daily occurrence.

If Jeremy Bamber carried out such a massacre and was able to coldly dissasociate himself from it so quickly and completely he must have extreme personality disorders which we are told he doesn't present with but rather that he is mentally balanced without any signs of such problems.

People who kill and are able to coldly disassociate DO present personality disorders and psychopathy, it is fact that the majority of prisoners especially those with a record of violence have some kind of PD.

[grahameb]

Hi grahame, think Adam is alluding to a psychiatrist who the defence at Jeremy's trial consulted. This psychiatrist didn't meet or interview Jeremy just surveyed him from afar and stated he believed he was a psychopath who had forgotten he'd committed the crime.   Cannot see how he could diagnose personality disorders etc. without even speaking to him??

I went to a place where a member of my family was being assessed by a psychiatrist. I remember I had to park the car. The member of my family who was being assessed went in before me and I was about 5 minutes late. When I spoke one of the psychiatrists to ask which door he had gone in he looked at me with a strange look on his face and his head cocked to one side. I mmediately though he was a patient because of his strange actions. But he was one of the psychiatrist. I thought to myself, "Heaven help us. Even the psychiatrists were crazy".

[grahameb]

Why does Jeremy protest his innocence. Well without sounding naive I would say because he IS innocent, I have often thought to myself what I would do if locked up for a serious crime that I didn't commit. And quite hinestly if I was innocent I simply could not admit to that crime I did not commit no matter how much it may benefit me. I don't think I would have the strength to confess to such a lie. But then, that's me.

[lookout]

If he admits it, he has no chance of getting out now because his denial has gone on for too long and ANY public sympathy he might have had - hell lose most of it. The campaign keeps him busy and there is always a chance he might just find something that will open his cell. He would also lose any rights to any compensation so IF he did manage to make parole - he'd be penniless.

Caroline,,same goes if he's released on a technicality.It means that he can't recoup any of his money unless he takes the matter to High Court----------------which costs money that he doesn't have.
This is why Jeremy hopes upon hope that it won't be on a technicality,,but rather a quashed verdict where at least he's known to have been telling the truth all along.
Should he refuse to be released on a technicality,,then that also would prove his innocence,,as who would want to remain locked up " unnecessarily ?".