Jeremy Bambers Injuries

[lookout]

 Believe me,,there are many women who have the urge to kill during the onset of menstruation alone.PMT ! Read about it.

[lookout]

Poor Sheila had all the hormone-related problems for years. In the end,,she flipped.

[scipio_usmc]

Time you started to think sideways old boy. Don't just tow the party line. Come at this thing from all sides.
ps: Absolutely no proof whatsoever that Jeremy did the murders and to me it is a cop out to introduce gloves just so that it fits in with your own scenario. Most of what you have is just guesswork. Why do I say that? Oh because you just don't have enough evidence to place Bamber at the scene you have to "invent" certain things in order to make your sceario work, such as gloves. Take out all your guesswork and you have nothing. As I said learn to think sideways, then perhaps there's hope that one day you might, just might be a fairly good investigator. But you cannot do that if you keep on inventing pieces of the jigsaw in order to complete the whole picture. You must work with just the available pieces and they are few.

I already came at it from all sides.

If Sheila did it then there would be physicla evidence indicating she did it.

Worse there are 3 different pieces of evidence that prove she can't have killed herself.

On the flip side is evidence that Jeremy lied to frame Sheila including his fairytale about leaving the gun out and Nevill removing the scope when clearly the only reaosn to remove the scope was to murder the family.  A tale which featured staged bullets as well which dismantled his claims further.

The call form Nevill makes no sense from any perspective and his reactions to the call even less sense.

You claim there is no evidence against Jeremy is a joke which amounts to you simply refusing to accept the evidence.  That doesn't make the evidence go away it just makes you look foolish by living in denial.

[grahameb]

I already came at it from all sides.

If Sheila did it then there would be physicla evidence indicating she did it.

Worse there are 3 different pieces of evidence that prove she can't have killed herself.

On the flip side is evidence that Jeremy lied to frame Sheila including his fairytale about leaving the gun out and Nevill removing the scope when clearly the only reaosn to remove the scope was to murder the family.  A tale which featured staged bullets as well which dismantled his claims further.

The call form Nevill makes no sense from any perspective and his reactions to the call even less sense.

You claim there is no evidence against Jeremy is a joke which amounts to you simply refusing to accept the evidence.  That doesn't make the evidence go away it just makes you look foolish by living in denial.

In actual fact he was asked by Ann Eaton (I believe it was her?) whether he had shewn her how to load the gun and instead of using that as an opportunity to bolster the fact that she could load the gun he instead said, that he didn't shew her.
And no I don't continue to live in de Nile, cos there are crocodiles in there.

[Jan]

I already came at it from all sides.

If Sheila did it then there would be physicla evidence indicating she did it.

Worse there are 3 different pieces of evidence that prove she can't have killed herself.

On the flip side is evidence that Jeremy lied to frame Sheila including his fairytale about leaving the gun out and Nevill removing the scope when clearly the only reaosn to remove the scope was to murder the family.  A tale which featured staged bullets as well which dismantled his claims further.

The call form Nevill makes no sense from any perspective and his reactions to the call even less sense.

You claim there is no evidence against Jeremy is a joke which amounts to you simply refusing to accept the evidence.  That doesn't make the evidence go away it just makes you look foolish by living in denial.

personally I think you look  foolish not Grahame  If I left this forum it would not be because you have changed my mind. Far from it . Your posts are so convoluted that they send me to sleep.

You are as bad as Adam about why the phone call would not have happened . you were not there on the night , you don't know the exact order of what happened so you are making an educated guess. At least the rest of us admit that.

[grahameb]

personally I think you look more foolish than Grahame  If I left this forum it would not be because you have changed my mind. Far from it . Your posts are so convoluted that they send me to sleep.

You are as bad as Adam about why the phone call would not have happened . you were not there on the night , you don't know the exact order of what happened so you are making an educated guess. At least the rest of us admit that.

Hey! waddaya mean I'm foolish?

[scipio_usmc]

In actual fact he was asked by Ann Eaton (I believe it was her?) whether he had shewn her how to load the gun and instead of using that as an opportunity to bolster the fact that she could load the gun he instead said, that he didn't shew her.
And no I don't continue to live in de Nile, cos there are crocodiles in there.

His claims changed depending upon who he was speaking to and what day it was. He had already abandoned the claim she fired guns by the time of his written statement because the family denied she had any interest in guns and he didn't want police to see him as a liar. 

He instead claimed she had walked aorund so could have seen how a gun operates by walking along when Nevill or himself used it.  He also claimed she was able to see him load the magazine in the kitchen during his fairytale account of loading it to shoot rabbits.

He didn't have his lies thought out well and memorized and wound up telling police there was no argument about the part time foster care and that she was quiet and had little reaction.  WHen he spoke to Colin he wanted Colin to believe she did it so told him that she had been arguing with them and that the argument was ongoing while he left.   Jeremy did this constantly he would tell different people different things.

He told Boutflour that he removed the scope himself from the rifle.  But in September he told police Nevill did it.  When he did so he contradicted other previous testimony to police as well.  He previously stated he had not touched the murder weapon the week prior to the murders.  The first time in a while he touched it was the night of the murders when he got it out to shoot the rabbits supposedly. 

But the last known user of the rifle told police it had been put away with the moderator and scope attached.  Police told him about the account and thus said Jeremy should have found it with these items attached so what did he have to say about it.  Jeremy drastically changed his atory.  he went from neve rusing it that weak to claiming he used it constantly that week and that so did Nevill.  He said sometimes when he got the gun from the closet it had the moderator and scope attached but other times it didn't.  He said Nevill was repeatedly taking the moderator and scope on and off during that week sometimes using it with and sometimes without.

These claims were not credible at all Nevill would have no reaosn to use the gun without the scope and moderator and no reason to remove them, and he clearly changed his story purely to deal with the fact there was evidence that he would have found the gun with the scope and moderator attached if he got the gun as claimed.

He never was able to think up a lie to account for the fact there were 30 bullets left and should have been only 25 at most left if his claims were true.

If one carfully scrutinizes Jeremy's claims they will find he told different people different things, changed his claims to people when convenient, that many of his claims make no sense and that many are contradicted by others.

Those who consider Jeremy credible are living in a fantasy world.     

[Jan]

Hey! waddaya mean I'm foolish?

 


   that did not come out quite right      but I am sure you know what I meant.

[scipio_usmc]

personally I think you look more foolish than Grahame  If I left this forum it would not be because you have changed my mind. Far from it . Your posts are so convoluted that they send me to sleep.

You are as bad as Adam about why the phone call would not have happened . you were not there on the night , you don't know the exact order of what happened so you are making an educated guess. At least the rest of us admit that.

Jeremy supporters admit they are making guesses when they insist it is fact that evidence was planted and all the wild claims I see on here?  Not hardly.

I admit the limits of what the evidence can't reveal and discuss what it can.  I present evidence to estbalish the order of events and describe the limits not not knowing for sure whether the twins dies last of Sheila.  The gun had 10 shots and ten were fired into the twins and Sheila.  DId Jeremy shoot her then go shoot them with the remaining 8 rounds or shoot them with 8 and leave 2 for her?  We have no way to know.

Other things are easier to tell like only the initial action would feature the gun loaded with 11 rounds and based on the casings and more we can tell all 11 were fired in the master bedroom and then the gun was empty when the action continued in the kitchen. Evidence and logic combines.  Why would a killer beat Nevill with the gun if the gun had bullets in it?  When could the killer have reloaded anyway before the struggle?  Had there been more than 1 magazine things would have been different the killer would not have need to beat Nevill and coudl have rapidly inserted another magazine and continued the shooting.   

These considerations are all things Jeremy supporters do not want to look at and never mention at all.  I'm the first perosn on this site to discuss them.  So much for Jeremy supporters being interested in the truth and facts when they never honestly look at the facts and evidence from any standpoint other than how to try to twist such to support Jeremy.

The evidence I presented with all the problems with the phonecall have not been rebutted.  You say who cares you find it boring.  All that means is my points are unrebutted.  When you don't rebut evidence and instead ignore it all that does is make one a denialist.  That fails to estbalish Jeremy is innocent it merely establisheds you don't want to face it.

Peopel have not rebutted my posts about all the problems with the phone call because they can't.  A few people tried a little with relidulous faiytales about Sheila hiding in the bathroom which only made the supposed call look even more ridiculous.

Jackie shot any chance of credibility in this thread asserting that Jeremy would have to have been injured if he was the killer but smaller, lighter, weaker Sheila would not have to be injured.  My last post discredited her claims further.  She failed to post a rebuttal and instead just repeated the same exact mantra I just discredited.

That is the reality of how the debates go here. 

After Jeremy supporters are discredited and they are unable to rebut the posts that discredit their claims they just repated the same discredited mantra saying they refuse to acknowledge the post that deiscreted their claims.

That's as effective as the defense doing nothing in court to challenge the moderator and simply saying in closing arguments we dismiss their claims as not valid don't pay attention to it. 

   

[grahameb]

His claims changed depending upon who he was speaking to and what day it was. He had already abandoned the claim she fired guns by the time of his written statement because the family denied she had any interest in guns and he didn't want police to see him as a liar. 

He instead claimed she had walked aorund so could have seen how a gun operates by walking along when Nevill or himself used it.  He also claimed she was able to see him load the magazine in the kitchen during his fairytale account of loading it to shoot rabbits.

He didn't have his lies thought out well and memorized and wound up telling police there was no argument about the part time foster care and that she was quiet and had little reaction.  WHen he spoke to Colin he wanted Colin to believe she did it so told him that she had been arguing with them and that the argument was ongoing while he left.   Jeremy did this constantly he would tell different people different things.

He told Boutflour that he removed the scope himself from the rifle.  But in September he told police Nevill did it.  When he did so he contradicted other previous testimony to police as well.  He previously stated he had not touched the murder weapon the week prior to the murders.  The first time in a while he touched it was the night of the murders when he got it out to shoot the rabbits supposedly. 

But the last known user of the rifle told police it had been put away with the moderator and scope attached.  Police told him about the account and thus said Jeremy should have found it with these items attached so what did he have to say about it.  Jeremy drastically changed his atory.  he went from neve rusing it that weak to claiming he used it constantly that week and that so did Nevill.  He said sometimes when he got the gun from the closet it had the moderator and scope attached but other times it didn't.  He said Nevill was repeatedly taking the moderator and scope on and off during that week sometimes using it with and sometimes without.

These claims were not credible at all Nevill would have no reaosn to use the gun without the scope and moderator and no reason to remove them, and he clearly changed his story purely to deal with the fact there was evidence that he would have found the gun with the scope and moderator attached if he got the gun as claimed.

He never was able to think up a lie to account for the fact there were 30 bullets left and should have been only 25 at most left if his claims were true.

If one carfully scrutinizes Jeremy's claims they will find he told different people different things, changed his claims to people when convenient, that many of his claims make no sense and that many are contradicted by others.

Those who consider Jeremy credible are living in a fantasy world.   

Well it is strange that the relatives said he expressed no interest in guns, because Pargeter said he's been out with him shooting and that Bamber claimed to be a good shot. So there you have different people contradicting themselves. I am ready to bet that if we searched the family photo album we would find a few photos with her holding guns, (we may even find her at the Scotland shoot as told by DB?) possibly a shotgun, because Ann Eaton when she heard of the shooting at first believed it was so because she thought it was a shotgun that Sheila used. So why she should find it more believable to her to have used a shotgun as opposed to a small calibre rifle I don't know?

[scipio_usmc]

Well it is strange that the relatives said he expressed no interest in guns, because Pargeter said he's been out with him shooting and that Bamber claimed to be a good shot. So there you have different people contradicting themselves. I am ready to bet that if we searched the family photo album we would find a few photos with her holding guns, (we may even find her at the Scotland shoot as told by DB?) possibly a shotgun, because Ann Eaton when she heard of the shooting at first believed it was so because she thought it was a shotgun that Sheila used. So why she should find it more believable to her to have used a shotgun as opposed to a small calibre rifle I don't know?

The family, farm workers and even Julie said that he didn't like the idea of shooting rabbits and thus the suggestion he took the gun out to do so was odd.

Pargeter did not contradict this at all, Pargeter said that Jeremy had no interest in guns in the past but recently had taken an interest in his gun and had shot targets with Pargeter.  They shared Pargeter's gun while shooting targets. 

Showing an interest in target shooting with Pargeter doesn't help support his tale that he got the gun out to shoot rabbits.  It also tends to suggest that his motive for getting Nevill to buy the gun was so he could use it to murder the family with it.

He was using Pargeter's gun for target shooting with him, they would share it.  He claimed he was going to get his own gun.  What gun did he want?  A 12 gauge semi-automatic shotgun with a 5 round magazine.  Is that suitable for target shooting?  No it would be for game but he didn't shoot game when he was with Anthony or anyone else and Nevill already had a 12 gauge shotgun but it only held 2 rounds.  Why did he want a semi-auto and one that held 5 rounds?  Because 5 rounds available is much better for murdering because what if after 2 rounds they are not dead and attack him?   

The only semi-auto he could talk Nevill into was a .22 (purchased Nov 30, 1984). If he wanted a gun for target shooting a 22 should have been his first choice not the shotgun.   It was 8 months old when Anthony found and used the murder weapon and it looked like it was brand new.  Suggestions by Jeremy that it was used daily to shoot rabbits clearly was BS, if Nevill did use it to shoot rabbits then it was sparingly. He probably still preferred his 410s for such.   

Jeremy had his father buy the weapon so he could kill the family with it, he would not even pay for the murder weapon himself.   

Sheila was at WHF various times after the gun was purchased but the first time the boys stayed over after its purchase was in August 1985. So it was his first chance to kill the entire lot of them together.   

[tyler]

Jeremy didn't 'share' AP's rifle with him at all! The weekend before the murders AP fitted new sights to his rifle and was zeroing them in,or whatever its called. He asked Jeremy to try out his rifle to see if he thought it was shooting straight. AP also handled the anschutz and yet his fingerprints don't appear to have been found on it. AP hadn't visited the farm for a long long time prior to that weekend as he and Nevill had had some kind of big falling out. Then of course there was the changing of his statements. His rifle was at whf at the time of the murders,at it always was,but by the time he had made his next statement he had changed his mind and stated that he had taken it home. I am convinced the murders were a two gun crime. Why would EP want to cover that up?

[Jane]

Just a thought, but does anyone else find it odd that a person who is said, by Julie, amongst others, to dislike the thought of shooting rabbits, is said to have told Julie that he strangled rats with his bare hands.

[grahameb]

Jeremy supporters admit they are making guesses when they insist it is fact that evidence was planted and all the wild claims I see on here?  Not hardly.

I admit the limits of what the evidence can't reveal and discuss what it can.  I present evidence to estbalish the order of events and describe the limits not not knowing for sure whether the twins dies last of Sheila.  The gun had 10 shots and ten were fired into the twins and Sheila.  DId Jeremy shoot her then go shoot them with the remaining 8 rounds or shoot them with 8 and leave 2 for her?  We have no way to know.

Other things are easier to tell like only the initial action would feature the gun loaded with 11 rounds and based on the casings and more we can tell all 11 were fired in the master bedroom and then the gun was empty when the action continued in the kitchen. Evidence and logic combines.  Why would a killer beat Nevill with the gun if the gun had bullets in it?  When could the killer have reloaded anyway before the struggle?  Had there been more than 1 magazine things would have been different the killer would not have need to beat Nevill and coudl have rapidly inserted another magazine and continued the shooting.   

These considerations are all things Jeremy supporters do not want to look at and never mention at all.  I'm the first perosn on this site to discuss them.  So much for Jeremy supporters being interested in the truth and facts when they never honestly look at the facts and evidence from any standpoint other than how to try to twist such to support Jeremy.

The evidence I presented with all the problems with the phonecall have not been rebutted.  You say who cares you find it boring.  All that means is my points are unrebutted.  When you don't rebut evidence and instead ignore it all that does is make one a denialist.  That fails to estbalish Jeremy is innocent it merely establisheds you don't want to face it.

Peopel have not rebutted my posts about all the problems with the phone call because they can't.  A few people tried a little with relidulous faiytales about Sheila hiding in the bathroom which only made the supposed call look even more ridiculous.

Jackie shot any chance of credibility in this thread asserting that Jeremy would have to have been injured if he was the killer but smaller, lighter, weaker Sheila would not have to be injured.  My last post discredited her claims further.  She failed to post a rebuttal and instead just repeated the same exact mantra I just discredited.

That is the reality of how the debates go here. 

After Jeremy supporters are discredited and they are unable to rebut the posts that discredit their claims they just repated the same discredited mantra saying they refuse to acknowledge the post that deiscreted their claims.

That's as effective as the defense doing nothing in court to challenge the moderator and simply saying in closing arguments we dismiss their claims as not valid don't pay attention to it. 

   

You too make guesses. In fact you make up stuff so to make it fit into your scenarios. Remember the "driving at 5mph" (hoping people would skip over it but didn't you called it "a figure of speach". A bit like the president saying after a nuclear war, "Oh I didn't really mean Press the red button. It was only a figure of speech".

[maggie]

Just a thought, but does anyone else find it odd that a person who is said, by Julie, amongst others, to dislike the thought of shooting rabbits, is said to have told Julie that he strangled rats with his bare hands.

It is a good thought imo April.The two statements just do not make sense. Neither does the oft stated fact by RWB, I believe, that Jeremy was a 'pansy', or something similarly offensive because he hated killing any animal but was apparently capable of killing his whole family in an orgy of bloody carnage. How DOES such a person carry out such a crime without the slightest sign of trauma?