Innocent or Guilty?

[Patti]

The information provided by Jeremy is extremely relevant, in fact it is the most relevant part of this entire case.

The procedures that existed in that era were largely followed. The pathologist wrote a report giving advice to a future pathologist that they should attend the scene, clearly it was not something which was always done.

Rather than trying to lead people down an alley by asking them to answer seemingly innocuous questions, why not not just be upfront from the onset, just say what you are trying to say.

I can sort of meet you half way on that, I guess.

But my argument is, was it relevant at 7:30am that morning? One can look back in hindsight Hartley after reading all the facts and think exactly what you are saying, but was that the case at the time? All based on what Bamber had said. Was that evidenced drafted up? Did anyone say that they did not call the pathologist because of what Bamber had said? Did anyone say that there was no need for a full forensic examination because of what Bamber had said?:

But, at the time it was the police that assessed the situation inside of the farm house not Jeremy Bamber.  The police witnessed what was inside and made the assumption not to cordon off the crime scene, not to call the pathologist and not request a full forensic examination of the crime scene.  Bamber alone was not in charge of that was he. 

[No-Bits]

I can sort of meet you half way on that, I guess.

But my argument is, was it relevant at 7:30am that morning? One can look back in hindsight Hartley after reading all the facts and think exactly what you are saying, but was that the case at the time? All based on what Bamber had said. Was that evidenced drafted up? Did anyone say that they did not call the pathologist because of what Bamber had said? Did anyone say that there was no need for a full forensic examination because of what Bamber had said?:

But, at the time it was the police that assessed the situation inside of the farm house not Jeremy Bamber.  The police witnessed what was inside and made the assumption not to cordon off the crime scene, not to call the pathologist and not request a full forensic examination of the crime scene.  Bamber alone was not in charge of that was he. 

I thought you were going to bed.

Read my previous couple of posts, they are the same answers to the same questions.

[guest7363]

Obviously there are a lot of people who think Jeremy Bamber is guilty, but equally there are people who think he is innocent. Why is this?

In my opinion its not a case as to whether Jeremy Bamber is guilty or not its a case of whether or not the case was handled correctly from the onset or was it that gross misconduct was/is a key factor in securing Jeremy Bamber's fate.

I would like for everyone to answer my following questions with a yes or no please.

1. The crime scene was made secure. True or false?

2. A full forensic examination was done. True or false?

3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths?

4. Exhibit labels were they changed?

Thank you.

Hi Patti good question, sorry not going to answer it the way you asked for?  I think everyone knows it was a poor investigation and the reasons why? The thing that always sticks out to me, the man leading the investigation thought Jeremy innocent and all Jeremy's supporters praise him with quotes good old fashioned copper, Taff knew Jeremy was innocent ect. So all these questions you have asked are at a time when Jeremy was thought innocent if that makes sense?

[susan]

Hello Justice

good post my sentiments exactly Taff Jones thought Jeremy was innocent so the crime scene was not preserved then Stan Jones had different ideas and knew him to be guilty and we know the rest.

[Reader]

Bare with me. 

I hope not. Perhaps you meant "Bear with me."

[No-Bits]

I hope not. Perhaps you meant "Bear with me."

I really don't think it's necessary to continually correct people's spelling and grammar.

[Jan]

I find it quite incredible that because Jeremy told them his sister suffered from a mental illness (true)

had suicidal thoughts ( true)

there were guns in the house not locked away ( true)

She possibly knew how to uses a gun ( true , if you read the Dickinson report it says one of the witnesses admitted this)
that this is the reason the police did not carry out a proper investigation. So Jeremy even gets the blame for that?

I can not believe that you are saying that the police in general believe everything that every tom,dick,or harry tell them about ANY crime. Surely they have to use their years of experience and judgement.

If Jeremy is innocent then this was still Murder ( initially although obviously her illness would have been taken into account)  so there still should have been a proper investigation.

Plus until they checked all exits from the house even Jeremy ( at the time they arrived) did not know that someone could have had a gun to Nevilles head making him phone Jeremy and therefore there could have been someone else in the house .

[maggie]

Excellent post jansus.

[lookout]

I'm beginning to think that if there had been an intruder and Sheila had charge of a gun,that the intruder would too have been shot/injured, as she would have been intent on protecting the children if nobody else.
The blood on the sill, prints of an unknown male on the rifle butt,a figure seen walking away from the farmhouse.These things were logged but never followed up.
I don't suppose local hospitals had been checked for anyone having received any type of injury.

Anyway,I'll get back to Pattis' questions.

[Jan]

to make it clear I do not think that there was another person involved .

However I do think that to blame Jeremy for how the police treated what was in any circumstance was a crime scene is pretty ridiculous. It makes them sound like right numpties.

Also as Adam is so often pointing out they were only country police force and in his words not used to family massacres- so in those circumstances you think they would step back , take stock , check with the highest people possible and be even more careful about how they proceeded.

So why did they not do that?

[JackiePreece]

I agree excellent Jansus

We have still seen NOTHING in Jeremy's behaviour that should make Miss Marple Anne Eaton suspicious that the suicide was in fact Murder

When Jeremy told Anne Eaton all his family were gone (dead ). She told him he still had her family

Overnight when Miss Marple realised the financial implications she set about looking for something to make Jeremy look like he was responsible for the murders

As for miss Marple and the silencer she suffers a memory block on the details around the discovery and handling

As we have established on this forum from independent witnesses

Jeremy did not Hate farming
He did not hate his family
He did not hate Sheila

As for the stupid comments on this forum about Jeremy could have been taken out of the will
There is NO evidence of this

June could not have children I should think June probably adored this handsome charming son she had raised

I would think he could have asked June for anything and got if
I bet he had her wrapped around his little finger

The main two photos show June with her arms around Sheila and Jeremy looking so proud
And the other great family photo looking like any other family on a special day

Greed and Money the root of a evil

[lookout]

Obviously there are a lot of people who think Jeremy Bamber is guilty, but equally there are people who think he is innocent. Why is this?

In my opinion its not a case as to whether Jeremy Bamber is guilty or not its a case of whether or not the case was handled correctly from the onset or was it that gross misconduct was/is a key factor in securing Jeremy Bamber's fate.

I would like for everyone to answer my following questions with a yes or no please.

1. The crime scene was made secure. True or false?

2. A full forensic examination was done. True or false?

3. The pathologist was called on site to determine the time of deaths?

4. Exhibit labels were they changed?

Thank you.  

1) The crime scene WASN'T secure,not cordoned off to stop other than professionals to enter.

2 )Areas of investigation,forensic or otherwise were NOT done.

3) NO times of death were ever recorded.A vital examination in any death/murder investigation.-

4) Exhibit labels were ALTERED.Different ones being shown at the trial.

[JackiePreece]

Happy

[JackiePreece]

Happy and I am sure there was a lot of love in that house whatever people say to the contrary

[lookout]

Good posts Jackie and Jansus. Very much appreciated.