Author Topic: No Motive  (Read 10072 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tyler

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2395
Re: No Motive
« Reply #90 on: October 01, 2014, 06:43:PM »
For Adam (source was requested previously) Sheila had been married,but was recently divorced and her parents were very worried about her sons,Nicholas and Daniel. They felt Sheila could not look after them properly and suspected that she harmed the children. (Claire Powell,Murder at White House Farm,Page 11)

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: No Motive
« Reply #91 on: October 01, 2014, 06:45:PM »
Well if he used an unwitnessed telephone call as his alibi he couldn't have been that bright. ;D

because he thought ringing Julie and leaving the phone off the hook would fool people and it has fooled some, myself included - for a short while;)
Few people have the imagination for reality

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: No Motive
« Reply #92 on: October 01, 2014, 06:51:PM »
because he thought ringing Julie and leaving the phone off the hook would fool people and it has fooled some, myself included - for a short while;)
After one year planning the murders, do you seriously think that that was all he could come up with? It is very weal Caroline and quite frankly his call to Julie to tell her that all was going well and tonight's the night isn't much of an alibi is it? It's more like a confession.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: No Motive
« Reply #93 on: October 01, 2014, 06:53:PM »
For Adam (source was requested previously) Sheila had been married,but was recently divorced and her parents were very worried about her sons,Nicholas and Daniel. They felt Sheila could not look after them properly and suspected that she harmed the children. (Claire Powell,Murder at White House Farm,Page 11)




Apparently,part of the conversation at supper was June telling Sheila that " she was an unfit mother and should consider fostering ". I can't imagine that went down very well as conversations go at the dinner table.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: No Motive
« Reply #94 on: October 01, 2014, 06:56:PM »
After one year planning the murders, do you seriously think that that was all he could come up with? It is very weal Caroline and quite frankly his call to Julie to tell her that all was going well and tonight's the night isn't much of an alibi is it? It's more like a confession.

I don't think he did plan it for a year. Julie didn't say he's planned it for a year either, she said he talked about it for a year. I think when it happened it was on the spur of the moment. The phone call to Julie wasn't just for Julie's sake, it was so the other house mates would also be aware that something was up. I'm sure all Julie told them was 'somethings wrong at the farm' and if Jeremy said his call from Neville was at around 03:10, they could verify that he called around a similar time and if he was calling the flat, he couldn't have been at WHF killing the family.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: No Motive
« Reply #95 on: October 01, 2014, 07:01:PM »



Apparently,part of the conversation at supper was June telling Sheila that " she was an unfit mother and should consider fostering ". I can't imagine that went down very well as conversations go at the dinner table.






In actual fact Dr Ferguson contradicted himself by saying that Sheila wasn't violent,then when told of the conversation over supper,said it would have tipped her over the edge ?

Mr. Gee

  • Guest
Re: No Motive
« Reply #96 on: October 01, 2014, 07:05:PM »
I don't think he did plan it for a year. Julie didn't say he's planned it for a year either, she said he talked about it for a year. I think when it happened it was on the spur of the moment. The phone call to Julie wasn't just for Julie's sake, it was so the other house mates would also be aware that something was up. I'm sure all Julie told them was 'somethings wrong at the farm' and if Jeremy said his call from Neville was at around 03:10, they could verify that he called around a similar time and if he was calling the flat, he couldn't have been at WHF killing the family.
Yes I suppose that could work?

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: No Motive
« Reply #97 on: October 01, 2014, 07:34:PM »
I am impressed with you're fire fighting Jansus. But you are flogging a dead horse. As you probably already secretly know. Even Caroline, April and Susan have turned, after years of being a supporter.

You're red answers are all weak. All my points are facts. All you can do is make lots of excuses for Jeremy.

Stop the self denial and come and join me.

Adam I have yet to see hardly any of your points that are FACT - they are assumptions by you which is different and I will make up my own mind - I am not influenced by you  or others whatsoever.

Afford me the respect of having my own opinions  because not once ever have I asked you to change your mind.

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: No Motive
« Reply #98 on: October 02, 2014, 05:06:AM »
Show me documentary evidence that he was not a 20% share holder in the families limited business worth about £72000 at the time of the murders.

Show me evidence in writing that he would not inherit unless he carried on with farming .

Show me that basil cock who dealt with all the family affairs knew that the twins were going to be written into the wills and therefore reduce his share.

1) Jeremy told people including the farm workers he woudl not share the estate with his sister and nephews.  He told Julie that he needed to kill them all so he coudl inherit everything.

2) Nevill's will specified that if he continued farming the business would go to Jeremy and Sheila only get 10,000 pounds but if he quit farming and it were liquidated then they each get half.

3) June's will divided things between them equally.

That means June's 1% interest would have been given half to Sheila and half to Jeremy.  Nevill's 79% interest would have been divided half and half unless he continued farming in which case the 79% woudl go to Jeremy so Sheila would only own 1/2 a percent and 10,000 pounds plus half of property owned by June.  Land owned by Nevill would have to be continued to be used for faring or likewise would be equally divided.

You are basically saying he would have been content dividing things as follows:

1) selling the business and getting his 20% share plus 40% so 60% of the prifts form the sale and Sheila's side getting 20%.

2) dividing the proceeds from all land sales 50/50

He killed her and the boys to get the other 20% of the business and the other 50% of the land value.

In the meantime he thought they owed all the land he didn't know most of it was leased. 

You failed to dent the mostive set forth by the prosecution of him doing it to get eveyrhting instead of sharing.
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9502
Re: No Motive
« Reply #99 on: October 02, 2014, 05:17:AM »
The inheritance being his motive was assumed I'm afraid. They had to think up something and just presumed it was the inheritance. Possibly because he asked a policeman in what order did they die?

Mind you if you think about it if the inheritance was the motive and he had to ask that question, then you would think that if he arranged the whole scene of murder you'd think he would so arrange things so that the order of deaths would be apparent?

1) Motive doesn't need to be proven it is not an essential element of the legal elements of the crime.  All that the prosecution needs to do is put forth a plausible motive because peopel do not do things for no reason at all they do it for a reason even if a bad one such as killing someone for fun to see what it is like.

2) They provided testimony from witnesses including Julie and farm workers who said he told them he would not share the inheritance with his nephews or Sheila.  Julie's testimony was more explansive abount how he said he need to kill them all so he could get everything.  He didn't come out and tell Ann Eaton or the farm workers he was going to get everything through murder. That testimony was more than sufficient to establish a motive.

Jeremy supporters are stuck saying they think he would have been content sharing it but that doesn't refute the motive.

A motive is refuted when the motive is impossible such as Jeremy would have gotten everything in the wills if just his parents died but that is not the case at all.

Then there are motives that are ludicrous.  Killing to get a full inheritance is not ludicrous it happens frequently.

An example of ludicrous is the claim that Amanda Knox was mad at her roomate because she said Knox was dirty so she decided to invite a guy she met once through friends to come rape and kill her and let him in then held her down so he could rape and kill her and she joined in also stabbing her but managed to clean up all her DNA so only his DNA was left there.

That is an assinine motive that defies crediblity.
 
Politeness is organized indifference- Paul Valéry

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: No Motive
« Reply #100 on: October 02, 2014, 10:03:AM »
It takes an extremely CLEVER person to murder someone for their inheritance,and it's NOT by shooting !

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: No Motive
« Reply #101 on: October 02, 2014, 11:18:AM »
It takes an extremely CLEVER person to murder someone for their inheritance,and it's NOT by shooting !

It only takes a CLEVER person to get away with it - you don't have to be clever to chance your luck. Jeremy did and it ran out!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48670
Re: No Motive
« Reply #102 on: October 02, 2014, 11:39:AM »
It only takes a CLEVER person to get away with it - you don't have to be clever to chance your luck. Jeremy did and it ran out!






Jeremy would have chosen another method.Shooting would have been far too messy for him,and also too obvious seeing that weapons were to hand.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076
Re: No Motive
« Reply #103 on: October 02, 2014, 11:43:AM »





Jeremy would have chosen another method.Shooting would have been far too messy for him,and also too obvious seeing that weapons were to hand.

Like drugging the family and setting the place on fire? However, in the end, he did choose to shoot them and it was obvious, which is why he was caught.
Few people have the imagination for reality

guest154

  • Guest
Re: No Motive
« Reply #104 on: October 02, 2014, 11:43:AM »





Jeremy would have chosen another method.

What a strange statement.  :-\






Shooting would have been far too messy for him,and also too obvious seeing that weapons were to hand.

He used the weapons that were "to hand" to present the case Sheila had gone crazy with a gun he'd left out.