The found hacksaw:

[Jan]

Hi Mr G. He is supposed to have gained access via the bathroom window and left from the tiny kitchen window. This is what the jury was made to believe. I think! 

head first?  looks pretty difficult to me with an uncomfortable landing.

[scipio_usmc]

head first?  looks pretty difficult to me with an uncomfortable landing.

Jeremy admitted he used these windows and he was even stupid enough to allow police to witness him use the bathroom window.

It takes extraordinary bias to try pretending it would not be possible to use windows he admitted he used and was even seen using.

The jury quite clearly wasn't biased like those Jeremy supporters who want to ignore reality and close their eyes to it. 

We are at the appellate stage which means the burden is higher.  At this stage just saying you doubt Jeremy could have gotten in and out is not enough.

You have to demonstrate Jeremy lied about being able to use the windows, that police lied about seeing him use them and prove with storng evidence that it would physically be impossible to use them.  Your skepticism which is driven by bias merely would not even start to approach what would be required to establish Jeremy could not have used these windows and thus that the jury was deceived.

Why would Jeremy lie though about being able to use the windows?  It is a statement against interest.  The defense would have been able to argue at trial he didn't fit in the windows and never used them if they wanted to.  So it would not be new evidence that could not have been argued a trial and thus could not be raised on appeal anyway.

 

[Mr. Gee]

Jeremy admitted he used these windows and he was even stupid enough to allow police to witness him use the bathroom window.

It takes extraordinary bias to try pretending it would not be possible to use windows he admitted he used and was even seen using.

The jury quite clearly wasn't biased like those Jeremy supporters who want to ignore reality and close their eyes to it. 

We are at the appellate stage which means the burden is higher.  At this stage just saying you doubt Jeremy could have gotten in and out is not enough.

You have to demonstrate Jeremy lied about being able to use the windows, that police lied about seeing him use them and prove with storng evidence that it would physically be impossible to use them.  Your skepticism which is driven by bias merely would not even start to approach what would be required to establish Jeremy could not have used these windows and thus that the jury was deceived.

Why would Jeremy lie though about being able to use the windows?  It is a statement against interest.  The defense would have been able to argue at trial he didn't fit in the windows and never used them if they wanted to.  So it would not be new evidence that could not have been argued a trial and thus could not be raised on appeal anyway.

 

Perhaps he was the village idiot?

[Jan]

Jeremy admitted he used these windows and he was even stupid enough to allow police to witness him use the bathroom window.

It takes extraordinary bias to try pretending it would not be possible to use windows he admitted he used and was even seen using.

The jury quite clearly wasn't biased like those Jeremy supporters who want to ignore reality and close their eyes to it. 

We are at the appellate stage which means the burden is higher.  At this stage just saying you doubt Jeremy could have gotten in and out is not enough.

You have to demonstrate Jeremy lied about being able to use the windows, that police lied about seeing him use them and prove with storng evidence that it would physically be impossible to use them.  Your skepticism which is driven by bias merely would not even start to approach what would be required to establish Jeremy could not have used these windows and thus that the jury was deceived.

Why would Jeremy lie though about being able to use the windows?  It is a statement against interest.  The defense would have been able to argue at trial he didn't fit in the windows and never used them if they wanted to.  So it would not be new evidence that could not have been argued a trial and thus could not be raised on appeal anyway.



he never said that he could get in and out of certain windows- what he said was they would not LOCK from the outside . I did not specify which windows.

I would say it was pretty unlikely that the top kitchen widow would have been viable as indicated .


 

[lookout]

Perhaps he was the village idiot?

Because the real one was missing so they chose him,as he looked a bit of a patsy.

[Jan]

yes here you are mr policeman - heres the moderator I used , I will show you how I got in and out and also tell my girlfriend so she can tell you. I will also make up a ridiculous call and then stand next to you at the murder scene - just so you can see how I am pooing myself because I made a mistake on shooting the suicide victim twice . simples

[Alias]

yes here you are mr policeman - heres the moderator I used , I will show you how I got in and out and also tell my girlfriend so she can tell you. I will also make up a ridiculous call and then stand next to you at the murder scene - just so you can see how I am pooing myself because I made a mistake on shooting the suicide victim twice . simples

 

[lookout]

yes here you are mr policeman - heres the moderator I used , I will show you how I got in and out and also tell my girlfriend so she can tell you. I will also make up a ridiculous call and then stand next to you at the murder scene - just so you can see how I am pooing myself because I made a mistake on shooting the suicide victim twice . simples

He may as well have said that for all the bother they took in investigating. He wouldn't have been any worse treated.

[Mr. Gee]

You know what I find amazing. The family complained that the cops made a shamble of the investigation and many have said they didn't treat the scene as a crime scene. But the way some people speak of them and the smart way in which they caught Bamber and the fast way in which they sent the silencer off to the lab and the accuracy with which they meticulously counted the bullets and their cases, you'd think they were the best cops in the world. But lets be honest they behaved like chimps at a tea party.

[scipio_usmc]

Perhaps he was the village idiot?

Or perhaps someone so busy plotting he outsmarted himself in the process.

He did that with his phonecall afterall.  The call was meant to place himself at home and ended up proving he had knowledge he coudl have otherwise denied having when the lab figured out Sheila had been shot with the moderator attached.

The defense argued the damage was done to the window and hacksaw blade used after he murders.  They used his entry through the window after the murders as evidence. So it is possible he did it on purpose to create the excuse that such could have been after the murders.  It could be another of his ideas that backfired.

But it is always possible he was not thinking about the ramifications when he admitted it and thus just being an idiot
   

[Reader]

Head first?  Looks pretty difficult to me with an uncomfortable landing.

It's theoretically possible to exit via the kitchen window. It's also possible to cause the latch to drop into place from outside. Exiting could be head first or feet first. Jeremy was thin enough to do either, but both methods are quite awkward. Feet first is safer when exiting, so as to avoid falling head first to the ground. I would think that nobody has ever demonstrated such an exit unaided.

[lookout]

 I'm sure Jeremy would have leapt through the window after killing all his family. He was brimming over with energy.

Apologies for being facetious but I can't accept some of these theories.

[Mr. Gee]

I'm sure Jeremy would have leapt through the window after killing all his family. He was brimming over with energy.

Apologies for being facetious but I can't accept some of these theories.

Well basically lookout when you have a blank canvas such as this one you can make up as many theories as you can and still make Bamber look guilty. Because you can take any piece of insignificant action or material and morph it into vital evidence to make him appear as guilty as hell, when in actual fact it is just a rusty old hacksaw blade that was left lying around. Have seen the state of the place in the yard around that window? It's a wonder that didn't find a whole woodworking tool kit in that load of junk let alone a rusty old hacksaw blade that Jeremy "OBVIOUSLY" used to break into the house. I find all these theories rather funny actually.

[lookout]

Well basically lookout when you have a blank canvas such as this one you can make up as many theories as you can and still make Bamber look guilty. Because you can take any piece of insignificant action or material and morph it into vital evidence to make him appear as guilty as hell, when in actual fact it is just a rusty old hacksaw blade that was left lying around. Have seen the state of the place in the yard around that window? It's a wonder that didn't find a whole woodworking tool kit in that load of junk let alone a rusty old hacksaw blade that Jeremy "OBVIOUSLY" used to break into the house. I find all these theories rather funny actually.

Yes,I did notice the mess by the window. It looks as though if you'd risked standing on that old wood,you'd have ended up in the cellar.  Even inside,the cellar entrance was a bit dodgy.Didn't one of the cops nearly vanish by stepping on the wooden stair ?
Those areas hadn't been touched for ages. You wouldn't dare take any chances where wood's rotten like that. Wet rot,dry rot and woodworm-------recipe for disaster.
Jeremy wouldn't have risked poking around there.

[Mr. Gee]

Yes,I did notice the mess by the window. It looks as though if you'd risked standing on that old wood,you'd have ended up in the cellar.  Even inside,the cellar entrance was a bit dodgy.Didn't one of the cops nearly vanish by stepping on the wooden stair ?
Those areas hadn't been touched for ages. You wouldn't dare take any chances where wood's rotten like that. Wet rot,dry rot and woodworm-------recipe for disaster.
Jeremy wouldn't have risked poking around there.

Just remember the dog outside. He wouldn't know who it was breaking in. Do people really think that Jeremy could break into that house without 2 dogs, one inside the house and one outside would remain silent? Of course not. To suggest such a thing is rediculous.