Was Sheila Caffell set up by her brother Jeremy Bamber?

[Kaldin]

There was loads of forensive evidence. There was the blood in the silencer for a start.

Mind you, if it hadn't been for the alleged phone call to Jeremy from Nevill, that forensic evidence could have applied to anyone else except Sheila, and not necessarily just to Jeremy.

I don't believe there is any forensic evidence which puts Jeremy at the scene but maybe you can prove me wrong.

The blood on the silencer does not relate to Jeremy as far as I understand Kaldin.

Let me explain. None of the forensic evidence puts Jeremy specifically at the scene, but it does eliminate Sheila as the murderer - that's what the jury decided anyway.

It was Jeremy who said that his father had rung him and said Sheila had a gun. Therefore, if Sheila did not do it, that call didn't happen, and Jeremy must have done the murders.

Had it not been for that claim that Nevill phoned Jeremy, there may have been other suspects.

[Alias]

Kaldin:

"Let me explain. None of the forensic evidence puts Jeremy specifically at the scene, but it does eliminate Sheila as the murderer - that's what the jury decided anyway.

It was Jeremy who said that his father had rung him and said Sheila had a gun. Therefore, if Sheila did not do it, that call didn't happen, and Jeremy must have done the murders.

Had it not been for that claim that Nevill phoned Jeremy, there may have been other suspects. "

Well explained. I thought about this too. You can´t help wondering if Jeremy actually, so to speak, painted himself into a corner with that phone-call to the police. It pretty much eliminates the possibility of other suspects.

[chelmsey]

There was loads of forensive evidence. There was the blood in the silencer for a start.

Mind you, if it hadn't been for the alleged phone call to Jeremy from Nevill, that forensic evidence could have applied to anyone else except Sheila, and not necessarily just to Jeremy.

I don't believe there is any forensic evidence which puts Jeremy at the scene but maybe you can prove me wrong.

The blood on the silencer does not relate to Jeremy as far as I understand Kaldin.

Let me explain. None of the forensic evidence puts Jeremy specifically at the scene, but it does eliminate Sheila as the murderer - that's what the jury decided anyway.

It was Jeremy who said that his father had rung him and said Sheila had a gun. Therefore, if Sheila did not do it, that call didn't happen, and Jeremy must have done the murders.

Had it not been for that claim that Nevill phoned Jeremy, there may have been other suspects.

Kaldin...........I agree totally with you on this.I believe that Jeremy was responsible.Its just that I would like to have seen a little more solid evidence proving his guilt,that is all.

[Kaldin]

Kaldin:

"Let me explain. None of the forensic evidence puts Jeremy specifically at the scene, but it does eliminate Sheila as the murderer - that's what the jury decided anyway.

It was Jeremy who said that his father had rung him and said Sheila had a gun. Therefore, if Sheila did not do it, that call didn't happen, and Jeremy must have done the murders.

Had it not been for that claim that Nevill phoned Jeremy, there may have been other suspects. "

Well explained. I thought about this too. You can´t help wondering if Jeremy actually, so to speak, painted himself into a corner with that phone-call to the police. It pretty much eliminates the possibility of other suspects.

Yes he did. If he's guilty, he took a big chance that they wouldn't look further than Sheila. If he's innocent it's a pity that Nevill phoned him at all.

Without that phone call, he might still have been prosecuted because of the motive and the lack of an entry point into the house - that kind of thing, but his chances of acquittal would have been much higher.

[chelmsey]

The Judge himself said that a person cannot be convicted on a motive alone. The relatives had just as much of a motive!If you remove the evidence of JM as hearsay and remove the controversial evidence of the silencer.then that leaves the alleged telephone call.The defence couldnt prove that it happened and the prosecution couldnt prove that it didnt happen!

[sandy]

Kaldin:

"Let me explain. None of the forensic evidence puts Jeremy specifically at the scene, but it does eliminate Sheila as the murderer - that's what the jury decided anyway.

It was Jeremy who said that his father had rung him and said Sheila had a gun. Therefore, if Sheila did not do it, that call didn't happen, and Jeremy must have done the murders.

Had it not been for that claim that Nevill phoned Jeremy, there may have been other suspects. "

Well explained. I thought about this too. You can´t help wondering if Jeremy actually, so to speak, painted himself into a corner with that phone-call to the police. It pretty much eliminates the possibility of other suspects.

Exactly so, had there not been a telephone call then there was every possibility that an outsider, possibly someone who Ralph had sent down, had committed this vile murder.  In any event, such a person would want revenge on Ralph only and would not have wanted to murder innocent children.

It takes a very special sort of slime ball to do such a thing.

The telephone call from White House farm to Jeremy's cottage can be easily explained as the murderer reporting in.

[sandy]

Jeremy had it all worked out but he didn't count on Mugford doing the dirty.   

[Paul]

What is interesting is that the two 'live' threads so far this evening are completely contradictory!

[Kaldin]

The Judge himself said that a person cannot be convicted on a motive alone. The relatives had just as much of a motive!If you remove the evidence of JM as hearsay and remove the controversial evidence of the silencer.then that leaves the alleged telephone call.The defence couldnt prove that it happened and the prosecution couldnt prove that it didnt happen!

They didn't have a motive to kill those five people unless Jeremy was dead too.

[sandy]

I don't think the relatives had anywhere as good a motive as Jeremy.  Jeremy was struggling to get a couple of grand together to buy a Porsche kit car so he obviously had ideas above his station.  Maybe he got tired waiting and maybe Ralph had other ideas about the estate. 

Sheila's two boys would come of age in time and Jeremy's slice was beginning to diminish every day that passed. 

[Kaldin]

I don't think the relatives had anywhere as good a motive as Jeremy.  Jeremy was struggling to get a couple of grand together to buy a Porsche kit car so he obviously had ideas above his station.  Maybe he got tired waiting and maybe Ralph had other ideas about the estate. 

Sheila's two boys would come of age in time and Jeremy's slice was beginning to diminish every day that passed.

I'm not sure what the boys had to do with the inheritance. It was Sheila who would have got half of it, not the boys.

[mike tesko]

Until JB was convicted, any slice the relatives might think they had, had vanished altogether -  hence the concerted effort by the relatives to persuade the police that JB committed the murders...

[sandy]

I'm not sure what the boys had to do with the inheritance. It was Sheila who would have got half of it, not the boys.

What makes you think that Kaldin?

[sandy]

Until JB was convicted, any slice the relatives might think they had, had vanished altogether -  hence the concerted effort by the relatives to persuade the police that JB committed the murders...

Maybe they thought he was guilty?   

[Kaldin]

I'm not sure what the boys had to do with the inheritance. It was Sheila who would have got half of it, not the boys.

What makes you think that Kaldin?

Are you suggesting that the Bamber inheritance would have been divided into four - one quarter for Jeremy and the rest for Sheila and the boys?