The proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant

[Mr. Gee]

Feel free to comment on the already created thread 'Did Jeremy have a fair trial'.

Giving you're reasons why you believe it was unfair & why he should have a retrial. The legal system does not agree.

This is precisely the reason I stand where I do. I really am very sad for you Adam as you cannot view these things in a balanced way.

[Adam]

Morning Mr.Gee Jeremy Bamber  could have already been in the farmhouse like Caroline suggested it is a possible scenario he brought the last trailer back and went into the house which would be quite the norm.

The Foakes's heard Jeremy drive off that night. He also rang Julie at 10am. He wouldn't do that if he was trying to hide inside WHF.

Spending 5-10 minutes driving home, then 20-30 minutes cycling to WHF 3/4 hours later is not hard.

[maggie]

Morning Mr.Gee Jeremy Bamber  could have already been in the farmhouse like Caroline suggested it is a possible scenario he brought the last trailer back and went into the house which would be quite the norm.

Hi susie I accept that is quite possible but what about his car? Do we know what time he parked his car outside his cottage in Goldhangar ? We know they were alive and out of bed at 10 so if he hid for a couple of hours he wouldn't have been home til early hours yet neighbours said it was parked outside all night??? Xxx

[Adam]

This is precisely the reason I stand where I do. I really am very sad for you Adam as you cannot view these things in a balanced way.

I am giving a poster a platform to express her views. And read an already created thread.

Saying it was an unfair trial is fine. But why ?

[Adam]

Adam anyone can dream up a scenario and in the past I have indulged this foolishness just for your sake. But in principle I do not condone scenarios, because of the very reasons I gave at the time we simply do not know because none of us were there, so anything we may come up with is in the end no more than a guess as is your own pet scenario. There may have been factors in the case and indeed the distinct possibility that the police themselves interfered with the scene, plus the doubted use/non use of a silencer. Also as to whether we have ALL the crime scene photographs. As well as the various accusations, like did Bamber set up the scene, or did the police do so etc (for instance where is Taff Jones' notebook?). In other words there are so many variables for anyone to take into consideration that personally because of those things the case is not such a clear cut one as it may seem to be on the surface? So Adam I am not so willing as you are to rush into making scenarios, as all scenarios can be just a figment of our imaginations and I suggest that they are for the very reasons I have given.

ps: The police rejected the bicycle as evidence. If he did it he had to get there. But there is no forensic evidence to say he was anywhere near the place, so that is also just a guess.

My apologies. It is unfair of me to expect you to say how Sheila could have massacred her family. Although you believe she did.

You can't even say what Sheila was doing when Neville phoned Jeremy. Well you can, it was either after she started shooting upstairs, or after she ran upstairs with a loaded rifle. Perhaps a trifle late ?

[susan]

Hello Adam hope you will not be offended if I take a rain check answering your post but it is far too complicated and would require me to make accusations I cannot prove and you would not want to see my doing "time" would you now Think maybe in time to come you will have answers to your questions.

[Adam]

The prosecution case was that he cycled to WHF. The judge mentioned it in his summing up. Please see 'The judges summing up thread'.

[maggie]

The prosecution case was that he cycled to WHF. The judge mentioned it in his summing up. Please see 'The judges summing up thread'.

Are you addressing my post Adam, I am talking about Caroline's suggestion JB stayed in the house after bringing in the last trailer but maybe I should reread it as can't remember her complete suggestion.

[susan]

Hello Maggie I thought Caroline's scenario was feasible although maybe not full proof.  He told Ralph he would bring the last trailer in he drove home parked his car rang Julie then legged it back through the fields to the trailer.  Drove to the farm and went in may be on the pretence of staying all night and hung about till they were all in bed (not Sheila) I feel she played a part in his plan but that is supposition on my part I cannot see how one person could have carried out these horrendous shootings but I guess we may never know what happened and it is driving me crazy

[Mr. Gee]

The prosecution case was that he cycled to WHF. The judge mentioned it in his summing up. Please see 'The judges summing up thread'.

But the prosecution totally failed to prove this. They suggested it even though the police failed to find any evidence that he did this. This was completely based entirely on assumption. I suggest that the prosecution was wrong and the jury were wrong (well 10 of them any way) to believe their suggestion without proof of any kind.
 
Indeed their case was also based upon the presumption that Sheila could not have done the murders therefore it must have been Bamber. A totally wrong conclusion to come to as his guilt or innocence was based upon whether Sheila did it or not. Can I remind you that absolutely no forensic evidence found that even suggests that Bamber did the murders.

Furthermore there is the silencer evidence that should have been rejected outright when even the suggestion that DB took it to bits or not, as contaminated at least.

Then of course there is the evidence of JM that amazingly was accepted as gospel truth by all and sundry, although she had absolutely no one to back up what she said happened when she and Bamber were alone.

Now notice Adam I have not used any kind of scenario to cloud the issues here. My assessment is based entirely on the evidence presented at court and as you could see if you aren't blinded by prejudice just how far short the evidence falls to obtain a conviction and in my opinion was not handled in court how it should have been. Too much was accepted as truth which could not be substantiated. I will go further and say that he was convicted entirely on a "scenario" and not by the facts.

[Jan]

I think Adam forgets that the family in their statements and notecards were watching Jeremy like a hawk from day one. Therefore he had no chance of getting rid of forensic evidence/clothes /clean bike etc.

Also if he had any doubt about how he had left the silencer he could have taken those keys to WHF and doubly make sure there was no evidence on the windows  / clean the silencer /sort out the phone.

His "simple" scenario is anything but simple and he choses to ignore all of the many angles , practical and psychological that make it almost impossible for Jeremy to do what he suggests .

So in other words it seems impossible that Jeremy could do it - and hard to believe that Sheila could do it - so it came to be that because Sheila was not able to be accused then Jeremy came to trial.

[susan]

Hello Jan I don't think for one moment the bike was used to get Jeremy to WHF or back to his cottage.  He could have got rid of clothes etc on the night of the murders does anyone know if the farm had an incinerator? I don't think the silencer was ever used had it  been Sheila would not have put it away in the box in the cupboard and Jeremy would not have left incriminating evidence behind at the farm I have never put too much importance on the phone issue no big deal.

[Adam]

But the prosecution totally failed to prove this. They suggested it even though the police failed to find any evidence that he did this. This was completely based entirely on assumption. I suggest that the prosecution was wrong and the jury were wrong (well 10 of them any way) to believe their suggestion without proof of any kind.
 
Indeed their case was also based upon the presumption that Sheila could not have done the murders therefore it must have been Bamber. A totally wrong conclusion to come to as his guilt or innocence was based upon whether Sheila did it or not. Can I remind you that absolutely no forensic evidence found that even suggests that Bamber did the murders.

Furthermore there is the silencer evidence that should have been rejected outright when even the suggestion that DB took it to bits or not, as contaminated at least.

Then of course there is the evidence of JM that amazingly was accepted as gospel truth by all and sundry, although she had absolutely no one to back up what she said happened when she and Bamber were alone.

Now notice Adam I have not used any kind of scenario to cloud the issues here. My assessment is based entirely on the evidence presented at court and as you could see if you aren't blinded by prejudice just how far short the evidence falls to obtain a conviction and in my opinion was not handled in court how it should have been. Too much was accepted as truth which could not be substantiated. I will go further and say that he was convicted entirely on a "scenario" and not by the facts.

Thank you for you're long reply. Retirement boredom ?

Yes I notice you did not make a scenario. Although I politely asked you to.

Thought it would be easy. You know how many bullets were fired, where and who was in WHF & where they were when shot or brutally beaten. Or both. 

It was easy for me to make one for Jeremy. Which matched everything.

Then again, no one can even explain what Sheila was doing when Neville made his 'mysterious' phone call to Jeremy.

[Adam]

Hello Jan I don't think for one moment the bike was used to get Jeremy to WHF or back to his cottage.  He could have got rid of clothes etc on the night of the murders does anyone know if the farm had an incinerator? I don't think the silencer was ever used had it  been Sheila would not have put it away in the box in the cupboard and Jeremy would not have left incriminating evidence behind at the farm I have never put too much importance on the phone issue no big deal.

Do you agree with Grahame that it was a coincidence that Jeremy brought his mothers bike to his cottage just before the massacre ?

[Adam]

I think Adam forgets that the family in their statements and notecards were watching Jeremy like a hawk from day one. Therefore he had no chance of getting rid of forensic evidence/clothes /clean bike etc.

Also if he had any doubt about how he had left the silencer he could have taken those keys to WHF and doubly make sure there was no evidence on the windows  / clean the silencer /sort out the phone.

His "simple" scenario is anything but simple and he choses to ignore all of the many angles , practical and psychological that make it almost impossible for Jeremy to do what he suggests .

So in other words it seems impossible that Jeremy could do it - and hard to believe that Sheila could do it - so it came to be that because Sheila was not able to be accused then Jeremy came to trial.

Jeremy spent a month gallivanting around Europe after the massacre. Was AE tagging along ?