Neville & Jeremy. The last blazing row ?

[Jane]

So if he didn't feel the need,his conscience was clear.

Not necessarily, Lookout. It could EQUALLY well mean he didn't see a need because he'd, in his opinion, taken care of everything.

[Alias]

Not necessarily, Lookout. It could EQUALLY well mean he didn't see a need because he'd, in his opinion, taken care of everything.

How could he think that if he had left a bloodied silencer in the cupboard - must have nagged at him if he did it.

[Jan]

Grahame, I hear what you're saying but it sounds as if you're telling us what YOU would do if YOU were guilty. I can go with all that double checking, I'd probably do the same, BUT supposing you were of the mindset that because you'd crossed all the T's and dotted all the I's, NOTHING could go wrong? What, of course, is patently wrong with this is that you could only deal with what YOU regarded as being important because you have NO idea what others might see as being important.

But would he have thought that after two shots in an alleged suicide ? I don't think that the "common man" would have thought it would have been accepted that easily . And surely he would have looked at  and cleaned the silencer before putting it away . That would have been a basic precaution. Could he have been sure he had left no prints or marks on the windows ? Cant see him reaching back through and wiping with a cloth?

[Jane]

How could he think that if he had left a bloodied silencer in the cupboard - must have nagged at him if he did it.

I guess if he'd taken on board the fact that the silencer was bloodied he'd have run it under a tap. This is how WE would have seen it. OUR thoughts clearly were not the ones he was having.

[Mr. Gee]

Grahame, I hear what you're saying but it sounds as if you're telling us what YOU would do if YOU were guilty. I can go with all that double checking, I'd probably do the same, BUT supposing you were of the mindset that because you'd crossed all the T's and dotted all the I's, NOTHING could go wrong? What, of course, is patently wrong with this is that you could only deal with what YOU regarded as being important because you have NO idea what others might see as being important.

Not at all April. Even you said you would go along with what I said. So that's at least two people to acknowledge what a guilty person would do. But look at it logically. Would you let anyone else into a house that was going to be yours. I should think that the mindset of any crook or murderer would do this. I should think if you took a vote of everyone on the forum most would say if it were they who committed the crime there will always be that niggle at the back of their minds that tells them to "make sure".
On the other hand the actions of an innocent man would be completely those of Bamber. Completely open with everyone, so much so as to allow all and sundry in the place.

[Jane]

But would he have thought that after two shots in an alleged suicide ? I don't think that the "common man" would have thought it would have been accepted that easily . And surely he would have looked at  and cleaned the silencer before putting it away . That would have been a basic precaution. Could he have been sure he had left no prints or marks on the windows ? Cant see him reaching back through and wiping with a cloth?

Jan, I guess that's something that HAD to be put on the back burner. What was he going to do? It would have been THE most enormous cock up. He couldn't run time backwards. He couldn't run the risk of leaving her. MAY not have liked the idea of her bleeding to death. She HAD to be shot again. It probably caused a wobble. This MAY be the reason for him hiding the silencer without first checking it.

[Mr. Gee]

Not necessarily, Lookout. It could EQUALLY well mean he didn't see a need because he'd, in his opinion, taken care of everything.

And what has happened to the well known saying, "A murderer always returns to the scene of the crime". There is a lot of truth in that. That silencer for instance. Don't you think he would feel the need to make sure that it was completely clean if indeed he had used it?
No doubt if he had returned to the house you might be saying "he obviously returned in order to make sure everything was ok"? The truth is April that to every answer there is a counter answer depending on a person's point of view.

[Alias]

But would he have thought that after two shots in an alleged suicide ? I don't think that the "common man" would have thought it would have been accepted that easily . And surely he would have looked at  and cleaned the silencer before putting it away . That would have been a basic precaution. Could he have been sure he had left no prints or marks on the windows ? Cant see him reaching back through and wiping with a cloth?

I agree, he cannot have felt so sure that everything would go his way easy peasy.

[Jane]

Not at all April. Even you said you would go along with what I said. So that's at least two people to acknowledge what a guilty person would do. But look at it logically. Would you let anyone else into a house that was going to be yours. I should think that the mindset of any crook or murderer would do this. I should think if you took a vote of everyone on the forum most would say if it were they who committed the crime there will always be that niggle at the back of their minds that tells them to "make sure".
On the other hand the actions of an innocent man would be completely those of Bamber. Completely open with everyone, so much so as to allow all and sundry in the place.

NO, Grahame. You misunderstand me. I'm not looking at guilt versus innocence. I'm looking at a mind set. I'm certain that we're both aware that in a classroom there are children who will admit guilt as soon as the question is asked. These are generally children who have been made to FEEL guilt. The real culprit is capable of just sitting there. If someone else is fool enough to take the blame for their actions, more fool them.

[Jane]

I agree, he cannot have felt so sure that everything would go his way easy peasy.

How we feel and how we act are often very different.

[Alias]

How we feel and how we act are often very different.

As Jan pointed out, there was a two shot murder staged as a suicide. The natural thing to assume is that it would make the culprit nervous and on his toes.

[Jane]

As Jan pointed out, there was a two shot murder staged as a suicide. The natural thing to assume is that it would make the culprit nervous and on his toes.

I can't imagine that it didn't, Alias.

[Jan]

How we feel and how we act are often very different.

Well  I think in that if he is guilty he must be extremely stupid

not to check the house when he had the chance
Tell Julie
Break into the house after the murders
Not think about his behaviour after the murders and how it may be perceived.
Go along with Basil Cock and start thinking about the money and clearing the house.


Of course it could be that if innocent he was just a greedy person and thought financially Sheila had done him a favour .

[Alias]

Well  I think in that if he is guilty he must be extremely stupid

not to check the house when he had the chance
Tell Julie
Break into the house after the murders
Not think about his behaviour after the murders and how it may be perceived.
Go along with Basil Cock and start thinking about the money and clearing the house.


Of course it could be that if innocent he was just a greedy person and thought financially Sheila had done him a favour .

Yes, very stupid. He has just killed his whole family and staged the two shot murder of his sister as a suicide - yet he stands outside with a cop and says he didn´t like his sister much....

[Jan]

Yes, very stupid. He has just killed his whole family and staged the two shot murder of his sister as a suicide - yet he stands outside with a cop and says he didn´t like his sister much....

Oh yes forgot that bit.Mind you Mike thinks he is innocent because he was not clever enough to do it in the first place. Sighhhhhhhhh