The conviction. What does not fit ?

[Adam]

1:

Was there a motive - Several.

2:

Was there an opportunity - Yes.

3:

Was there an alibi - No.

4:

Was there a lot of circumstantial evidence - Yes.

5:

Have there been other inheritance killers - Yes.

6:

Was there a way to WHF without being seen - Yes.

7:

Was a bike brought over just before the massacre - Yes.

8:

Was there a way into WHF through a window - Yes.

9:

Was there a way out and to lock a window from outside - Yes.

10:

Was 12pm - 2pm the perfect execution time - Yes.

11:

Was there a lethal weapon inside WHF - Yes.

12:

Are there just two suspects - Yes.

13:

Does the forensic evidence show it was not Sheila - Yes.

14:

Does the forensic evidence round the suspects to Jeremy  - Yes.

15:

Is a multiple frame attempt unprecedented - Yes.

16:

Did Bamber have an opportunity to dispose of evidence - Yes.

17:

Are there any reasons why Neville would call Jeremy - No.

18:

Did Bamber have better options, random stranger etc - No.

19:

Would the WHF dogs prevent a massacre or attempt - No.

20:

Did experts believe Sheila capable of such a murderous rage - No.

21:

Could Sheila have committed the massacre - No. 

22:

Have there been several failed appeals - Yes.

23:

Has anyone retracted or been proved to have lied - No.

24:

Is there a library of forensic evidence ? - Yes.



I could continue. Can someone please tell me what does not fit and why the conviction is wrong.

[Jan]

Was there a motive - Several.  Not necessarily - the inheritance was very complicated and JB was already quite well off with shares in two companies at age 24 - his parents as you have pointed out were very generous to him so was the motive enough to risk 5  life sentences?

Was there an opportunity - Yes. - As there was no time of death determined  you can not assume that with any accuracy

Was there an alibi - No.  - There was if Sheila died after he arrived  there was a whole police force as alibis 

Was there a lot of circumstantial evidence - Yes.  Only in your assumption . 

Have there been other inheritance killers - Yes.  - there have been other killers with sheilas illness who have killed as well . So that proves nothing

Was there a way to WHF without being seen - Yes.  Don't forget the time of year and he had to leave his house in the village and arrive back on a bike  without being seen by the neighbours  and how would he ride down the paths in the dark - Make sure you allow plenty of time for this and getting rid of all possible forensic evidence.

Was a bike brought over just before the massacre - Yes.   - It was never proved the bike was used - it was an assumption - there was no forensic link and don't forget the family were watching hime from day one  and the police were at his house the following morning - when did he clean it?

Was there a way into WHF through a window - Yes.  Does not prove he used it on the night.

Was there a way out and to lock a window from outside - Yes. -  I give up with you .
Was 12pm - 2pm the perfect execution time - Yes. - In your head yes - See above NO TIME OF DEATHS WAS ESTABLISHED.

Was there a lethal weapon inside WHF - Yes. - Does not mean Jeremy used them .So proves nothing

Are there just two suspects - Yes.  According to the judge there were  but some feel he was wrong .

Does the forensic evidence show it was not Sheila - Yes.  - No it does not - see the DICKINSON report - You need to start a thread on this and go into more detail if you are going to state that as a fact when it is not.

Does the silencer evidence round the suspects to one - Yes.  - If Jeremy did it and the silencer was on he would not be concentrating on that in various appeals . And although unlikely and improbable it is not IMPOSSIBLE that Sheila did use the gun with the silencer and in her state of mental illness put it away - to be honest it is just as unlikely as Jeremy  putting it away in a box in plastic with a blob of blood that somehow survived .

Is a triple frame attempt unprecedented - Yes.  Excuse me How many people do you think were involved in other cases where people were framed ? that's not even true

Did Bamber have an opportunity to dispose of evidence - Yes. How ? the police and miss Marples were round his house as soon as he got back with the police and you cannot change the fact that there was NO forensic evidence to link him AT ALL .

Are there lots of reasons why Neville would call Jeremy - No.  Again in your head - not everyone agrees with you so it does not make it a fact.

Did Bamber have better options, random stranger etc - No. - NOT even sure what this means?

Would the WHF dogs prevent a massacre or attempt - No.  No one said that as far as I know - so irrelevant .

Did experts believe Sheila capable of such a murderous rage - No. Neither did they believe Jeremy was capable and she had shown more violence than him.Read FE statement where several grown adults could not control her . If you are going to say JB could do it with no prior history - then with her history it was more likely.

Could Sheila have committed the massacre - No.  - Yes she could - the judge said they had to consider she could.

Have there been several failed appeals - Yes. - Yes you are right on that one .

Has anyone retracted or been proved to have lied - No.  Yes witnesses did lie in their original and subsequent statements . And the police were investigated in 1992 in connection with the case - and one of them broke down when questioned . Also logs and photos and statements have been with held - so watch this space



I could continue. Can someone please tell me what does not fit.

Done .

[lookout]

Take a bow,Jan.

[Adam]

Very well done Jan in fire fighting. 

I appreciate you have to fight every point. Because every point fits smoothly into the Bamber conviction.

I remember watching a police  TV show. The police were going in the wrong direction. So not everything was fitting.

What doesn't fit in the Bamber case that everyone accepts as fact, that shows he cannot be guilty ? If it is a triple frame and Bamber is innocent, there must be something.

[Adam]

Of course my invitation was not just for Jan.

There are over twenty facts which fit with Bamber being guilty.

Obviously people can address each point.

But what would be more interesting is if there can be found a fact which does not fit with the conviction. Even showing Bamber is in fact innocent. 

[Jan]

Of course my invitation was not just for Jan.

There are over twenty facts which fit with Bamber being guilty.

Obviously people can address each point.

But what would be more interesting is if there can be found a fact which does not fit with the conviction. Even showing Bamber is in fact innocent.

well the logs that you conveniently declined to discuss  on the thread that strangely enough got closed. Or for example and how about the fact that EP will not release original phone logs for forensic testing . Or release missing photographs ? Or the logs that say they were in conversation with someone in WHF. Or the gun that was found in the kitchen ? Or the officers who were concerned that the body had been moved. All conveniently explained by police errors.

Please stop saying (second request ) that I am firefighting . You accused me of being chicken and a coward and now when I enter discussion with you , you persist in being sarcastic. Try to stop it. If you can.

[Adam]

well the logs that you conveniently declined to discuss  on the thread that strangely enough got closed. Or for example and how about the fact that EP will not release original phone logs for forensic testing . Or release missing photographs ? Or the logs that say they were in conversation with someone in WHF. Or the gun that was found in the kitchen ? Or the officers who were concerned that the body had been moved. All conveniently explained by police errors.

Please stop saying (second request ) that I am firefighting . You accused me of being chicken and a coward and now when I enter discussion with you , you persist in being sarcastic. Try to stop it. If you can.

Very well done Jan. Are you not fire fighting a forest fire ? Apologies I thought you were.

Come on. Surely you are not saying the police were in conversation with someone in the house. I will find the thread.

I did discuss the logs on a thread I created. It was locked after another poster called me racist.

I also asked you a question, forget about the logs - do you think Sheila went on extended walkabouts after shooting herself' ? Jeremy is saying she did.

[Jan]

Very well done Jan. Are you not fire fighting a forest fire ? Apologies I thought you were.

Come on. Surely you are not saying the police were in conversation with someone in the house. I will find the thread.

I did discuss the logs on a thread I created. It was locked after another poster called me racist.

I also asked you a question, forget about the logs - do you think Sheila went on extended walkabouts after shooting herself' ?

don't find the threads

and where did I say that?

BTW  I started a thread feel free to join in .

[Caroline]

Was there a motive - Several.

Was there an opportunity - Yes But also for Sheila

Was there an alibi - No. Not true, but it comes down to whether you believe the phone call or not

Was there a lot of circumstantial evidence - Yes. But also for Sheila

Have there been other inheritance killers - Yes. Not relevant

Was there a way to WHF without being seen - Yes. I think the question should have been 'without' disturbing anyone? Possibly but far easier as an inside job

Was a bike brought over just before the massacre - Yes.

Was there a way into WHF through a window - Yes. This we don't know for sure, there is conflicting info

Was there a way out and to lock a window from outside - Yes. This we don't know for sure, there is conflicting info

Was 12pm - 2pm the perfect execution time - Yes. That would be true whoever the killer was

Was there a lethal weapon inside WHF - Yes. Also true whoever the killer was

Are there just two suspects - Yes.

Does the forensic evidence show it was not Sheila - Yes. Depends if you believe the silencer evidence

Does the silencer evidence round the suspects to one - Yes. Not necessarily but even if the silencer was planted, it doesn't make Jeremy innocent

Is a triple frame attempt unprecedented - Yes. You can't say that  because if there had been successful 'triple fame up' you wouldn't know about it!!

Did Bamber have an opportunity to dispose of evidence - Yes.

Are there lots of reasons why Neville would call Jeremy - No. We have no idea about their true relationship

Did Bamber have better options, random stranger etc - No. Not sure what this question is asking?

Would the WHF dogs prevent a massacre or attempt - No. Well obviously not given that they didn't! 

Did experts believe Sheila capable of such a murderous rage - No. Witness's for the defense did

Could Sheila have committed the massacre - No.  Of course (although I don't think she did)

Have there been several failed appeals - Yes. Not sure why you're asking this question here, he could still be innocent regardless of failed appeals

Has anyone retracted or been proved to have lied - No. Oh, I think it's quite clear that not everyone is telling the full truth but I include Jeremy in that



I could continue. Can someone please tell me what does not fit and why the conviction is wrong.

[Adam]

Very well done Caroline.

I was quite surprised at some of you're answers. But will not bother answering them at this late hour.

Each point from me can be endlessly argued by optimistic supporters. But if all correct, each matches perfectly a conviction.

My question was more - 'The conviction. What does not fit ? Are there any facts which show the conviction is wrong ?

[Caroline]

Very well done Caroline.

I was quite surprised at some of you're answers. But will not bother answering them at this late hour.

Each point from me can be endlessly argued by optimistic supporters. But if all correct, each matches perfectly a conviction.

My question was more - 'The conviction. What does not fit ? Are there any facts which show the conviction is wrong ?

Gotta love im!  . The evidence is circumstantial (in the main) and can be argued backwards and forwards until the coos come home. There are LOTS of things that don't fit and although I think he's most likely guilty - I can still see that there are many unanswered points. Perhaps I'll make a thread about those and you can answer as Jan and I have done?

[Adam]

Gotta love im!  . The evidence is circumstantial (in the main) and can be argued backwards and forwards until the coos come home. There are LOTS of things that don't fit and although I think he's most likely guilty - I can still see that there are many unanswered points. Perhaps I'll make a thread about those and you can answer as Jan and I have done?

Thank you.

I have just numbered the points. Will respond to some of you're answers later.

[Mr. Gee]

Very well done Caroline.

I was quite surprised at some of you're answers. But will not bother answering them at this late hour.

Each point from me can be endlessly argued by optimistic supporters. But if all correct, each matches perfectly a conviction.

My question was more - 'The conviction. What does not fit ? Are there any facts which show the conviction is wrong ?

And it WILL be argued by those who are recalcitrant and unreasonable guilters.

[Adam]

Well my 23 points are all facts to everyone. Apart from Bamber supporters who will doggedly refuse to accept each point.

If each point is accepted it fits perfectly with the conviction.

Do you know of any accepted facts by everyone that fits perfectly into Bamber being innocent ?

[Mr. Gee]

Well my 23 points are all facts to everyone. Apart from Bamber supporters who will doggedly refuse to accept each point.

If each point is accepted it fits perfectly with the conviction.

Do you know of any accepted facts by everyone that fits perfectly into Bamber being innocent ?

Well Adam they are only facts as far as they are all "general" points as opposed to specific points. No doubt you could equally make up general points in regard to most murder trials? Points like, "was there an opportunity?" The answer is bound to be "yes". Why is this? Well the same point could be applied to Sheila as well. Why? because it is just a general point.

 Again, "Was there an alibi?" Well of course the answer is no. Why, because it applies to Bamber? No, because the same could be applied to anyone. It is a general point.

Again, "Have there been other inheritance killers?" Well yet again the answer would be yes. But once again it is a general question that does not necessarily apply to Bamber.

In fact you have to look over all of your questions and you will see that most of them can be answered in the affirmative. Why is that? Oh because you yourself have engineered it that way. So in actual fact it is a false questionnaire because all the questions are geared to be answered the way you want them to be answered.

Let's look at another example. "Was there a lethal weapon inside WHF ?" Well the answer must once again be "yes". So what is the purpose of that particular question? It is of course just filling in order to bulk out your questionnaire.
So as far as I am concerned your questionnaire is not really fair?