Why did the police frame Jeremy ?

[Mr. Gee]

AP mentioned it, stating that the last time he saw the rifle it had both the silencer and sights attached. TJ and SJ went to Goldhanger and asked Jeremy if the silencer (and sights) was/were attached when he went to shoot rabbits. Jeremy said that neither were attached.

I wonder why when he allegedly said to Ann Eaton "this must be the silencer" when they also supposedly found the sights at the same time? Why didn't he say, "This must be the sights"? Do you think that, that which he had "up his sleeve" had anything to do with the priority of the silencer above the sights?

[Gemma]

It seems strange that no reasons are given by the police for believing that  Jeremy was the killer before they had Julie Mugford's testimony and the silencer evidence. The relatives gave only hints and suggestions. Ann Eaton made a statement full of “blackening” type remarks about Jeremy, but nobody came up with anything to link him with the crime and to this day nobody else has.

Usually the police like to tell people what first made them suspicious-it shows they are on the ball. But that kind of explanation seems lacking in this case.

[lookout]

EP had been under enormous pressure by the relatives practically from day one. More fool them for not having done the thorough investigation themselves and allowing outside interference which wasn't even questioned. I knew some officers were unbelievably thick-----------but gullible too ?

It was the relatives who set up this investigation,not the police. The police were only too happy to tag along provided they got their much NEEDED conviction after the Diane Jones case flopped.

[Gemma]

EP had been under enormous pressure by the relatives practically from day one. More fool them for not having done the thorough investigation themselves and allowing outside interference which wasn't even questioned. I knew some officers were unbelievably thick-----------but gullible too ?

It was the relatives who set up this investigation,not the police. The police were only too happy to tag along provided they got their much NEEDED conviction after the Diane Jones case flopped.

It's worth remembering that the decision to arrest Jeremy was taken before Julie Mugford came forward, which naturally poses the question what evidence did they have to justify it? Perhaps some of them thought that Jeremy was probably the culprit just because the relatives seemed so convinced he was. It's not necessary to assume that they thought he was guilty with any real conviction or that they thought he was innocent. Jobsworths will just go along with it.

[lookout]

It's worth remembering that the decision to arrest Jeremy was taken before Julie Mugford came forward, which naturally poses the question what evidence did they have to justify it? Perhaps some of them thought that Jeremy was probably the culprit just because the relatives seemed so convinced he was. It's not necessary to assume that they thought he was guilty with any real conviction or that they thought he was innocent. Jobsworths will just go along with it.

The thing is Gemma,they had to " solve " this one,or else. All officers had been hauled over the coals previous to the WHF murders, for not having secured a conviction in the doctors' wife murder case,so they were literally held over a barrel regarding their jobs and pensions.

[Gemma]

The thing is Gemma,they had to " solve " this one,or else. All officers had been hauled over the coals previous to the WHF murders, for not having secured a conviction in the doctors' wife murder case,so they were literally held over a barrel regarding their jobs and pensions.

I agree with that, Lookout. They have to try to look good and to avoid looking bad.

[Caroline]

It seems strange that no reasons are given by the police for believing that  Jeremy was the killer before they had Julie Mugford's testimony and the silencer evidence. The relatives gave only hints and suggestions. Ann Eaton made a statement full of “blackening” type remarks about Jeremy, but nobody came up with anything to link him with the crime and to this day nobody else has.

Usually the police like to tell people what first made them suspicious-it shows they are on the ball. But that kind of explanation seems lacking in this case.

Stan Jones gave a reason - he said it was his attitude. Sometimes that's all they have to go on.

[Caroline]

I wonder why when he allegedly said to Ann Eaton "this must be the silencer" when they also supposedly found the sights at the same time? Why didn't he say, "This must be the sights"? Do you think that, that which he had "up his sleeve" had anything to do with the priority of the silencer above the sights?

Possibly. A silencer would be considered far more useful in a murder.

[Gemma]

Stan Jones gave a reason - he said it was his attitude. Sometimes that's all they have to go on.

That's just the point, it's just what they always say. Talk about behaviour and demeanour takes the place of concrete evidence. You seem to be admitting that they might not have had any, just a gut feeling.

Surely, they would need more than that to decide to frame somebody, unless they did feel under pressure, as Lookout suggests.

[Caroline]

That's just the point, it's just what they always say. Talk about behaviour and demeanour takes the place of concrete evidence. You seem to be admitting that they might not have had any, just a gut feeling.

Surely, they would need more than that to decide to frame somebody, unless they did feel under pressure, as Lookout suggests.

I can believe they framed someone on 'gut feeling' far more than they knowingly framed an innocent man. I imagine they were under pressure but if they had  evidence of Sheila being guilty, it would have elevated the pressure.

[guest7363]

That's just the point, it's just what they always say. Talk about behaviour and demeanour takes the place of concrete evidence. You seem to be admitting that they might not have had any, just a gut feeling.

Surely, they would need more than that to decide to frame somebody, unless they did feel under pressure, as Lookout suggests.

I think you will find Stan Jones was onto Bamber from day one,  he noticed there was no towels in the bathroom and  Jones said he was always sceptical of Bamber's innocence and raised his concerns at a meeting of detectives.

"On the second day after the shooting I spoke out and said it was Bamber who did it. I was ostracised and (I) spent a month of hell.

[susan]

Hello justice  thanks for that information I remember now about the no towels in the bathroom which is strange to say the least.  Think Stan Jones was a very shrewd cop.

[guest7363]

Hello justice  thanks for that information I remember now about the no towels in the bathroom which is strange to say the least.  Think Stan Jones was a very shrewd cop.

Hi Susan there was a lot going on from the start quite a few suspected Bamber, Bews said this One thing he found strange was that Bamber had phoned ­Chelmsford ­police station direct. He added: “Even kids at primary school are taught to dial 999 in an ­emergency.”

He said DCI “Taff” Jones, leading the case, should have listened to ­local police before concluding Sheila was responsible for the killings. He said that a good deal of potentially revealing evidence was destroyed before Det Supt Stan Jones took over, even Bews was not happy from day one.

[susan]

justice it is a shame that valuable evidence was destroyed before Stan Jones got involved I am quite sure a few officers did think he was guilty they saw and heard things we are not privy to.  Perhaps Taff Jones was a tad hasty in his conclusion that Sheila was responsible for the murders none of us will really ever know just guessing as I said earlier.

[lookout]

No towels in the bathroom meant that they'd been used for mopping/soaking up the blood on the kitchen floor. There is a pic of the kitchen showing white ? towels on the floor.
EP would have thrown them down,even if nobody else had done. That's if they were in the bathroom to start with,considering that Neville was only partially dressed as though he'd just had a shower.