submit questions for the Essex Police Challenge

[Caroline]

I think, what Caroline means, is that there were only two people who could ever possibly have been in the frame, this is due to the phone call Jeremy claims he received.

Therefore anything which indicates that Sheila was not responsible,  equally indicates that Jeremy was.

This was the courts perspective also.

That is exactly what I mean. Thanks Hartley! (Although I thought it was perfectly obvious).

[Caroline]

Incorrect Hartley for Caroline said that Jeremy put himself in the frame by inventing a phone call. A phone that cannot be proved either way.

If he's the killer the phone call didn't happen.

Weren't you just saying that people have a right to believe what they choose without being 'ridiculed'? I imagine that includes NOT having a moderator calling their opinions 'utter rubbish'. I believe he invented the phone call - if you think he's guilty, it's a given! So it's not rubbish at all - but common sense! 

[guest2181]

Incorrect Hartley for Caroline said that Jeremy put himself in the frame by inventing a phone call. A phone that cannot be proved either way.

I'm not sure how to explain it any other way.

If Sheila is innocent, then the phone call didn't take place.

That would mean that JB invented the phone call, which then puts him the frame and pretty much proves his guilt.

This is all on the basis that there is other evidence which eliminates Sheila.

Does that make sense?

[scipio_usmc]

Incorrect Hartley for Caroline said that Jeremy put himself in the frame by inventing a phone call. A phone that cannot be proved either way.

THis is a perfect example of precisely what I was saying about ineffective Jeremy advocates.  All you are doing is closing your eyes to the case made against Jeremy.  Aside from the fact that Appeal Court decisions, books and even postings from various people have laid out the case many times I have posted numerous threads that lay out the case quite clearly.

I noted the case has two different prongs.  Prong 1 established that Sheila didn't load a gun, didn't shoot anyone else, didn't beat anyone else and can't have killed herself.  Someone else was there who killed them and planted the gun on Sheila's body to frame her and then left.

Prong 2 established that Jeremy was that person who did it and a very large part of the evidence was the fact that Jeremy knew about the murders and claimed the reason why he learned about the trouble was because of Nevill called him to say Sheila was going crazy and had a gun.  Since Sheila didn't commit the murders obviously she didn't have the gun. Why would Nevill call Jeremy and falsely blame Sheila?  This means the call is not credible and that Jeremy must be the killer.  Even his own lawyers conceded this.  Additional evidence against Jeremy was provided by Julie's testimony as well as evidence he  staged ammunition in the kitchen after the murders and other lies he told in an effort to implicate Sheila.
There was eve evidence he called Julie before police and lied about the order after realizing it looked bad to admit he called her first though he should not have called her at all. 

Pretending there was no evidence Jeremy was involved is a waste of time the only way to establish his innocence is to refute the evidence that established Sheila didn't do anything. The defense needed to establish it was reasonably likely that Sheila did it and that Julie was reasonably likely to have been lying.

 

   

[Caroline]

Phone-call or not,wouldn't amount to the most important evidence. When Jeremy could no longer contact his father and if there'd been an engaged tone,he'd naturally have assumed that his father was contacting the police,which you would assume. Was it an engaged tone,or was it a drawn-out tone/signal which would indicate a handset having been left off its cradle ?
If it was an engaged tone which Jeremy had asserted,then it meant that someone was using the phone.

So Jeremy was jailed on his assumption that his father had rang the police ? Without other evidence,it's Jeremy's word against the prosecution.
 Though it was a foregone conclusion over the " blood in the silencer debacle " that the judge had brainwashed everyone into saying it was Sheila's,so what chance Jeremy anyway ? May as well add a few more probably's and maybe's to the collection.

The alleged phone call is the crux of the case - I'm shocked that people still can't see this after years of debate!! 

[lookout]

 Sadly,there's a lot of evidence which points to Sheila,and it's no use saying that Jeremy was emulating her actions when he allegedly killed everyone because he hadn't got a clue about her illness nor did he or his family realise just how ill she was.
When it was said that Sheila had deteriorated,was there anything put into place since this remark was made ? Not to my knowledge. There was no support written up,no follow up or change in medication ordered,so were we to understand that nothing more could be done ? That was the way it looked to me.

[guest154]

Sadly,there's a lot of evidence which points to Sheila, and it's no use saying that Jeremy was emulating her actions when he allegedly killed everyone because he hadn't got a clue about her illness nor did he or his family realise just how ill she was.
When it was said that Sheila had deteriorated,was there anything put into place since this remark was made ? Not to my knowledge. There was no support written up,no follow up or change in medication ordered,so were we to understand that nothing more could be done ? That was the way it looked to me.

What evidence do you think points to Sheila?

[guest2181]

The alleged phone call is the crux of the case - I'm shocked that people still can't see this after years of debate!! 

See what?   

[Jan]

The alleged phone call is the crux of the case - I'm shocked that people still can't see this after years of debate!! 

Of course that is obvious - but show me where someone has proved it did not happen?

It might seem unlikely - but it is still possible that it did happen because the fact is none of us know what happened - not 100%

So could the call from NB to Jeremy have happened ? Yes

Could someone have forced him to make the call - remote possibility .

If the call did not happen - of course he is guilty .

If police had the proof it did not happen I am sure they would have produced it by now  because it would have saved them a lot of hassle over the years. So I don't see that we are missing the "obvious"

[John]

What evidence do you think points to Sheila?

Best not hold your breath Mat!   :D

Lookout has a bee in her bonnet over Bamber but I have seen this all before.  Lost count of the number of people who swore he was innocent over the years but came to realise the truth in the end.

For nearly thirty years the world has been promised new evidence and can breakthrough in this case but predictably it was always a damp squid.  Even his last lawyer couldn't get past the evidence and the best he hoped for was that the conviction was unsafe.

[Jane]

Sadly,there's a lot of evidence which points to Sheila,and it's no use saying that Jeremy was emulating her actions when he allegedly killed everyone because he hadn't got a clue about her illness nor did he or his family realise just how ill she was.
When it was said that Sheila had deteriorated,was there anything put into place since this remark was made ? Not to my knowledge. There was no support written up,no follow up or change in medication ordered,so were we to understand that nothing more could be done ? That was the way it looked to me.

Sadly, I can see how Sheila's condition makes it possible for some to claim that she was responsible BUT if her"condition" is looked at from a different angle it's more than possible to see how she COULDN'T have done it.

We know that her meds had been DRASTICALLY reduced without any monitoring. Scipio tells us that 200 mg of Haloperidol was way to high a dose causing heaviness of limbs, lack of coordination and lethargy yet that dose had been HALVED and STILL she appeared to be suffering these symptoms. Could it be that those were the symptoms NOT of over medication but depression? If this WAS the case -and the circumstances of Sheila's life at that time do nothing to rule it out as a possibility- she could easily have been in that place in depression which is rather more safe for the sufferer than when it starts to lift. That place is so low that they don't possess the energy to inflict damage on themselves or others. When June told Pam that she was concerned about Sheila's lack of interest in helping in the house or doing things with the children she could just as easily have been describing depression as an incipient psychotic episode.

[maggie]

Of course that is obvious - but show me where someone has proved it did not happen?

It might seem unlikely - but it is still possible that it did happen because the fact is none of us know what happened - not 100%

So could the call from NB to Jeremy have happened ? Yes

Could someone have forced him to make the call - remote possibility .

If the call did not happen - of course he is guilty .

If police had the proof it did not happen I am sure they would have produced it by now  because it would have saved them a lot of hassle over the years. So I don't see that we are missing the "obvious"

I agree, jan there is no proof at all that Nevill didn't call Jeremy, some people may find it unlikely etc. but they don't know the truth any more than anyone else does.  There are always many possibilities just because some are unlikely doesn't mean they can be dismissed out of hand.

[Caroline]

Sadly,there's a lot of evidence which points to Sheila,and it's no use saying that Jeremy was emulating her actions when he allegedly killed everyone because he hadn't got a clue about her illness nor did he or his family realise just how ill she was.
When it was said that Sheila had deteriorated,was there anything put into place since this remark was made ? Not to my knowledge. There was no support written up,no follow up or change in medication ordered,so were we to understand that nothing more could be done ? That was the way it looked to me.

What evidence? Of course Jeremy knew about her illness - he called her 'a nutter'.

[lookout]

What evidence do you think points to Sheila?

  Were you not aware that she was ill, then, ?
 In Sheila's mind latterly,she thought that everyone was colluding against her to take away her children. Her ex-husband,even her father who she once relied on for support.Everyone was projecting evil,in her mind. She saw her friend Freddie as the Devil. As for her mother,the relationship was always a bad one.

How is it you're so certain of Jeremy's guilt ? Because everyone else says so ??

[Jane]

Of course that is obvious - but show me where someone has proved it did not happen?

It might seem unlikely - but it is still possible that it did happen because the fact is none of us know what happened - not 100%

So could the call from NB to Jeremy have happened ? Yes

Could someone have forced him to make the call - remote possibility .

If the call did not happen - of course he is guilty .

If police had the proof it did not happen I am sure they would have produced it by now  because it would have saved them a lot of hassle over the years. So I don't see that we are missing the "obvious"

Jan, would you be willing to see Jeremy released PURELY on the possibility that a call MAY have been made? I ask because it seems to me that THAT(alleged) call is the crux of the case. As for anyone being able to prove that something DIDN'T happen, I don't think it's yet possible to prove a negative.