In answer to your first point number 1.
He was not worried about his safety the police were. At this point he was not aware of anyone being shot and neither were the police. It was the police who arranged to meet Jeremy. Jeremy had asked if the police would pick him up on route but they said no.
He then phoned Julie to tell her something was wrong at the farm....She told him to go back to bed. Why would calling Julie make him a killer?
Police were worried about Jeremy's safety so they told him to go to the potential crime scene? That makes no sense at all. They would have told him to stay home if they were worried that his safety would be in jeopardy at WHF. Jeremy was told to go to WHF because he was the one who summoned the police. They didn't want to just wake up the occupants in what could potentially be a prank call. Furthermore they wanted him there to be able to provide all relevant information he possessed to the police.
Jeremy told AE that he was worried for his safety and that is why he didn't rush over to WHF but instead called police. But he went beyond simply claiming he was worried about his safety he claimed he was worried that Sheila forced Nevill to make the call in order to lure him there so she could murder him as well as the other family members. So he was claiming that at the time of the call he feared Sheila was planning to execute the entire family but one member was missing- Jeremy so Sheila forced Nevill to call Jeremy to get him there so she would be able to execute him along with them. WHY would he think based upon the call he claimed to receive that she planned to execute everyone and thus forced Nevill to lure him there? If you can't see how damning such a claim is then your bias is clouding your judgment even more than normally.
It could be that this is how the burns tie in. Jeremy may have planned to try to get police to believe that Sheila forced her father to make the call to sucker Jeremy there by burning him. He might have planted the burns for that reason. But police never came to such conclusion and if Jeremy asserted such it might give away he did it so he could not push that. Whether he planned for that or not he provided that as a reason to AE for not going there.
It shows his deceptive mind at work that he thought up such and I think is a sign he had that in mind. But it was a claim he didn't make to police or at trial because it was harmful for the reasons I mentioned including the fact that if he did think that Sheila was planning to execute everyone then he should have immediately dialed 999 not have called Julie and taken his sweet time looking up phone numbers. He realized it was not a helpful claim so he didn't repeat it in the future he only made it to AE.
2. Where does it say that on the 6th August that he had wanted to teach Sheila how to use a gun. Its not in Jeremy's statement and there was no need to have her prints on the rifle for if he had thought this then he would have ensured that all her prints were over the rifle when he was supposed to have organised it a suicide.
Jeremy initially told police he trained her how to fire the murder weapon and that she had fired it. He dropped the claim after he realized it made him look bad and decided to match his statements to those he heard the family giving which was that she had no interest in guns and he hadn't known her to fire any. June told Pam that he was trying to teach her to load his rifle but that she had no interest in learning. Pam then told her husband of the conversation and he told police. The reason why he was trying to teach her is obvious he just wanted her to touch it to get her prints on it. He even told Julie he was scared that fresher prints got on the gun during the murders than the ones he planted thus indicating he got her to touch it in advance in an effort to get her prints on it.
Why would he teach her to shoot when she had no interest in learning? He was telling police she was crazy who teaches a crazy person to shoot? He realized it was a bad claim to have made because it is suspicious for him to have taught her so he stopped making it. He just used the claim initially to get those at the scene to believe she would be able to use it. After police were sufficiently convinced she did it he dropped the claim and meshed with that of the family that he didn't know her to shoot ever.
No one needs demonstrations on how to use guns its not rocket science and she was an adult who had be raised on a farm, a farm which in its daily life used guns. Are you telling me she never saw her father use a gun or she never saw any other person use a gun even though Sheila and Colin had been beaters up on a shot in Scotland?
This is a very stupid claim in light of out past debates. It demonstrates bias on your part that prevents you from facing the issue honestly. I have repeatedly noted that just because you see someone use a shotgun or bolt action rifle doesn't mean you will know how to load, unload and fire the weapon you saw operated let alone a semi-auto rifle which functions DIFFERENTLY. Until I made a big deal about it no one here (except perhaps NGB) even knew that the first round had to be manually fed into the chamber to get the weapon to work. No one here would have been able to get it to fire before it could be taken away let alone would know how to release the magazine in order to be able to then reload it.
I even posted an example of someone who grew up around shotguns who tried to kill US President Ford but failed because she didn't know the semi-auto she was using needed to have the first round manually chambered first before so when she pulled the trigger the gun didn't fire and she was disarmed before she could figure out what was wrong she though it just misfired.
You ignore this because you don't want to admit that Sheila would not have known how to use the gun and that had she slapped a magazine in it would not have gone off and Nevill would have been able to disarm her before she could ever figure out why it didn't fire. The gun also had a safety and if it was engaged that would be another problem she would have to deal with.
A girlfriend of one of my friends tried to open the cylinder of a revolver by pulling on the ejector rod like in the manner that cap guns that use disc caps opens. She couldn't figure out how to open it in order to reload it, we gave it to her loaded already and showed her how to shoot not how to unload it. Eventually we had to show her there is a thumb latch that push to the left in order to open it. People who were never taught about weapons have problems figuring out how to work the. We laughed but it is not as if we called her an idiot, guns have different designs and naturally one had to be trained to figure out how to work the properly.
You have this attitude that anyone can instantly know how to load, unload and fire any weapon in existence the first time they set out to use a weapon of any kind without needed any training of any kind. That is far from the case and while people can potentially figure it out given enough time that is dangerous both because they could unintentionally hurt themselves and others plus if someone is being confronted it would provide the opportunity for the person being confronted to disarm them.
Jeremy has never used the fact that he could have lured to WHF this would mean that his father was forced at gunpoint....and that is not what Jeremy had said and no one has ever said it....
He used it on AE but realized it was a damaging argument so didn't make it at trial or to police. Why was he telling different things to different people at different times? That is a signal he is not tellign the truth.
We are talking 1985 there was no reason for dailing 999 when all he had to do was call his local nick. Even if he had called 999 whose headquarters were next door to the nick it would have made no difference to the time any officers arrived at the scene....none at all.
The whole reason 999 exists is because it is an EASY number to remember. It exists so that people don't need to waste time looking for a phonebook to look up police station numbers. It is reserved for emergencies so that instead of waiting on hold to ge tthrough to someone who handles everything under the Sun that you speak to someone who handles emergencies. That is why 999 calls are taped but others are not.
You claim calling 999 would not have been faster than wasting time to look up the number of a station that ended up being empty is absurd. He wasted many minutes looking up 2 different police stations numbers and dialing waiting for someone to answer at the first station. He lost more time as the station he did get through to had to call the 999 operator anyway. It would have been much faster speaking directly from the 999 operator himself from the outset. After finding out the first station was unmanned so he got no answer he should have feared more stations would be unmanned because of the time of night and surely should have dialed 999 at that point. Nope he just looked up another number causally. He had no sense of urgency and thus exhibited no genuine sense of concern. If he had been genuinely concerned he would have rushed over or would have instantly dialed 999 nto have called Julie then wasted time looking up numbers. While you choose to ignore this because of bias you should try taking the blinders off to see how it looks to those who are not objective and not in the tank for Jeremy. Those are the people you have to try finding a way to convince and saying that dialing 999 would not be faster than looking up numbers and hoping to eventually find one where someone will be there to answer flops.
1985 is not different from now except we don't even use phonebooks much anymore and they are significantly smaller than phonebooks of old. Phonebooks of old we used as targets to shoot at the modern ones are way too skinny.
