Exhibits from the family

[Jane]

I know how the police work,April. 
Not sure if I've mentioned this before.I probably have. A friend of the family----a cop,was on night duty near the Manchester ship canal,years ago.Just before he was due to go off duty at 6am,he spotted a body floating downwards towards where he was,so he found a length of wood and kept pushing it away from him as far as he could or he'd be faced with a load of paperwork before he went off duty.
I'm going back years,but I don't doubt that avoidances similar to this still go on.

In one way,it was better for the new staff coming on duty as there would be a continuence of this one case,of hopefully the same officers for that day.
Continuity is key to progress. This,I feel didn't happen in the Bamber case as everyone's notes didn't tally at all. Or,certain things had been omitted which doesn't give a true overall description from each individual officer.
One said the rifle was on Sheila's body,another didn't see a rifle,and someone else said it was 18ins away from the body on the floor of the bedroom---------so which is it to be ?

I, too, have been regaled with police anecdotes. At the time I thought they were amusing. I suspect similar STILL happens in ALL public service employment.

We have to remember that when these notes were written they weren't written for our benefit and it's highly likely that not all personnel were present at the same time so it's possible that the rifle MAY have been moved and then put back, meaning all of it is true.

[Caroline]

For a month------why the sudden change though.? What was it that happened after a month ?

The family found a silencer (yeah I know  ) and Julie came forward. BUT there were officers who just weren't happy with the original decision anyway.

[Caroline]

I, too, have been regaled with police anecdotes. At the time I thought they were amusing. I suspect similar STILL happens in ALL public service employment.

We have to remember that when these notes were written they weren't written for our benefit and it's highly likely that not all personnel were present at the same time so it's possible that the rifle MAY have been moved and then put back, meaning all of it is true.

I also have had experience of dodgy coppers - one in particular destroyed a piece of evidence in order to get a conviction. However, I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush.

[lookout]

I, too, have been regaled with police anecdotes. At the time I thought they were amusing. I suspect similar STILL happens in ALL public service employment.

We have to remember that when these notes were written they weren't written for our benefit and it's highly likely that not all personnel were present at the same time so it's possible that the rifle MAY have been moved and then put back, meaning all of it is true.

Again,care hadn't been taken because gloves weren't worn when the rifle was moved as fingerprints belonging to an unknown male were found to be on it. Not really good enough when dealing with such a case.

Regarding the notes,which were a joke. Put together they'd have read like one of those " pass around " stories where a person starts something off and the next person continues and so on. Nothing matched.

Unfortunately,nobody's interested as the truth would open the biggest can of worms in history. This case is feared by those who should be helping. It's a political timebomb.

[Caroline]

Again,care hadn't been taken because gloves weren't worn when the rifle was moved as fingerprints belonging to an unknown male were found to be on it. Not really good enough when dealing with such a case.

Regarding the notes,which were a joke. Put together they'd have read like one of those " pass around " stories where a person starts something off and the next person continues and so on. Nothing matched.

Unfortunately,nobody's interested as the truth would open the biggest can of worms in history. This case is feared by those who should be helping. It's a political timebomb.

Nah 

[Jane]

Again,care hadn't been taken because gloves weren't worn when the rifle was moved as fingerprints belonging to an unknown male were found to be on it. Not really good enough when dealing with such a case.

Regarding the notes,which were a joke. Put together they'd have read like one of those " pass around " stories where a person starts something off and the next person continues and so on. Nothing matched.

Unfortunately,nobody's interested as the truth would open the biggest can of worms in history. This case is feared by those who should be helping. It's a political timebomb.

Lookout, in your efforts to make Jeremy innocent, on the grounds of gloves not being worn and, what appears to you to be Chinese Whisper notes, you're making it sound as if the MAJORITY of convictions are unsafe. IF that is so, it seems to me that an awful lot of people were in the wrong place at the wrong time. I may be naive but I don't believe that the WHOLE of the British police force is corrupt -although I'll admit that corruption exists- any more that I believe that all the consultants/surgeons in the NHS are drug taking alcoholics who leave instruments in patients. Errors occur EVERYWHERE but despite stamping our feet and demanding that it shouldn't happen, we can't make everything -ANYTHING!!!- 100% fail-safe.

[scipio_usmc]

Again,care hadn't been taken because gloves weren't worn when the rifle was moved as fingerprints belonging to an unknown male were found to be on it. Not really good enough when dealing with such a case.

Regarding the notes,which were a joke. Put together they'd have read like one of those " pass around " stories where a person starts something off and the next person continues and so on. Nothing matched.

Unfortunately,nobody's interested as the truth would open the biggest can of worms in history. This case is feared by those who should be helping. It's a political timebomb.

The rifle was moved by touching the sling swivels. The prints they lifted that could not be identified were only smudges. They could have belonged to Jeremy for all anyone knows. No one could be ruled in or out because they were incomplete. 

Those interested in the truth recognize Jeremy is guilty.  Those who don't want to face reality refuse to do so and make up all sorts of excuses to avoid facing Jeremy's guilt. 

[maggie]

Jeremy could not even remember her married name I think it is likely Jeremy did get her age wrong.  Many siblings end up being only ballpark right when it comes to their siblings ages even when not adopted. The age apart will fluctuate to make matters worse unless both have the same birthday in different years. The age gap grows or shrinks by a year at the birthday of one or the other.  For instance my brother is 1 year younger half the year but 2 years younger than me the other half.  Some people don't even know how old they are.  When you are adult you start ignoring it and losing count (sometimes intentionally).  I know people who have accidentally given their incorrect ages and needed to be corrected.  I also know people who screwed up their birthday.  My paternal grandmother had us celebrate her birthday the wrong day we found out after she died her birthday was actually a day earlier than we had thought!  Screwing up her age is the one thing that Jeremy could have reasonably done.  I would not read too much into such an error given what I have seen by others.

I agree but do dispute your reference to adoption the fact they were adopted siblings and not blood relations is irrelevant in this context IMO.

[scipio_usmc]

I agree but do dispute your reference to adoption the fact they were adopted siblings and not blood relations is irrelevant in this context IMO.

The fact they were both adopted makes it even less likely they would be able to remember the exact age of the other sibling. You won't have hospital records and the like sitting around the house you grew up in to constantly remind you of the birth year of your sibling(s).  I know not only the year but the exact hospital of mine because my mother framed such and I saw them so often I can still picture them in my mind today. You still have to do the math though to calculate ages when you know the year which opens the door to human error. When you are a child you keep track of exactly how old you are with precision because you can't wait to be older and are either constantly telling people on your own or being asked your age by others. Once you are of full legal age then you stop keeping track of your own age with the same dedication and even need to calculate your own age those rare occasions when people ask.  When it comes to calculating the age of a sibling you need to know their birth year and the less trappings there were when you were young the less likely you will know it accurately.

[Jane]

The fact they were both adopted makes it even less likely they would be able to remember the exact age of the other sibling. You won't have hospital records and the like sitting around the house you grew up in to constantly remind you of the birth year of your sibling(s).  I know not only the year but the exact hospital of mine because my mother framed such and I saw them so often I can still picture them in my mind today. You still have to do the math though to calculate ages when you know the year which opens the door to human error. When you are a child you keep track of exactly how old you are with precision because you can't wait to be older and are either constantly telling people on your own or being asked your age by others. Once you are of full legal age then you stop keeping track of your own age with the same dedication and even need to calculate your own age those rare occasions when people ask.  When it comes to calculating the age of a sibling you need to know their birth year and the less trappings there were when you were young the less likely you will know it accurately.

WHOA!!!! I'm not letting you get away with that one, Scipio!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sheila and Jeremy had been bought up as brother and sister YEARS before either knew of their adoption. We adopteds may not "have hospital records and the like sitting around the house" we grew up in but here in England we're not so stuck in the dark ages that we don't have birth certificates -albeit, shortened versions- which give our names, sex and date of birth. Hospital of birth would be good but not necessary. I see my reflection therefore I am. Apologies to Descartes.

[maggie]

The fact they were both adopted makes it even less likely they would be able to remember the exact age of the other sibling. You won't have hospital records and the like sitting around the house you grew up in to constantly remind you of the birth year of your sibling(s).  I know not only the year but the exact hospital of mine because my mother framed such and I saw them so often I can still picture them in my mind today. You still have to do the math though to calculate ages when you know the year which opens the door to human error. When you are a child you keep track of exactly how old you are with precision because you can't wait to be older and are either constantly telling people on your own or being asked your age by others. Once you are of full legal age then you stop keeping track of your own age with the same dedication and even need to calculate your own age those rare occasions when people ask.  When it comes to calculating the age of a sibling you need to know their birth year and the less trappings there were when you were young the less likely you will know it accurately.

I assure you Scipio the fact they are adopted makes no difference in this instance. I know from first hand experience.

[scipio_usmc]

WHOA!!!! I'm not letting you get away with that one, Scipio!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sheila and Jeremy had been bought up as brother and sister YEARS before either knew of their adoption. We adopteds may not "have hospital records and the like sitting around the house" we grew up in but here in England we're not so stuck in the dark ages that we don't have birth certificates -albeit, shortened versions- which give our names, sex and date of birth. Hospital of birth would be good but not necessary. I see my reflection therefore I am. Apologies to Descartes.

Many keep birth certificates in locations where they are easily accessible?  Most people hide official government documents.  Until I got my first job I was not even allowed to see my Social Security card and I have no idea when I was finally able to handle my birth certificate for the first time I think it was to get my driver's license when I was 17. All such documents were locked away. My wife took up where my mother left off, I have not seen my birth certificate or social security card in several years my wife locked them up in a safe along with hers, our marriage certificate, cash, jewelry or whatever else she has hidden away. I don't think I have ever seen any of my siblings' government records to this day.

The further children are in age the less likely they share interests together and will religiously know each other's ages.  To complicate matters they were sent to boarding schools so were not even living together all the time till the oldest officially left home. Jeremy was 23 at the time of the murders and Sheila was 28.  Saying she was 26 or 27 was not that far off and within the realm of reasonable error under all the circumstances. It appears he said 27 so was only off by a year.

It is highly unlikely that Jeremy told West 26 but West incorrectly recorded it as 27 yet correctly told Bonnett the 26.  Much more likely is that he correctly recorded Jeremy saying 27 but screwed up when telling Bonnett or Bonnett somehow misheard him or misrecorded it.

The notion the 26 on Bonnett's log means Nevill must have phoned Bonnett is one of the most absurd arguments routinely made.  Nevill getting his daughter's age 2 years wrong is rather unbelievable since parents seem to know their children's ages better than their own.  The 26 is infinitely more likely an error between West and Bonnett than involving anyone else.

 

[Jane]

Many keep birth certificates in locations where they are easily accessible?  Most people hide official government documents.  Until I got my first job I was not even allowed to see my Social Security card and I have no idea when I was finally able to handle my birth certificate for the first time I think it was to get my driver's license when I was 17. All such documents were locked away. My wife took up where my mother left off, I have not seen my birth certificate or social security card in several years my wife locked them up in a safe along with hers, our marriage certificate, cash, jewelry or whatever else she has hidden away. I don't think I have ever seen any of my siblings' government records to this day.

The further children are in age the less likely they share interests together and will religiously know each other's ages.  To complicate matters they were sent to boarding schools so were not even living together all the time till the oldest officially left home. Jeremy was 23 at the time of the murders and Sheila was 28.  Saying she was 26 or 27 was not that far off and within the realm of reasonable error under all the circumstances. It appears he said 27 so was only off by a year.

It is highly unlikely that Jeremy told West 26 but West incorrectly recorded it as 27 yet correctly told Bonnett the 26.  Much more likely is that he correctly recorded Jeremy saying 27 but screwed up when telling Bonnett or Bonnett somehow misheard him or misrecorded it.

The notion the 26 on Bonnett's log means Nevill must have phoned Bonnett is one of the most absurd arguments routinely made.  Nevill getting his daughter's age 2 years wrong is rather unbelievable since parents seem to know their children's ages better than their own.  The 26 is infinitely more likely an error between West and Bonnett than involving anyone else.

I will agree totally that where there are vast age gaps and numerous children birth dates -possibly even names!- probably get forgotten. I didn't see my birth certificate until I was an adult although I knew it to be a shortened version.

 Birth certificates per se aren't the question, though. It was your suggestion -as I read it- that because they were adopted they weren't as likely to know the age of the other. Do you not think it would be as, if not MORE, important to start the bonding process with two unrelated adopted siblings as with their biological counterparts and is not each remembering the other's special day a natural way of doing it? The Bamber children didn't learn of their adoption until just before Jeremy went to boarding school -8 years old? Sheila COULD have been around 10!!!!-  FAR to late to have left it although Sheila MAY have learned of it earlier and told not to tell Jeremy. Not certain how THAT would have worked in practice, it's a lot to expect of a child and VERY unfair. They MUST have known the others birthday by that time. If they didn't something was already very wrong.

 Moving on to their adulthood, having been separated by schooling, leaving home, trips abroad, marriage ect, it doesn't in the least surprise me that Jeremy may have got her age wrong. It would probably have been more by good luck than judgement had he got it right.

[scipio_usmc]

I will agree totally that where there are vast age gaps and numerous children birth dates -possibly even names!- probably get forgotten. I didn't see my birth certificate until I was an adult although I knew it to be a shortened version.

 Birth certificates per se aren't the question, though. It was your suggestion -as I read it- that because they were adopted they weren't as likely to know the age of the other. Do you not think it would be as, if not MORE, important to start the bonding process with two unrelated adopted siblings as with their biological counterparts and is not each remembering the other's special day a natural way of doing it? The Bamber children didn't learn of their adoption until just before Jeremy went to boarding school -8 years old? Sheila COULD have been around 10!!!!-  FAR to late to have left it although Sheila MAY have learned of it earlier and told not to tell Jeremy. Not certain how THAT would have worked in practice, it's a lot to expect of a child and VERY unfair. They MUST have known the others birthday by that time. If they didn't something was already very wrong.

 Moving on to their adulthood, having been separated by schooling, leaving home, trips abroad, marriage ect, it doesn't in the least surprise me that Jeremy may have got her age wrong. It would probably have been more by good luck than judgement had he got it right.

Knowing a birthday and birth year are 2 different things.  When young you will see the candles on the cake and know the exact age of your siblings.  It won't be the result of calculations it will be from seeing the signs or candles that say happy 8th Birthday. When that stops you lose count of which birthday they are having. It just becomes happy birthday and only milestones are celebrated with a special sign or card. Adoptees are even less likely to see things that would ingrain a birth year in their mind.  It is an added handicap in an issue with plenty of handicaps already. 

[Jane]

Knowing a birthday and birth year are 2 different things.  When young you will see the candles on the cake and know the exact age of your siblings.  It won't be the result of calculations it will be from seeing the signs or candles that say happy 8th Birthday. When that stops you lose count of which birthday they are having. It just becomes happy birthday and only milestones are celebrated with a special sign or card. Adoptees are even less likely to see things that would ingrain a birth year in their mind.  It is an added handicap in an issue with plenty of handicaps already.

I agree that children will be more concerned with the number of candles on the cake than the year of their sibling's birth. The birth year may not arise until mental arithmetic time, or later. I HAVE to write down birth dates because I'm not numerically literate. I'm far from certain about how you've come to that conclusion about adoptees but I am my only frame of reference. I think between us we've thrown in enough variables for the age error to have occurred in any number of ways.