The Glasgow Herald newspaper cuttings.

[Jan]

Reading Chapter 10 of Carol Ann Lee's book again Dr. Ferguson tells us he initially diagnosed her with schizoaffective disorder,which turned out to be mistaken as he later claimed she was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. What surprised and shocked me was the doctor going further than what we already knew about her being obsessed with good and evil as concepts and the author quoting him as saying she had "expressed a measure of doing violence to her children..that she was capable of murdering them or communicating some ability for them to become evil or murderers at a later date."

I'm sure I hadn't read the above before in any of his four contributions in the Statements and Transcripts library. There is a footnote to the bit about Sheila needing evil to be cleansed in the CAL book but I'm not sure it extends to the part about her feeling able to murder them. When you look in the footnote the reference is Trial Testimony 1986,but I am unable to confirm exactly what he did say.

I remember reading that she could be a danger to her children - but not actually murdering them . And even then I am not sure of his full trial testimony .

The thing I have always questioned is whether Jeremy or her parents would have even known about her innermost thoughts? Because she may have only told her doctor these extreme personal worries.

[Steve_uk]

I remember reading that she could be a danger to her children - but not actually murdering them . And even then I am not sure of his full trial testimony .

The thing I have always questioned is whether Jeremy or her parents would have even known about her innermost thoughts? Because she may have only told her doctor these extreme personal worries.

You know Jan I'm wondering whether this piece of information was in the original book or whether it has been "sexed up" (to coin an expression) for the 30th anniversary.

[Jan]

Steve, I was very surprised by the amount of new information CAL managed to persuade Dr Ferguson to reveal about Sheila.

But in court I guess Ferguson  could only answer what he was asked - he could not volunteer information and as I said I am guessing Jeremy did not know all of her medical history or what she had revealed so he could not say to his counsel - ask about her thoughts about the children could he? And if all her medical history was not revealed to his defence I guess Jeremy would not have known .

[Jan]

You know Jan I'm wondering whether this piece of information was in the original book or whether it has been "sexed up" (to coin an expression) for the 30th anniversary.

I have not read the book yet but have it on my kindle so I will give it a go.

But I hope not . That's not really fair on anyone whatever the truth.

[Jan]

Family shot at point blank range,Bamber trial told. https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2507&dat=19861015&id=E4JDAAAAIBAJ&sjid=q6UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4879,3440832&hl=en

Was Jeremy straining at the leash to hit June first from three feet away as he burst into the bedroom,the remaining shots only a few inches away from all of them?

Dr. Ann Wilkinson claims halving the dose of Sheila's Haloperidol would have had no effect on schizophrenia to recur..

Its amazing the different descriptions of how Sheila was just before the murders

Some saying fit and well - others saying hardly able to hold a conversation or co-ordinate her movements . Some say tired - others saying she was happy - others saying disinterested in everything . No wonder its easy to chose statements to fit each scenario

[lookout]

Can I interrupt by asking when it was that the boys were due to join their father for their holidays ?

[Jan]

Can I interrupt by asking when it was that the boys were due to join their father for their holidays ?

from memory I think straight after they had stayed a few days at WHF - they were there so Neville and June could see them before they went away.

[Jane]

Can I interrupt by asking when it was that the boys were due to join their father for their holidays ?

Lookout, I THINK!! they were being picked up by their father on the Thursday and they were going to Norway on the Friday.

[Steve_uk]

As usual with the press some things wrong some things right .Interesting the figure of what he was going to inherit from his grandmother. Fancy risking 5 life sentences when you were going to inherit £125000. 

Plus she did not exactly change her will without persuasion did she considering the family said they had not told her about Jeremy being guilty.

This is another grey area because according to Ann Eaton the family were pressured by a housekeeper(Mrs. Peek?) to tell Mabel Speakman (Ann's mother) the shocking news. This they did but insist they did not mention Jeremy's name and they also insist Jeremy never came to visit during the August,presumably because he thought he was going to inherit from his parents. According to the relatives Mabel didn't ask about Jeremy until December,when by that stage he would be in prison. So the half share which he would have inherited through June dissipated in favour of Pamela,who got the whole lot.

[lookout]

from memory I think straight after they had stayed a few days at WHF - they were there so Neville and June could see them before they went away.

Okay,thanks.

[Jan]

Am I reading it wrong or was Julies main story for motive was him hating his family and hating working on the farm - hating his fathers farming methods etc?  Rather than the money?

wonder if  she was told about his grandmothers inheritance coming his way which kind of negated the money has being his main motive . £125000 was still quite a lot of money.

[Jan]

This is another grey area because according to Ann Eaton the family were pressured by a housekeeper(Mrs. Peek?) to tell Mabel Speakman (Ann's mother) the shocking news. This they did but insist they did not mention Jeremy's name and they also insist Jeremy never came to visit during the August,presumably because he thought he was going to inherit from his parents. According to the relatives Mabel didn't ask about Jeremy until December,when by that stage he would be in prison. So the half share which he would have inherited through June dissipated in favour of Pamela,who got the whole lot.

If you read Colins book they kept everyone away from granny . I would like to know more about this because what was said in court was it was his share - not Junes .  And I believe Pamela did not take the money in the end.

[Steve_uk]

Am I reading it wrong or was Julies main story for motive was him hating his family and hating working on the farm - hating his fathers farming methods etc?  Rather than the money?

wonder if  she was told about his grandmothers inheritance coming his way which kind of negated the money has being his main motive . £125000 was still quite a lot of money.

I think he wanted revenge on his parents more than anything. Sheila and the twins were an afterthought,but she was made a scapegoat which also gave him an alibi.

[lookout]

Lookout, I THINK!! they were being picked up by their father on the Thursday and they were going to Norway on the Friday.

Thankyou.-------which would have meant Sheila enduring and anticipating the prospect of spending the rest of her time at WHF until their return. I see.

[Steve_uk]

If you read Colins book they kept everyone away from granny . I would like to know more about this because what was said in court was it was his share - not Junes .  And I believe Pamela did not take the money in the end.

Mabel Speakman left half shares to her two daughters,Pamela and June,which is understandable. As things stood in August June's share would have passed directly to him.