Bamber's 1985 claim that Sheila committed child abuse:

[Jane]

Jeremy had allegedly told her well in advance, his intentions for God's sake. How much more hinting does one need ? Even down to allegedly telling of his plans. Plus he'd allegedly told RWB. JB might as well have gone through the village with a megaphone.

My friend's life was threatened by her husband's mentally ill ex-wife -who had actually been married and divorced again- the police were informed but they said they were powerless to do anything unless a crime was committed. Standing on my friend's doorstep, in itself WASN'T a crime, but if she'd put one foot over the threshold, it would have been. It didn't matter WHAT Jeremy had told her if the crime hadn't yet been committed.

[nugnug]

Or Jeremy.

Nothing to show they did in this case. Saying they have got it wrong before doesn't mean that they did this time, you need evidence to prove they got it wrong.  People have killed for money before, if I was to repeat that over and over wouldn't convince people that Jeremy did.

wellthey got it wrong one way or the other becouse they acused her in the first place.

[guest154]

wellthey got it wrong one way or the other becouse they acused her in the first place.

They investigated. They didn't go in saying she is guilty or innocent of child abuse.

[Jane]

It wouldn't be thankless if the right people were targeted.

They don't have their crimes written across their foreheads, Lookout.

[lookout]

Hard to know who the right people are until you target them. Social services work alot from reports from the general public.

It's usually from the police if they're attending domestics. Anonymous-calls are not often taken seriously as it's normally someone with an axe to grind against that person,unless the name is already on the register. There has to be proof of injury or neglect.

[nugnug]

who acused her in the first place they dont normally get involved unless an acusation is made.

[lookout]

The police had attended the " taxi " incident,who in turn would automatically contact social services when it involves children.

[nugnug]

taxi indedent ?

[Jane]

The police had attended the " taxi " incident,who in turn would automatically contact social services when it involves children.

Her social worker attended hospital with her to vouch for her. Lookout, I REALLY think it's time this was bought to a close. Sheila DIDN'T deliberately harm her children.

[nugnug]

what colin say about all this.

[lookout]

taxi indedent ?

One of the children must have fiddled with the handle and out he fell. Sheila probably wasn't concentrating.

[Jane]

what colin say about all this.

No idea, Nugs. As it was a genuine accident, there'd have been no need for him to be officially informed.

[Jane]

One of the children must have fiddled with the handle and out he fell. Sheila probably wasn't concentrating.

She was apparently distracted by/was pondering something her mother had said.

[maggie]

well they get it wrong a lot both ways.

cases are wrongly closed somtimes.

Thank goodness some people want to work in child protection.  They are the most overworked, abused and stressed workforce but they continue to do their very best.
There is always human error in any profession and tragic mistakes are made but many children live longer and happier lives because some are willing to step outside their comfort zone to try to protect neglected and abused children, women and men.

[Caroline]

who acused her in the first place they dont normally get involved unless an acusation is made.

That is completely incorrect, SW's get involved to actually HELP when someone needs it. Sheila had been released from psychiatric care so SW's would have gotten involved to assist and to make sure she was able to look after her children and herself.