outlandish Theory's

[Caroline]

I get where they were coming from too jane. It must have been hard knowing that june and nevills son was going to own half of thier farms etc.anne eaton and the boutflours knew exactly what the stakes were.

would they have framed him for the money..... well as i said they had the same motive as jb and its a fact they weren't completely honest to the jury about benefiting were they.

Same motive? Motive for what?

[Jane]

Yes it is ambigious and likely it would have been put within there other joint assetts.

Had it been revealed in court the jury would have completely understood that they were going to benefit which was the point of asking.

they should havd known

I feel as if I'm banging my head against a brick wall here. Had counsel wanted the answer to the question "Will your family benefit from Jeremy being convicted", THAT would have been the question they asked. It was with good reason that they didn't ask that question, instead asking if HE would benefit from Jeremy's conviction.

[Steve_uk]

(1) - Mugfords evidence is too scatty, and unreliable. She was a woman scorned, hell bent on causing Jeremy as much trouble as possible. The 31+ interviews she had with the police were clearly sessions during which DS Jones, and DC Barlow, schooled her on how to present her evidence. She was also motivated by cash incentives should Jeremy be convicted. She was treated like a VIP, put up in a hotel, all expenses paid for. If any of her evidence was true, she should have been prosecuted in the same way Myra Hindley, Rose West and Maxine Carr, were implicated, charged and convicted. Her account cannot be factually true, otherwise she would have been in the dock with Jeremy...

(2) - Silencer belonging to anshuzt rifle was not used in shooting of Sheila Caffell, if it had been used police would have known about it, before the relatives did...

(3) - Jeremy did receive a call from his father, there is evidence regarding this in his witness statements, and trial testimony. No evidence exists or was relied upon to contradict this fact (unless you accept Jeremy shot Sheila, and set the scene by him placing the anshuzt rifle on her body to create the impression that she had shot herself - in which case, how could the same rifle be photographed resting against the bedroom window (photo' 23) prior to 'it' being then photographed upon her body, as per crime scene photographs, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32, etc)...

Julie Mugfords testimony was tainted, the Bamber owned Silencer was not used in Sheila' shooting, and Ralph Bamber did make a call to Jeremy...

Jeremy never felt part of anything at the White House,shut out emotionally by June and unable to emulate his once hero Nevill,who himself failed to conceal the disappointment he felt in how his son had developed. With the death of his second sister Diana in 1968 he retreated to his own sequestered world of reminiscing on times which didn't include either child. June was a wife first and foremost and not a mother,which only reinforced the children's estrangement whenever they returned from boarding school to that inexpressive, loveless vacuum which was White House Farm. Jeremy began to understand the justification for this state of affairs and consoled himself with materialism;Sheila contrarily was preoccupied with cognitive development where money was a side issue.

The sad fact is,in my opinion,that Jeremy never telephoned Nevill in his whole life,nor vice versa.

[mike tesko]

The jury were duped by the fabricated crime scene photographs in their possession when they retired to consider their verdict. They had it drummed into their heads that all the photographs which showed the anshuzt rifle resting upon  Sheila's body, was as the firearms team had found it upon entering the main bedroom at the farmhouse, and that Jeremy Bamber had set the death scene of his sister by positioning that rifle on her body after he had killed her, to give the impression that she had shot herself by use of that rifle. There were 8 consecutive photographs, which all showed Sheila's body with the anshuzt rifle resting upon it, with her right hand fingers close to the trigger mechanism, and the muzzle of the rifle pointing in the general area of her chin / throat (photo's, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32), yet crime scene photograph No. 23 shows the same rifle resting against the bedroom window, before police shifted it, onto Sheila Caffells body. The integrity of the crime scene, and in particular, the sequence with which certain photographs were taken, has been significantly undermined, and exposed as a clear cut fabrication in the prosecutions case:-

(1) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmCART1vcCo

[Jane]

The jury were duped by the fabricated crime scene photographs in their possession when they retired to consider their verdict. They had it drummed into their heads that all the photographs which showed the anshuzt rifle resting upon  Sheila's body, was as the firearms team had found it upon entering the main bedroom at the farmhouse, and that Jeremy Bamber had set the death scene of his sister by positioning that rifle on her body after he had killed her, to give the impression that she had shot herself by use of that rifle. There were 8 consecutive photographs, which all showed Sheila's body with the anshuzt rifle resting upon it, with her right hand fingers close to the trigger mechanism, and the muzzle of the rifle pointing in the general area of her chin / throat (photo's, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32), yet crime scene photograph No. 23 shows the same rifle resting against the bedroom window, before police shifted it, onto Sheila Caffells body. The integrity of the crime scene, and in particular, the sequence with which certain photographs were taken, has been significantly undermined, and exposed as a clear cut fabrication in the prosecutions case:-

(1) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmCART1vcCo

Is it possible there have been one or two of those photos here?

[mike tesko]

Is it possible there have been one or two of those photos here?

Yes, they are already posted up on the forum, along with the photographic records, and testimony of Detective Inspector Ron Cook (SOCO), and Police Officer David Bird (SOCO)...

[Jane]

Yes, they are already posted up on the forum, along with the photographic records, and testimony of Detective Inspector Ron Cook (SOCO), and Police Officer David Bird (SOCO)...

And, if memory serves me correctly, some very poor, female Bamber lookalikes?

[mike tesko]

And, if memory serves me correctly, some very poor, female Bamber lookalikes?

No, the facts of the matter in this instance - anshuzt rifle was photographed on Sheila's body, (Crime Scene Photographs, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32) after the same rifle was photographed resting against the main bedroom window (23). Don't even try to manipulate the true facts of the case...

[Jane]

No, the facts of the matter in this instance - anshuzt rifle was photographed on Sheila's body, (Crime Scene Photographs, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32) after the same rifle was photographed resting against the main bedroom window (23). Don't even try to manipulate the true facts of the case...

 "In THIS instance"!!!! You've obviously listened to more barristers than most of us.

[mike tesko]

 "In THIS instance"!!!! You've obviously listened to more barristers than most of us.

Solicitors, Barristers, and QC's - yes. I have witnessed at first hand the quality of their approach, including the approach made by prosecutors, and the trial judges, themselves...

I have a good working knowledge of how all parties could, would, and did react...

[Jane]

Solicitors, Barristers, and QC's - yes. I have witnessed at first hand the quality of their approach, including the approach made by prosecutors, and the trial judges, themselves...

I have a good working knowledge of how all parties could, would, and did react...

You obviously listened and learned

[mike tesko]

You obviously listened and learned

Yes love, I have...

If I am honest, I must admit that I was impressed by the arguments of all parties...

If I have learned anything from being a witness to all these different arguments, it is that evidence is not always what it appears to be. The truth, or it's interpretation, is open to interpretation. The interpretation is  subject (I think) to anyone's own interpretation based upon an individuals personal experience...

[Jane]

Yes love, I have...

If I am honest, I must admit that I was impressed by the arguments of all parties...

If I have learned anything from being a witness to all these different arguments, it is that evidence is not always what it appears to be. The truth, or it's interpretation, is open to interpretation. The interpretation is  subject (I think) to anyone's own interpretation based upon an individuals personal experience...

And with that, I agree 100%

[notsure]

Same motive? Motive for what?
[/quote,

Money

[mike tesko]

And with that, I agree 100%

OK, Good. In the past I have benefited from the this approach, but been disadvantaged on other occasions. My overall interpretation of this process, is that the truth is not always achieved, obtained, or established...