Another MASSIVE Lie

[Jane]

The risk in this case is overwhelming and any plan to kill the family would be unsustainable set against that backdrop according to reasonable doubt.  If Jeremy had any psychological or personality defects it would have been highlighted before the trial or after it and would certainly be more evident in prison.  If Jeremy couldn’t acquire a suitable weapon to carry out the crime then he doesn’t do it. 

I am asking those who think that Jeremy is guilty to challenge their own thinking,  see the crime through a different lens and put themselves in Jeremy’s shoes.  I would like to see a plan of action and a narrative of the crime that results in the staged suicide of Sheila from the viewpoint that nothing yet has happened.  I am challenging those to posters to get from point “a” to “z” taking into account honestly all the variables that could intervene in the plan and arriving at the intended outcome of the staged suicide of Sheila beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hoots!

You may see the risks more clearly than Jeremy did. Psychopaths are risk takers because they have no fear. Therefore it's probably not possible for you to see it as Jeremy would have. I find condescending your request for us to challenge our thinking. There are numerous educated and thinking members here who have done precisely that..........................and find Jeremy guilty.

[maggie]

The risk in this case is overwhelming and any plan to kill the family would be unsustainable set against that backdrop according to reasonable doubt.  If Jeremy had any psychological or personality defects it would have been highlighted before the trial or after it and would certainly be more evident in prison.  If Jeremy couldn’t acquire a suitable weapon to carry out the crime then he doesn’t do it. 

I am asking those who think that Jeremy is guilty to challenge their own thinking,  see the crime through a different lens and put themselves in Jeremy’s shoes.  I would like to see a plan of action and a narrative of the crime that results in the staged suicide of Sheila from the viewpoint that nothing yet has happened.  I am challenging those to posters to get from point “a” to “z” taking into account honestly all the variables that could intervene in the plan and arriving at the intended outcome of the staged suicide of Sheila beyond reasonable doubt.
Hoots!

I believed JB innocent for 2 years then the past year I have come to realise this cannot be so and have had to change my stance.
No one can take into account all the variables in this crime as there are too many to mention. Anyway I don't do scenarios, to my mind they are guess work and prove nothing but I would be interested to hear your opinion of what you believe happened if you want to give it.
My mind is open to change and I am willing to consider any new scenarios supporting innocence but for the present at least I have to go with guilty for various reasons. I cannot excuse the 'dodgy' areas anymore, the facts which don't quite gel.
The bottom line is why did EP frame Jeremy Bamber? What were they covering up?
I don't go with the idea they shot Sheila and covered that up by accusing JB, why would they?
For a start they ran with the belief that Sheila did it and committed suicide so they already had a cover up if they believed they needed it. Why complicate a simple murder/suicide by suddenly accusing her brother of multiple murder causing an embarrassing and humiliating media frenzy all to cover up what? The only answer I have heard to this question is that the police shot Sheila on entry or at some other time.
I can see it is possible if Sheila was alive when they broke into the farmhouse that they may have shot her in panic, self defence or some other reason but as I've already said the suicide verdict would cover this up if it was necessary but why would it be necessary to cover up a raid team shooting of a violent P.S. who had killed both her children and her parents? There would be an internal investigation and the verdict would have been self defence or at worst accidental death or the like.
If I could find a convincing argument for a cover up I would climb back up on the fence but I can't for now, I have to stay on what feels like unfamiliar ground ie. accepting the status quo 

[lookout]

Hi Maggie. Because you've been unsure for quite a while now it doesn't come as a surprise to me that you say he's guilty. You're certainly entitled to the way you feel about it all and it won't be held against you.

To me,the whole scenario tells me that it's too obvious for him to be the killer.

[lebaleb]

He doesn't need to have been framed by the police, only by JM.

[Caroline]

He doesn't need to have been framed by the police, only by JM.

JM didn't put blood in the silencer and hide it in the gun cupboard.

[Caroline]

I believed JB innocent for 2 years then the past year I have come to realise this cannot be so and have had to change my stance.
No one can take into account all the variables in this crime as there are too many to mention. Anyway I don't do scenarios, to my mind they are guess work and prove nothing but I would be interested to hear your opinion of what you believe happened if you want to give it.
My mind is open to change and I am willing to consider any new scenarios supporting innocence but for the present at least I have to go with guilty for various reasons. I cannot excuse the 'dodgy' areas anymore, the facts which don't quite gel.
The bottom line is why did EP frame Jeremy Bamber? What were they covering up?
I don't go with the idea they shot Sheila and covered that up by accusing JB, why would they?
For a start they ran with the belief that Sheila did it and committed suicide so they already had a cover up if they believed they needed it. Why complicate a simple murder/suicide by suddenly accusing her brother of multiple murder causing an embarrassing and humiliating media frenzy all to cover up what? The only answer I have heard to this question is that the police shot Sheila on entry or at some other time.
I can see it is possible if Sheila was alive when they broke into the farmhouse that they may have shot her in panic, self defence or some other reason but as I've already said the suicide verdict would cover this up if it was necessary but why would it be necessary to cover up a raid team shooting of a violent P.S. who had killed both her children and her parents? There would be an internal investigation and the verdict would have been self defence or at worst accidental death or the like.
If I could find a convincing argument for a cover up I would climb back up on the fence but I can't for now, I have to stay on what feels like unfamiliar ground ie. accepting the status quo 

Excellent post Maggie and might I say ........ welcome to the dark side! 

[lookout]

JM didn't put blood in the silencer and hide it in the gun cupboard.

Neither did Jeremy.Better start looking for a pipette or medicine-dropper.

[Caroline]

The risk in this case is overwhelming and any plan to kill the family would be unsustainable set against that backdrop according to reasonable doubt.  If Jeremy had any psychological or personality defects it would have been highlighted before the trial or after it and would certainly be more evident in prison.  If Jeremy couldn’t acquire a suitable weapon to carry out the crime then he doesn’t do it. 

I am asking those who think that Jeremy is guilty to challenge their own thinking,  see the crime through a different lens and put themselves in Jeremy’s shoes.  I would like to see a plan of action and a narrative of the crime that results in the staged suicide of Sheila from the viewpoint that nothing yet has happened.  I am challenging those to posters to get from point “a” to “z” taking into account honestly all the variables that could intervene in the plan and arriving at the intended outcome of the staged suicide of Sheila beyond a reasonable doubt.
Hoots!

Many of us have done this lots of times but when I get the time, I'll do it again. In the mean time you need to consider and account for why EP would fit up Jeremy Bamber because without a reason the whole notion of a fit up falls at the first hurdle - you haven't tackled the issue yet. You also need to consider when they decided to fit him up. Jeremy is relying on things like the logs that state 'two dead bodies in the kitchen. One dead male, one dead female'. So, if this was the case and if as suggested; Sheila wasn't dead and legged it upstairs, EP KNEW that Jeremy was innocent but framed him anyway - is that likely? Is it likely that Nevill called the police as is also suggested and that West wouldn't have mentioned to Jeremy that an incident at WHF had already been reported by his father? What reason would West have for not telling Jeremy that they were aware?

 

[Caroline]

Neither did Jeremy.Better start looking for a pipette or medicine-dropper.

So EP and JM decided to frame JB at the same time but independently?

[lookout]

So EP and JM decided to frame JB at the same time but independently?

Did I mention framing ? Did I mention EP or JM ?

[Caroline]

Did I mention framing ? Did I mention EP or JM ?

No you haven't nor did you give any explanation on how the blood got in the silencer. If he wasn't framed how did the blood get there?

[guest1199]

Many of us have done this lots of times but when I get the time, I'll do it again. In the mean time you need to consider and account for why EP would fit up Jeremy Bamber because without a reason the whole notion of a fit up falls at the first hurdle - you haven't tackled the issue yet. You also need to consider when they decided to fit him up. Jeremy is relying on things like the logs that state 'two dead bodies in the kitchen. One dead male, one dead female'. So, if this was the case and if as suggested; Sheila wasn't dead and legged it upstairs, EP KNEW that Jeremy was innocent but framed him anyway - is that likely? Is it likely that Nevill called the police as is also suggested and that West wouldn't have mentioned to Jeremy that an incident at WHF had already been reported by his father? What reason would West have for not telling Jeremy that they were aware?

Hi Caroline

I don’t doubt what you say about people having theorised Jeremy’s involvement in the case.  The problem is that forums are great for discussions but not for referencing.  Does this forum have an affiliate website or wiki so that I can access the information?  If not you could provide links to the previous discussions that you refer to.

I certainly take the rest of your post seriously.  What I have learned about this case is sketchy and sporadic.  The post I submitted previously, were made in 2013 so I’m going back a bit.   The reason I pursued the issue of Jeremy having to predict the unpredictable and plan the unplannable with an infinite number of variables in order to get the most exacting of outcomes is because I believe that failure of a sustainable narrative in that respect undermines the whole pro-guilt argument and also makes irrelevant all the points you make.  As far as I am concerned (at the moment) it’s a murder/suicide case with Jeremy being shoe-horned into a scenario that offers an easy way out for a jury.

I am reading the e-book on the case by Jeremy’s official website.  However I want to consider both sides of the argument with an up-to-date pro-guilt version of events if one is available.  Let me know if the one by Carol-Ann Lee is any good and advise me if anyone on this forum has reviewed it.

Hoots!

[Caroline]

Hi Caroline

I don’t doubt what you say about people having theorised Jeremy’s involvement in the case.  The problem is that forums are great for discussions but not for referencing.  Does this forum have an affiliate website or wiki so that I can access the information?  If not you could provide links to the previous discussions that you refer to.

I certainly take the rest of your post seriously.  What I have learned about this case is sketchy and sporadic.  The post I submitted previously, were made in 2013 so I’m going back a bit.   The reason I pursued the issue of Jeremy having to predict the unpredictable and plan the unplannable with an infinite number of variables in order to get the most exacting of outcomes is because I believe that failure of a sustainable narrative in that respect undermines the whole pro-guilt argument and also makes irrelevant all the points you make.  As far as I am concerned (at the moment) it’s a murder/suicide case with Jeremy being shoe-horned into a scenario that offers an easy way out for a jury.

I am reading the e-book on the case by Jeremy’s official website.  However I want to consider both sides of the argument with an up-to-date pro-guilt version of events if one is available.  Let me know if the one by Carol-Ann Lee is any good and advise me if anyone on this forum has reviewed it.

Hoots!

I read the ebook and give it a BIG THUMBS DOWN!

CAL's book is VERY GOOD.


I'm not sure what you mean by 'unplannable'? Clearly the plan was bad because he got caught - however, to go ahead with it, he simply had to believe it was workable. He knew the victims and I guess he planned around what he knew, or what he thought he knew. That with a mix of desperation and arrogance allowed him to believe he get away with it.

[guest1199]

I read the ebook and give it a BIG THUMBS DOWN!

I thought you'd say that.

CAL's book is VERY GOOD.

I thought you'd say that.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'unplannable'? Clearly the plan was bad because he got caught - however, to go ahead with it, he simply had to believe it was workable. He knew the victims and I guess he planned around what he knew, or what he thought he knew. That with a mix of desperation and arrogance allowed him to believe he get away with it.

So what was the plan?   No... I tell you what!  I'll refer you to your previous post and leave that for you to consider as you said you would.  In the meantime I'll go and read up on the books mentioned and I'll get back to you later....Much later.

Peace
Hoots!

[guest1199]

You may see the risks more clearly than Jeremy did. Psychopaths are risk takers because they have no fear. Therefore it's probably not possible for you to see it as Jeremy would have. I find condescending your request for us to challenge our thinking. There are numerous educated and thinking members here who have done precisely that..........................and find Jeremy guilty.

I'd like to see the psychiatrist's report or at least a diagnosis for Jeremy's psychopathy, either in prison or before.  I'm sorry that you find my request for you to challenge your thinking condecending.  I am willing to go forth and challenge my own thinking if it makes you feel better if only someone would come up with Jeremy's theory of the crime and plan of action.   

Peace
Hoots!