Breakdown of the forensic evidence:

[lookout]

Not really Lookout, the evidence is a LOT more than that you just refuse to acknowledge it.

I wish I could see evidence,but I can't. I'm not the type not to acknowledge something at all.

[Caroline]

I wish I could see evidence,but I can't. I'm not the type not to acknowledge something at all.

You can't see the evidence on Jeremy because he had time to get rid. However, we're supposed to believe that Sheila battered Nevill senseless and causing MASSIVE injuries and nothing spattered on her nightdress, or her body - nothing at all? The first shot to her throat was at 45 degrees - a nye on impossible shot!

[David1819]

Not really Lookout, the evidence is a LOT more than that you just refuse to acknowledge it.

The only evidence linking Jeremy to the crime is the silencer yet you don't believe it was ever used. What then makes you believe Jeremy is guilty?

[Caroline]

The only evidence linking Jeremy to the crime is the silencer yet you don't believe it was ever used. What then makes you believe Jeremy is guilty?

The fake phone call and the fact that he is VERY selective in the questions he is willing to answer. There are MANY reasons - I don't believe you need physical evidence to prove guilt, in the case there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence all pointing to Jeremy.

[Steve_uk]

The telephone call is paramount because it gives Jeremy knowledge of the crime at this early stage. For those of us who believe there was very little communication between father and son throughout their lives, this purported telephone call is implausible. It wouldn't surprise me if the time Jeremy began to work longer hours on the Farm coincided with his heightened proxy threats about his family to Julie with the ulterior motive of lulling his parents into a false sense of security whilst all the time planning to do away with them.

[lookout]

The only evidence linking Jeremy to the crime is the silencer yet you don't believe it was ever used. What then makes you believe Jeremy is guilty?

I asked this before so your answer will be the same as I got-------circumstantial.

[David1819]

The fake phone call and the fact that he is VERY selective in the questions he is willing to answer. There are MANY reasons - I don't believe you need physical evidence to prove guilt, in the case there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence all pointing to Jeremy.

The only proof the phone call was fake was the silencer indicating Jeremy done it. Yet you don't believe the silencer was used? If the silencer was manufactured evidence then you cannot prove the phone call was fake or not. The entire case rests on the sound moderator,

This alleged mountain of circumstancial evidence its merely peoples interpretations of conversations and rumours circulating outside court, It don't actually prove anything.

[lookout]

Circumstantial evidence can get anyone a prison sentence whether they're guilty or not. The fact that they're hated and loathed and already committed petty crime is a starter.
For instance,there used to be a guy whose mother lived not far from here ( she's since moved  because of intimidation by neighbours ) the son had been in and out of prison over a 30 year period for preying on the elderly.Say for instance there had been a murder in the area,the first person to name would have been him because he was hated among the community and I wouldn't have had a good word to say about him because of the sort of crime he was into.
He would naturally be arrested and because of it being true that folk want to see the back of him,they hope that what they have to say would be enough to send him away again. My word against his that I " saw him enter a building ?" Easy. Who would the police believe,him or me ?

[Adam]

There are 17 pieces of forensic evidence linking Bamber directly to the crime.

These other pieces are all just as damaging as the silencer. However supporters doggedly stick with the stance that only the silencer is incriminating forensic evidence. So outlandish claims can be made about contamination and blood testing.

A supporter did acknowledge the thread about Sheila's legs being pulled after the second shot. But just said it was my leg being pulled.

The other 13 pieces of forensic evidence are also very damaging.

[Steve_uk]

The only proof the phone call was fake was the silencer indicating Jeremy done it. Yet you don't believe the silencer was used? If the silencer was manufactured evidence then you cannot prove the phone call was fake or not. The entire case rests on the sound moderator,

This alleged mountain of circumstancial evidence its merely peoples interpretations of conversations and rumours circulating outside court, It don't actually prove anything.

Julie was not some tart Jeremy picked up on a bar stool in the Frog and Beans. They had been going out for eighteen months and slept in the honeymoon suite of a top London hotel. I don't think Jeremy had met any woman quite like her, and as he was to tell her post-murders had "entrusted my life in your hands". As for the telephone call, Nevill is unlikely to call the very person he thinks is planning a shooting accident with himself the recipient, yet even he baulked at believing the son he had adopted would do away with them all.

If the silencer was manufactured evidence this does not in itself render Jeremy innocent, merely that the relatives were desperate to be taken seriously by law enforcement and concocted their own scheme to sex up the evidence,shocking as this course of action may have been.

[Adam]

Julie was not some tart Jeremy picked up on a bar stool in the Frog and Beans. They had been going out for eighteen months and slept in the honeymoon suite of a top London hotel. I don't think Jeremy had met any woman quite like her, and as he was to tell her post-murders had "entrusted my life in your hands". As for the telephone call, Nevill is unlikely to call the very person he thinks is planning a shooting accident with himself the recipient, yet even he baulked at believing the son he had adopted would do away with them all.

If the silencer was manufactured evidence this does not in itself render Jeremy innocent, merely that the relatives were desperate to be taken seriously by law enforcement and concocted their own scheme to sex up the evidence,shocking as this course of action may have been.

The silencer was not manufactured evidence. It was impossible for the relatives to do this.

[Steve_uk]

The silencer was not manufactured evidence. It was impossible for the relatives to do this.

I'm not sure Adam. If Jeremy were high on cocaine and cannabis in the early hours of that morning so much so that he could put the whole episode out of his mind as regards lie detector tests then who knows what other mistakes he was capable of.

[Adam]

Stan Jones gave Ann Eaton the keys to WHF. This was to do some cleaning.

Ann Eaton and other relatives attended WHF. Finding a silencer hidden away in the gun cupboard. Basil Cock & Barbara Wilson were also present. The silencer had blood & paint on according to the relatives.

The silencer was handed to Stan Jones within two days. 

In court it was never suggested the silencer was contaminated or was unsafe evidence. Jeremy suggested this decades later. Claiming his surviving family framed him. The relatives did not do this for money. Jeremys own Youtube video said they were already rich with no reason to lie. They also had no criminal record as far as I know.

If the silencer did not have blood & paint on, the relatives, in two days had to -

1: Decide in unison to attempt to frame Jeremy. All be confident in each other that no one will crack under pressure. They all had to agree to commit a serious crime & risk criminal charges.

2: Find out about back splatter.

3: Find out if any shots were contact shots which would produce back splatter.

4: Find out Sheila's, June's and Neville's blood type.

5: Find out if the rifle end had blood on it. Meaning a silencer was not used & they could not frame Jeremy.

6: Get blood which is very close to Sheila's, June's and Neville's. Assisting in getting a conviction. 

7: Find out how to effectivly & realistically put the correct blood into the silencer baffles.

8: Get the right equipment to transfer the found blood into the silencer.

9:  Go back to WHF and effectivly put paint onto the silencer.

10: None of them retract from their statements and attempt to frame Jeremy.

[lookout]

Found one month or so after the murders ?? Who's kidding who ?

[Steve_uk]

Stan Jones gave Ann Eaton the keys to WHF. This was to do some cleaning.

Ann Eaton and other relatives attended WHF. Finding a silencer hidden away in the gun cupboard. Basil Cock & Barbara Wilson were also present. The silencer had blood & paint on according to the relatives.

The silencer was handed to Stan Jones within two days. 

In court it was never suggested the silencer was contaminated or was unsafe evidence. Jeremy suggested this decades later. Claiming his surviving family framed him. The relatives did not do this for money. Jeremys own Youtube video said they were already rich with no reason to lie. They also had no criminal record as far as I know.

If the silencer did not have blood & paint on, the relatives, in two days had to -

1: Decide in unison to attempt to frame Jeremy. All be confident in each other that no one will crack under pressure. They all had to agree to commit a serious crime & risk criminal charges.

2: Find out about back splatter.

3: Find out if any shots were contact shots which would produce back splatter.

4: Find out Sheila's, June's and Neville's blood type.

5: Find out if the rifle end had blood on it. Meaning a silencer was not used & they could not frame Jeremy.

6: Get blood which is very close to Sheila's, June's and Neville's. Assisting in getting a conviction. 

7: Find out how to effectivly & realistically put the correct blood into the silencer baffles.

8: Get the right equipment to transfer the found blood into the silencer.

9:  Go back to WHF and effectivly put paint onto the silencer.

10: None of them retract from their statements and attempt to frame Jeremy.

Do people believe this was doable in two days ?

I don't think they did, but Robert Boutflour had the same blood group as Sheila and Peter Eaton was an expert on guns.