Author Topic: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.  (Read 6253 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #30 on: January 24, 2016, 09:05:AM »
Well it's the most recent documentary on the case. With lots of new information and several 'Primary' sources, which Jan demands. Although she is now saying the 'primary'sources all lied.

You haven't created any threads in the last two years. But if there are apparently lots of valid questions, feel free to ask them.
No I did not say ALL the PRIMARY SOURCES LIED

And some sources who changed their statements must have lied because one statement was the truth and one was not.

So for example Julie Lied in her first statement about what was in the vital phone calls to her . Or was it the second one?

And Barbara Wilson changed her mind completely and absolutely about Jeremy - now what was her reason?

You have not answered my questions by the way . I am genuinely interested .

And by the way this forum is NOT about adding or starting threads .

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #31 on: January 24, 2016, 09:27:AM »
When are you going to answer my questions?

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2016, 10:03:AM »
No I did not say ALL the PRIMARY SOURCES LIED

And some sources who changed their statements must have lied because one statement was the truth and one was not.

So for example Julie Lied in her first statement about what was in the vital phone calls to her . Or was it the second one?

And Barbara Wilson changed her mind completely and absolutely about Jeremy - now what was her reason?

You have not answered my questions by the way . I am genuinely interested .

And by the way this forum is NOT about adding or starting threads .

Julie didn't lie in her first statement. It was a two page statement.

Most of it was about her relationship with Bamber and the relatives. Then there was a bit about the phone call she received from Bamber at 3am.

It's obvious why she didn't accuse Bamber on the first day. (TAC).

Miller, Bews and BW are not going to include every single word said on their WS's. But free from the shackles of WS's they can say more to the cameras.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2016, 10:40:AM »
Well it's the most recent documentary on the case. With lots of new information and several 'Primary' sources, which Jan demands. Although she is now saying the 'primary'sources all lied.

You haven't created any threads in the last two years. But if there are apparently lots of valid questions, feel free to ask them.
I have had no reason to create any threads or ask any questions in the past two years but thanks for your offer Adam.
I don't believe there was any new 'information' of any merit, think there was more hearsay and personal opinions etc. about something that happened 30 years ago ..... I don't need to watch stuff like that to endorse my own opinion.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 10:43:AM by maggie »

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2016, 12:40:PM »
BW knowing who did the caravan break in, explains why Bamber admitted to it straight away, when questioned by the police. He knew that BW knew and she may have told other people.

If he believed it was his word against Julie's he may have denied it to try to discredit Julie.  Admitting it shows Julie is telling the truth about this, so may be telling the truth about other things. But he had no choice but to admit to it.

It was a minor crime with a minor punishment, so Bamber would not have been scared to admit to it.  But it has been a terrible burden for Bamber over the last 30 years.

« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 12:49:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #35 on: January 24, 2016, 03:43:PM »
Julie didn't lie in her first statement. It was a two page statement.

Most of it was about her relationship with Bamber and the relatives. Then there was a bit about the phone call she received from Bamber at 3am.

It's obvious why she didn't accuse Bamber on the first day. (TAC).

Miller, Bews and BW are not going to include every single word said on their WS's. But free from the shackles of WS's they can say more to the cameras.

If he is guilty she lied about what he said in both of the phone calsl . That vital phone call when he was telling her he had murdered or arranged the murders of his family .

She changed the words so one of the statements is a lie .


as for your statement about miller bews and BW - that's rubbish . If its relevant put it in your statement. If its not then don't go on about it.


Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #36 on: January 24, 2016, 03:44:PM »
A few questions for you Adam

Have you EVER doubted that Jeremy was guilty?

Why do you think it necessary to use falsehoods or assumptions to prove him guilty when he is in Jail serving a full life sentence?

Why do you seem  to alienate even people who have changed from innocent to guilty ? As if the fact they EVER had a doubt in their minds is somehow an insult in your mind?

How and why did you become interested in the case in the first place if it is so black and white?


Adam would you mind answering my questions I am interested

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #37 on: January 24, 2016, 03:53:PM »

Jeremy did not mention to me about killing his family until Tuesday 6th August 1985.
I was at my home in Lewisham when Jeremy phoned me about 10pm.
He said to me ‘ Hi honey’ I’ve just phoned up to ask how you are. I said to him I have had a wonderful day at work and that I was really happy and I wanted to make him happy. I asked him how his day had been and he said ‘ As best as can be expected’ as he had spent all day on the tractor; …???… it had been sunny and he had spent all day inside. I assume that he meant he was inside the cab of the tractor all day.
I said to him ‘you sound pissed off’. He said I have been thinking on the tractor and the crime will have to be tonight or never. I told him not to be so stupid and that he was only saying this because he had had a bad day on the tractor. He also told me that he had only just got back from work and had had supper with his parents and Sheila and the twins and that was why he late in phoning me.

PAGE 12

I then continued telling him about my day and dropped the matter concerning his family. I was aware that when he said the word crime he was referring to the killing of his family. I did not believe he could carry it out. I remember that he told me that he had been on the phone 17 minutes and I said words to the effect ‘oh I am sorry do you want me to go now’ he just said that he hadn’t got anything else to say. We both said goodbye and put the phone down. I remember now that he said words to the effect that I might be hearing from him later. I thought nothing of this.
I believe that prior to Jeremy phoning me up I had been smoking marijuana and I suppose because of this I was quite flippant on the phone with Jeremy.
I suppose I went to be that night about 11:15pm time.
In the early hours of the morning, I have since found out from a friend of mine, Susan Battersby who was with me then, it was about 3:15am, I was woken up by another house mate Douglas Dale who told me that Jeremy was on the telephone. I got out of bed and went to the phone on the landing and said hello. I felt very dozy and I suppose I was only half awake. He said everything is going well, not to worry there is something wrong at the farm.
I told him sleepily to go back to bed and he said bye honey I love you lots. I then put the phone down. I particularly remember the phrase ‘everything is going well’ I then got into bed and laid there for a few minutes when I suddenly came to my senses and realised what he had said.

PAGE 13

In my view he was telling me they were all dead. I immediately got out of bed and I spoke to my friend Susan. I don’t know if she came into my room or we met on the landing. She was very cross and complained about Jeremy phoning at a stupid time. She asked me what was wrong as apparently I looked concerned. I told her that I didn’t know but there was something wrong at the farm.
She said again what was wrong. We then all went back to our beds. I have since spoken to Susan and I feel sure that she told me the time that Jeremy phoned was 3:12am.
I lay in bed but did not go to sleep as I knew that Jeremy had murdered his family

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #38 on: January 24, 2016, 03:54:PM »
If he is guilty she lied about what he said in both of the phone calsl . That vital phone call when he was telling her he had murdered or arranged the murders of his family .

She changed the words so one of the statements is a lie .


as for your statement about miller bews and BW - that's rubbish . If its relevant put it in your statement. If its not then don't go on about it.

Julie didn't accuse Bamber in her first two page WS. TAC. Get over it.

Miller, BW and Bews are not going to say the same things on their WS as they said on the programme.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #39 on: January 24, 2016, 03:58:PM »
Notice the subtle differences ::) - but vital wording as far as him committing the crime .

He made no mention of his family

But in the second one he talked about murdering that night.

The change in the times

She particularly remembered ( the second time ) everything is going well. 4 vital words that relate to the killing .


One of the statements includes lies - now for whatever reason - even if she was scared for her own life - she managed to lie in front of the police without them noticing anything wrong at all - andyet she said she was nervous in the first statement as she had not manage to find out what Jeremy had said - So it seems if he was guilty she did NOT want to dob him in at that stage. 

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #40 on: January 24, 2016, 04:01:PM »
Julie didn't accuse Bamber in her first two page WS. TAC. Get over it.

Miller, BW and Bews are not going to say the same things on their WS as they said on the programme.

You get over it - your the one that is always defending her . She was with the police - she knew he had murdered those children and she did nothing.

Its my choice what I think - get over that.

Are you going to answer my questions?

guest154

  • Guest
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #41 on: January 24, 2016, 04:02:PM »
Notice the subtle differences ::) - but vital wording as far as him committing the crime .

He made no mention of his family

But in the second one he talked about murdering that night.

The change in the times

She particularly remembered ( the second time ) everything is going well. 4 vital words that relate to the killing .


One of the statements includes lies - now for whatever reason - even if she was scared for her own life - she managed to lie in front of the police without them noticing anything wrong at all - andyet she said she was nervous in the first statement as she had not manage to find out what Jeremy had said - So it seems if he was guilty she did NOT want to dob him in at that stage.

That isn't right. I've read the police say that they didn't believe Julie at first and felt she was either in on it or knew more that she was saying, that she was holding something back.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #42 on: January 24, 2016, 04:06:PM »
That isn't right. I've read the police say that they didn't believe Julie at first and felt she was either in on it or knew more that she was saying, that she was holding something back.

For once we agree - I think if he was guilty she was involved - hence why she was worried about her words being in line with his . But I don't think that everyone thought she was telling lies otherwise they would have got to Bamber MUCH earlier. So she must have been pretty convincing.

guest154

  • Guest
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #43 on: January 24, 2016, 04:10:PM »
For once we agree - I think if he was guilty she was involved - hence why she was worried about her words being in line with his . But I don't think that everyone thought she was telling lies otherwise they would have got to Bamber MUCH earlier. So she must have been pretty convincing.

I guess that's the difference between knowing she is telling lies, in which you can pursue her and just thinking that something isn't right. I think they would have seen her as the easier nut to crack however, as Bamber isn't going to go through all what he did and then crack under pressure from the police.

But, for the record I think we agree on a lot of things!  ;D

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44410
Re: 'Slaughter at the farm'. Discussion points.
« Reply #44 on: January 24, 2016, 04:14:PM »
The police arrested Bamber after one month. Several reasons why (TAC).

Julie didn't accuse Bamber on day one (TAC).

Yes Julie did identify the twins (TAC).

He was found guilty. She wasn't involved as in Lewisham (TAC).

'Only I know what really happened that night'.