After the easy WHF journey and entrance. Any obstacles left for Bamber ?

[Adam]

None really. Just advantages:


There was rifle with 10/11 bullets waiting for him. Pre/post massacre forensic evidence.

He testified he knew how to use the murder weapon. Pre/post massacre forensic fact.

Everyone was in bed. Pre/post massacre forensic evidence.

Everyone was in clothing which would not protect them. Pre/post massacre forensic evidence.

Everyone was asleep. Pre/post massacre forensic evidence.

Bamber knew the lay out of WHF. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber knew the sleeping arrangments of everyone.

Two of the five targets were 6 years old. Pre/post forensic fact.

Two of the five targets were women. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber could physically restrain June if she woke prior to getting shot. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber could phyically restrain one or both 6 year olds. If either or both woke prior to their shooting. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber could physically restrain Sheila if she woke prior to her shooting. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber had 10/11 bullets to negate the most dangerous targets - June and Neville. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber would be fully clothed and protected. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber would have  the element of surprise. Pre/post forensic fact.

A silencer was attached to the rifle. Meaning people would not wake during the shooting. Pre/post forensic fact.

Everyone may have their bedroom doors shut, therefore would not hear rifle shots or noises in other rooms.

No one should wake and react after being shot. They were asleep and will receive head shots. Pre/post forensic fact.

All telephones could have been disconnected upon entrance. Pre post forensic fact.

Bamber could restrain and kill an injured Neville. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber had no time restrictions and could take his time in arranging the frame. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber had been at WHF a few hours earlier. So knew exactly where everything was. Pre/post forensic fact.

If intially head shots did not kill his targets, they should certainly immobilise them. Giving him time to reload and chamber. Pre/post forensic fact.

Bamber had a lot of options in how to get Sheila to his chosen position. Pre/post forensic fact.

[Adam]

Nine times out of ten,  Bamber would have been able to kill, or at least immobilise Neville while he lay in bed. The twins would have still been killed while they slept, before Sheila was woken and killed, or killed and moved. The five massacres being done smoothly within ten minutes.

This is what Bamber correctly envisaged happening and the reason why he attempted the massacre and frame.

This (tenth) time however Neville woke seconds beforehand. But still received four very damaging upstairs shots, two to the head from close range. This was enough to help give Bamber a decisive advantage in the kitchen fight 

[Adam]

A lot of this list is pre massacre forensic evidence which would have encouraged Bamber.

And back up by post massacre forensic evidence. 

I will amend the list.

[lebaleb]

A lot of this list is pre massacre forensic evidence which would have encouraged Bamber.

And back up by post massacre forensic evidence. 

I will amend the list.

Don't bother!

[Adam]

Don't bother!

It's pre crime forensic evidence. Which shows Bamber would not have and did not have any obstacles once through the bathroom window. Apart from Neville, which was an unexpected incident.

Some of it backed up by Bamber himself, such as the there being a fully loaded rifle available.

Some of it backed up by post massacre forensic evidence. Such as four people were certainly in or by their beds when getting their first shots.

Other forensic facts cannot be disputed. Such as two of the targets were 6 years old, and two were women.

[Adam]

Pre crime forensic evidence is something which is not looked into enough.

While there are pages of post crime forensic evidence in this case. Pre crime forensic evidence helps to determine whether there was firstly an opportunity.

If the pre crime forensic evidence shows Bamber had an opportunity, that will automatically increase the motivation he already had to commit the crime.

Sometimes both pre and post massacre forensic evidence does not change. Such as the massacre time. This must have occurred at least half an hour after Bamber's 10am call to Julie, and at least half an hour before his 3.00am call to Julie. So between 11pm - 2.30am. This is incriminating evidence as it was certainly Bamber's only time period opportunity to commit the massacre.

[lebaleb]

It's pre crime forensic evidence. Which shows Bamber would not have and did not have any obstacles once through the bathroom window. Apart from Neville, which was an unexpected incident.

Some of it backed up by Bamber himself, such as the there being a fully loaded rifle available.

Some of it backed up by post massacre forensic evidence. Such as four people were certainly in or by their beds when getting their first shots.

Other forensic facts cannot be disputed. Such as two of the targets were 6 years old, and two were women.

Other pre massacre forensic facts: That night the sun set in the west.
                                                      Julie Mugford got smashed on cannabis.
                                                      It was harvest time.
                                                      Crispy was a dog.

Anyway, according to witness testimony, Neville was fastidious about weapons and would never have left a loaded gun lying around the house.
                                                     

[Caroline]

Other pre massacre forensic facts: That night the sun set in the west.
                                                      Julie Mugford got smashed on cannabis.
                                                      It was harvest time.
                                                      Crispy was a dog.

Anyway, according to witness testimony, Neville was fastidious about weapons and would never have left a loaded gun lying around the house.
                                                     

And yet on another thread you're suggesting the opposite! 

[Jane]

And yet on another thread you're suggesting the opposite! 

Funny, that, Caroline. It's the second time that's been pointed out today. Seems as if the poster wants it every which way, doesn't it?

[lebaleb]

And yet on another thread you're suggesting the opposite! 

It depends if you believe the witness statements. You can't have it both ways.

[Caroline]

It depends if you believe the witness statements. You can't have it both ways.

And yet you're trying to! 

[lebaleb]

And yet you're trying to! 

Wrong! Jeremy testified he left the gun out. Many people including Jeremy testified Neville was fastidious with guns. Whether he put it away or not makes little difference as there were multiple weapons easily available.

[Caroline]

Wrong! Jeremy testified he left the gun out. Many people including Jeremy testified Neville was fastidious with guns. Whether he put it away or not makes little difference as there were multiple weapons easily available.

He didn't put it away because it was never left out in the first place! 

[lebaleb]

He didn't put it away because it was never left out in the first place! 

 

You can prove that statement?

[Jane]

 

You can prove that statement?

Can you prove Sheila experienced a psychotic episode?