What makes Bamber innocent?

[mike tesko]

J is the victim of a 'miscarriage of justice', I can see why, and how he got convicted, unless you have been a ''victim' of a miscarriage of justice, yourself, I suppose it is difficult to image that the state, and its witnesses, could 'lie', but they do, in 'certain circumstances'. I know, because on several 'different occasions' I have been the 'victim' of such tactics 'myself'...

In my honest opinion, J was not 'the killer', basically put he doesn't have the compulsion or the brains to have done everything they claimed he had done.I am not suggesting that J is not now 'intelligent' or 'devious enough' to have done it, and tried to get away with it. No, it is irrelevant what J is like, now.  What counts is 'What J was like back then in August, 1985'. He was 'slow', in my opinion, a bit 'thick' in the head. He was like, how can I say this without appearing to be being offensive, he was a 'dumbo'. When I first met J he hadn't got a clue about what the cops, the prosecution, his relatives, the experts had done to him. I am talking about 1989, here. J was backward, he couldn't see what the authorities had done to him, whereas, in comparison, I had been the victim of 'such tactics' from December, 1985, onwards...

Today, 'J is a completely different person', he is more like the person I was when 'I first met him, in 1989'...

[mike tesko]

J was 'thick' , maybe that is being 'unkind to him', but what I mean is that he couldn't open himself up to the possibility, that his 'relatives' were 'gunning for him', so to speak. Cops had 'secrets they intended to conceal, forever', J was 'wet between the ears', unsuspecting, whereas, relatives were eager to cling to the wealth they thought they were entitled too, in front of J...

[mike tesko]

It was a receipy  for what we all now know to be termed, as a 'miscarriage of Justice'...

[lookout]

J was 'thick' , maybe that is being 'unkind to him', but what I mean is that he couldn't open himself up to the possibility, that his 'relatives' were 'gunning for him', so to speak. Cops had 'secrets they intended to conceal, forever', J was 'wet between the ears', unsuspecting, whereas, relatives were eager to cling to the wealth they thought they were entitled too, in front of J...

That's exactly the way it was Mike. He couldn't see further than the end of his nose at what was happening. His father would have seen through it.

[mike tesko]

That's exactly the way it was Mike. He couldn't see further than the end of his nose at what was happening. His father would have seen through it.

I agree, whole heartedly...

[lookout]

I agree, whole heartedly...

Unfortunately,Mike,he's learned the hard way that such people do exist,but I would think that now he'll be forever on his guard after this very hard lesson. I should hope so anyway,even now as things are moving in his favour.

[Adam]

https://youtu.be/mmCART1vcCo

It seems things are moving in the right direction. Mike found the above compelling evidence last year and David has made a 'forensic evidence breakthrough' this year.

[lookout]

No need to be facetious,just because you've not come up with anything worth mentioning.

[Jane]

No need to be facetious,just because you've not come up with anything worth mentioning.

But it IS worth mentioning I heard from EP this morning that ".............at present Essex Police is not re-investigating the case, or the part it played in the original investigation, or the conduct of the officers involved in the case".

[mike tesko]

The most obvious pieces of information or evidence which guarantees his total innocence, is the fact that:-

(a) Cops, experts, and relatives had to frame him, because they 'thought' he might have had something to do with it, so they improvised the evidence, acting with a touch of 'noble cause corruption' in mind'...

As time moved on different people began to suspect that Sheila might not have been responsible for shooting and killing the others. First, there was 'Stan' Jones, the relatives, and a few cops in the elk of Cook and Miller, who gradually grew into the idea that J had killed the lot of them just so he could get his hands on the family fortune (around £440,000).These in turn sought to influence others, in the form of scientists involved in the testing of exhibits and samples. In the end there was a group of people all motivated in trying to convict J of the murders, just because they 'thought' he could have done it. There existed  a sense of 'noble cause corruption' amongst this group, that although they all knew that there was no way of proving J's involvement directly in the murders, they all felt he must have had something to do with it. Another thing which everyone conveniently overlooked, was that it was never a racing certainty that he (J) would have inherited everything anyway, because there was always going to be other beneficiaries involved in any inheritance matters. The real issue but for J's convictions would have surely been about how much of a share that J and the other beneficiaries stood to inherit. J was I suppose always going to be the one who stood to get the lions share, but others also were in line for a share, including the relatives at the heart of the prosecutions case. Their share grew considerably because J got convicted...

[Jane]

As time moved on different people began to suspect that Sheila might not have been responsible for shooting and killing the others. First, there was 'Stan' Jones, the relatives, and a few cops in the elk of Cook and Miller, who gradually grew into the idea that J had killed the lot of them just so he could get his hands on the family fortune (around £440,000).These in turn sought to influence others, in the form of scientists involved in the testing of exhibits and samples. In the end there was a group of people all motivated in trying to convict J of the murders, just because they 'thought' he could have done it. There existed  a sense of 'noble cause corruption' amongst this group, that although they all knew that there was no way of proving J's involvement directly in the murders, they all felt he must have had something to do with it. Another thing which everyone conveniently overlooked, was that it was never a racing certainty that he (J) would have inherited everything anyway, because there was always going to be other beneficiaries involved in any inheritance matters. The real issue but for J's convictions would have surely been about how much of a share that J and the other beneficiaries stood to inherit. J was I suppose always going to be the one who stood to get the lions share, but others also were in line for a share, including the relatives at the heart of the prosecutions case. Their share grew considerably because J got convicted...

Are you telling us that there is proof that Nevill's Will would have been challenged in the courts even had Jeremy been innocent? Leaving aside you lack of racing certainty, as Nevill's heir, Jeremy would most certainly have come in for the lion's share but it's still within reason that he'd have left bequests elsewhere. Besides which, Jeremy allegedly knew what was in Nevill's will.

[mike tesko]

The most obvious pieces of information or evidence which guarantees his total innocence, is the fact that:-

(b) no evidence presented to prove that anyone had been shot prior to J making his 3.36am call to cops...

I find it very hard to understand, how the police surgeon 'Dr Craig' failed to notice something odd, about the state and the condition of Sheila's body at the time he viewed it, at 8.44am when he pronounced her as being dead, that it suddenly did not dawn upon him, that Sheila 'had been dead' for longer than five and a half hours already? He was summoned to the scene at quite an early stage, to deal with 'two bodies', not five. When he arrives at the scene with 'Bob' Miller he discovers there are actually five bodies, not two. He must have been left with a clear impression that one or more of the victims must have been shot within an hour or so of him being contacted at around 7.42am,  and being requested to attend the incident where two people had been shot? Indeed, and this is what I find rather interesting, Dr Craig sees the body of Sheila at 8.44am, and he describes her body being on the far side of the bed. He states at this time, she has what appears to be 'a solitary wound' to her neck (hang on, let me finish). He is accompanied at this time by 'Bob' Miller. Strangely enough he says he saw Sheila's body at this time, situated on the far side of the bed. Through his own eyes, he independently recalls that she had been shot once in the neck (hang on, let me finish). The 'time' was 8.44am, and the firearm operation had not been officially terminated by that stage, and would not be until around 9am, when PS Adams enters the farmhouse for the very first time to view the state of play. You will remember, that it was Adams who was not happy at the debriefing held at Witham police station later that same evening when senior officers showed all those present at that time a video of the various crime scenes in the kitchen downstairs, and the two bedrooms upstairs. Adams complained that Sheila's body had been moved from the position he had personally seen it in at 9 O'clock. He also complained that 'somebody had put a gun on Sheila's body' and wrapped her 'hand upon the trigger mechanism' of the rifle to give the impression that 'she was armed' (not that she had killed herself). He also complained about the position of 'the Bible' in the video footage, as compared to where it was, when he had viewed her body and the bible. How utterly convenient that at the debriefing held on the same day as the shootings, that not one firearm officer said that any of the victims must have already been dead before the firearm teams arrived at the scene? No senior officer did likewise, and all those present had viewed the bodies themselves insitu...

[mike tesko]

I find it very hard to understand, how the police surgeon 'Dr Craig' failed to notice something odd, about the state and the condition of Sheila's body at the time he viewed it, at 8.44am when he pronounced her as being dead, that it suddenly did not dawn upon him, that Sheila 'had been dead' for longer than five and a half hours already? He was summoned to the scene at quite an early stage, to deal with 'two bodies', not five. When he arrives at the scene with 'Bob' Miller he discovers there are actually five bodies, not two. He must have been left with a clear impression that one or more of the victims must have been shot within an hour or so of him being contacted at around 7.42am,  and being requested to attend the incident where two people had been shot? Indeed, and this is what I find rather interesting, Dr Craig sees the body of Sheila at 8.44am, and he describes her body being on the far side of the bed. He states at this time, she has what appears to be 'a solitary wound' to her neck (hang on, let me finish). He is accompanied at this time by 'Bob' Miller. Strangely enough he says he saw Sheila's body at this time, situated on the far side of the bed. Through his own eyes, he independently recalls that she had been shot once in the neck (hang on, let me finish). The 'time' was 8.44am, and the firearm operation had not been officially terminated by that stage, and would not be until around 9am, when PS Adams enters the farmhouse for the very first time to view the state of play. You will remember, that it was Adams who was not happy at the debriefing held at Witham police station later that same evening when senior officers showed all those present at that time a video of the various crime scenes in the kitchen downstairs, and the two bedrooms upstairs. Adams complained that Sheila's body had been moved from the position he had personally seen it in at 9 O'clock. He also complained that 'somebody had put a gun on Sheila's body' and wrapped her 'hand upon the trigger mechanism' of the rifle to give the impression that 'she was armed' (not that she had killed herself). He also complained about the position of 'the Bible' in the video footage, as compared to where it was, when he had viewed her body and the bible. How utterly convenient that at the debriefing held on the same day as the shootings, that not one firearm officer said that any of the victims must have already been dead before the firearm teams arrived at the scene? No senior officer did likewise, and all those present had viewed the bodies themselves insitu...

Nobody talked about 'how long any of the victims had been dead', and in Sheila's case they 'didn't need to'...

[mike tesko]

The most obvious pieces of information or evidence which guarantees his total innocence, is the fact that:-

(b) no evidence presented to prove that anyone had been shot prior to J making his 3.36am call to cops...

For there to be even a remote possibility that J was the killer, you would have expected somebody to notice that at least one of the five victims had been dead for longer than say six hours by 9am that morning? But nobody did. Nobody noticed anything suspicious that would have exposed J's account as being a made up account. Let's take the body of dad, for example. If J was the killer he would have had to have killed dad before 3am, for sure. Nobody can tell me that with the amount of blood he must have bled out of the 8 bullet wounds, and god forbid all the other injuries he is supposed to have sustained, that 'nobody' noticed that dad had already been dead longer than five hours or more? Anybody who suggests that cops didn't notice any of this because J had conditioned their minds is barking up the wrong tree. J wasn't that clever back in August 1985, there was nothing remarkable about him, he was not overtly super intelligent, nor did he have much street cred'. He was just a normal everyday run of the mill Joe, 'with benefits'...

[lookout]

But it IS worth mentioning I heard from EP this morning that ".............at present Essex Police is not re-investigating the case, or the part it played in the original investigation, or the conduct of the officers involved in the case".

Did they give an honest reason ?

They'll have no choice if/when a court order is in place.