Aftermath, Where is the forensic evidence that Jeremy Bamber killed his family?

[Jane]

You cannot commit 5 murders without leaving a forensic trial! not possible.

Perhaps you can outline, for us, the forensic trail left by Sheila?

[Adam]

You cannot commit 5 murders without leaving a forensic trial! not possible.

Of course it's possible. Bamber was padded up and shot 4 people without any problems.

The forensic trail shows it was not Sheila anyway.

Anyway. I look forward to you're explanation of how Sheila committed the massacre. To match the crime scene and bullet allocation. Please include Neville's two phone calls and the kitchen fight.

Have I done a breakdown on Bamber committing the massacre ? Of course.  Available upon request.

[notsure]

Perhaps you can outline, for us, the forensic trail left by Sheila?

was there not two investigations and the material from the first was put away as that was when shiela was supposed to have done it.

im sure i read it somewhere but my recall isnt that great but maybe just maybe there is witheld evidence against shiela in these documents.

[Jane]

was there not two investigations and the material from the first was put away as that was when shiela was supposed to have done it.

im sure i read it somewhere but my recall isnt that great but maybe just maybe there is witheld evidence against shiela in these documents.

I think there undoubtedly were two investigations but if there had been conclusive evidence AGAINST Sheila in the first one, WHY would they have needed to start again -from scratch- in order to manufacture a case against an innocent Jeremy?

[lookout]

I think there undoubtedly were two investigations but if there had been conclusive evidence AGAINST Sheila in the first one, WHY would they have needed to start again -from scratch- in order to manufacture a case against an innocent Jeremy?

This is the $6,000 question that we'd all like to know.

[Jane]

This is the $6,000 question that we'd all like to know.

So we have EP  -who are known to have cocked up the recent Diana Jones case by being unable to break the alleged murderer- with a cast-iron case against one Sheila Caffell, a paranoid schizophrenic, recently released from a psych unit, and they risk it by trying to frame her innocent brother, who, because he's innocent stands every chance of walking when the case gets to court, leaving EP with heavily egg stained faces, YET again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How does ANY of that make sense?

[notsure]

And the evidence on Sheila? Spots of blood from the 5 victims? Just one? No, not one, nothing, zilch, zero. Jeremy had time (plenty of time) to get rid of clothes he wore that might have been covered in blood spots - it might explain why he chose to burn his parents clothes in the farm fire pit. We KNOW Sheila's clothes were free from other victims blood, we don't know that Jeremy's were.

exactly caroline we dont know, we cant assume guilt on i dont knows.

far too many mojs on circumstantial and non disclosure

[notsure]

So we have EP  -who are known to have cocked up the recent Diana Jones case by being unable to break the alleged murderer- with a cast-iron case against one Sheila Caffell, a paranoid schizophrenic, recently released from a psych unit, and they risk it by trying to frame her innocent brother, who, because he's innocent stands every chance of walking when the case gets to court, leaving EP with heavily egg stained faces, YET again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How does ANY of that make sense?

mmmmm its difficult isng it. I just wish i could be as sure as you are but its not convincing enough for me.

[Jane]

mmmmm its difficult isng it. I just wish i could be as sure as you are but its not convincing enough for me.

Well, I guess that you are the only one who knows what it WOULD take to convince you. I have NO idea what might be in those things -allegedly- held under PII, but a rough guess says it could only be something which incriminates Sheila and my original question still stands. WHY, when they had a legitimate culprit, would they chose to set all that to one side -wasting both man-power and public money- to work out a plan to incriminate an entirely innocent person?

[Caroline]

exactly caroline we dont know, we cant assume guilt on i dont knows.

far too many mojs on circumstantial and non disclosure

I can assume it - I do assume it and I'm pretty sure based on circumstantial evidence. Especially the phone calls, the timings etc.

[lookout]

Just read another sad story about a murder/suicide. Two adults and three children. A gun was found but it's yet to be established as to who'd fired it.
The wife suffered anxiety problems after the youngest child had suffered congenital heart disease and she'd blamed herself for her daughter having lived where others hadn't. There were constant rows in the household due to the heart issues of the younger daughter.
The wife had also suffered from PTSD of which she'd said,never goes and she'd struggled emotionally with the daughter's heart condition.

What does go on in the minds of those whose decision it is to wipe out ALL the family ?

A lovely family,so very sad.

[notsure]

Well, I guess that you are the only one who knows what it WOULD take to convince you. I have NO idea what might be in those things -allegedly- held under PII, but a rough guess says it could only be something which incriminates Sheila and my original question still stands. WHY, when they had a legitimate culprit, would they chose to set all that to one side -wasting both man-power and public money- to work out a plan to incriminate an entirely innocent person?

Well it might not incriminate shiela but there could be somethi g in them that proves certain things like the movement in the house and the calls.

[Jane]

Well it might not incriminate shiela but there could be somethi g in them that proves certain things like the movement in the house and the calls.

Hmm? It's always been my understanding that negatives can't be proved.

[lookout]

So we have EP  -who are known to have cocked up the recent Diana Jones case by being unable to break the alleged murderer- with a cast-iron case against one Sheila Caffell, a paranoid schizophrenic, recently released from a psych unit, and they risk it by trying to frame her innocent brother, who, because he's innocent stands every chance of walking when the case gets to court, leaving EP with heavily egg stained faces, YET again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How does ANY of that make sense?

Jane,if police can  lay blame on 96 people,how much easier for just 1  person ? When you know how, and also with the backing of a lying woman and a greedy family.

[Jane]

Jane,if police can  lay blame on 96 people,how much easier for just 1  person ? When you know how, and also with the backing of a lying woman and a greedy family.

Lookout, it sometimes sounds as if you WANT the police to have framed Jeremy in order to give you some retrospective revenge on their past misdeeds.

 If anything you believe is anywhere CLOSE to being true, there's a whole library, collecting dust, of incriminating evidence against Sheila, which I imagine you believe gives proof of Nevill's alleged call to the police, be it via 999 OR looking up the number like Jeremy. I will never believe, that after their appalling cock up in the Diana Jones case, they'd have once again allowed themselves to be shown up as incompetents by announcing, after a month, that Sheila was a victim, NOT the culprit. NOR do I believe she was as powerful and devious -at 21- as you would have us believe.

As a codicil, IF such evidence had ever existed, it's highly unlikely that it still does. It would have been consigned to an incinerator long since to protect the guilty.......................indeed, hasn't Jeremy said, on several occasions that he has everything there is?