The kitchen window

[Adam]

Those named had forensic evidence which nailed them------where's JB's ?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7204.msg373372.html#msg373372

Only 100+ pieces. But since when was that enough for supporters ? 

[Jan]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7204.msg373372.html#msg373372

Only 100+ pieces. But since when was that enough for supporters ?

No they are not forensic evidence that directly link Jeremy to the crime  . Because otherwise we would not all be here (:

[Caroline]

No they are not forensic evidence that directly link Jeremy to the crime  . Because otherwise we would not all be here (:

Jeremy had plenty of time to get rid of any forensics. Burning his parents clothes in the fire pit at WHF was a good opportunity and explains such odd behaviour. Who does that after their parents have been murdered unless there is a good reason?

[Adam]

No they are not forensic evidence that directly link Jeremy to the crime  . Because otherwise we would not all be here (:

I'm afraid all evidence which shows it was not Sheila, directly links Bamber to the massacre.

[Adam]

There is also forensic evidence which is nothing to do with Sheila, but links Bamber.

The bike, bathroom window, kitchen window, found hacksaw, police phone call, phone call to Julie, Bamber's answering machine, Bamber sleeping 'like a log', an (unseen) available route to WHF, the massacre time, the previous caravan break in,  etc. 

All of which supporters can dispute. But as the judge said 'several curious coincidences'.

[Jan]

There is also forensic evidence which is nothing to do with Sheila, but links Bamber.

The bike, bathroom window, kitchen window, found hacksaw, police phone call, phone call to Julie, Bamber's answering machine, Bamber sleeping 'like a log', an available route to WHF, the massacre time, the previous caravan break in,  etc. 

All of which supporters can dispute. But as the judge said 'several curious coincidences'.

coincidences ? is that what we use to jail someone ? Really ?

[Jan]

Jeremy had plenty of time to get rid of any forensics. Burning his parents clothes in the fire pit at WHF was a good opportunity and explains such odd behaviour. Who does that after their parents have been murdered unless there is a good reason?

Is that separate to the fire organised by the police , proven or information from a poster on here?

And as apparently the evidence the police missed was so overwhelming such a shame they did not notice the clothes of his, mixed with his parents because that is what you are implicating.

[Caroline]

Is that separate to the fire organised by the police , proven or information from a poster on here?

And as apparently the evidence the police missed was so overwhelming such a shame they did not notice the clothes of his, mixed with his parents because that is what you are implicating.

No it was separate to the police fire - why would the police notice? This was after they had gone and Jeremy was in and out of the farm. There is a mention of it in Wilkes book and a more detailed account in CAL's book. I'm not implying and I saying that he most certainly could have destroyed evidence in this fire.

[Jan]

No it was separate to the police fire - why would the police notice? This was after they had gone and Jeremy was in and out of the farm. There is a mention of it in Wilkes book and a more detailed account in CAL's book. I'm not implying and I saying that he most certainly could have destroyed evidence in this fire.

Is that not implying that you think he did?

So was the source a farm worker who also used to post on here ? And I thought some police were always suspicious of him as were the family - so I guess they must have slipped up on watching him on that one then. Shame , could have got him without any doubt as blood on his clothes from the victims would have been direct forensic evidence linking him to the crime. Take note Adam.

[Jane]

Is that not implying that you think he did?

So was the source a farm worker who also used to post on here ? And I thought some police were always suspicious of him as were the family - so I guess they must have slipped up on watching him on that one then. Shame , could have got him without any doubt as blood on his clothes from the victims would have been direct forensic evidence linking him to the crime. Take note Adam.

It's my understanding that those members of the force, who had direct contact with him, were never NOT suspicious of him.

[notsure]

That must be it. The police fed Julie.

your sarcasm really gets on my nerves. Can you not debate without it.

[notsure]

He got rid of it.

Got rid of it where Caroline.  Okay so he could have burnt some things in the fire pit , pretty risky thing to do as I doubt the fire was lit by him and watched over by him alone. Five killings  I don't get it.

[Caroline]

Is that not implying that you think he did?

So was the source a farm worker who also used to post on here ? And I thought some police were always suspicious of him as were the family - so I guess they must have slipped up on watching him on that one then. Shame , could have got him without any doubt as blood on his clothes from the victims would have been direct forensic evidence linking him to the crime. Take note Adam.

I'm not implying it, I'm saying it.

No, that wasn't the source, the source(s) were Ann Eaton who saw the trailer full of clothes, Philip Wilson who was instructed to burn them in the fire pit and BW and Jean Bouttell who both confirmed the fire was still smoking when they arrived for work.

Risky or not, the clothes were burned and he could easily have had his own burned along with them.

[Jan]

I'm not implying it, I'm saying it.

No, that wasn't the source, the source(s) were Ann Eaton who saw the trailer full of clothes, Philip Wilson who was instructed to burn them in the fire pit and BW and Jean Bouttell who both confirmed the fire was still smoking when they arrived for work.

Risky or not, the clothes were burned and he could easily have had his own burned along with them.

I am just surprised I thought you liked to stick to facts . So without any proof you are saying he burnt the clothes he was wearing on the night with his parents clothes. Interesting.

[Jane]

I am just surprised I thought you liked to stick to facts . So without any proof you are saying he burnt the clothes he was wearing on the night with his parents clothes. Interesting.

Have you never offered something as a possibility?