Jeremy's assumptions about his sister's meds and relatives' opinions

[Lucy522]

There was a wealth of evidence indicating Sheila.  The police could not destroy it all and some remains.  Some is actually on this forum in plain sight.  It has even been debated on (to some extent).

In short, Sheila killed everyone by retaining control of a loaded weapon. The injuries sustained by the other two adults, dramatically reduced any physical advantage that they may have had, either individually or collectively.

Roch, what one piece or pieces of evidence make you think Sheila? I personally think it was her to, I can't see her laying down to be shot in the neck totally compliant.

[Jane]

Even though you may have genuine concerns - whatever the course of events and whatever the sequence of events that took place - the result was as I have stated above. It is not really possible to work out the dynamics of a mother and father being woken and confronted by an armed daughter; who may or may not have been hallucinating.

The result would have been far MORE guaranteed had it been an armed son they were confronting.

[Jane]

Roch, what one piece or pieces of evidence make you think Sheila? I personally think it was her to, I can't see her laying down to be shot in the neck totally compliant.

Lucy, I think you only can't see it, because you don't believe you'd have done it. You need to have BEEN Sheila -in her head, living her life- before you can say what she'd have done.

[Steve_uk]

Even though you may have genuine concerns - whatever the course of events and whatever the sequence of events that took place - the result was as I have stated above. It is not really possible to work out the dynamics of a mother and father being woken and confronted by an armed daughter; who may or may not have been hallucinating.

But do you accept that she would have to reload the weapon and as Jane says beat her father to it?  https://youtu.be/xG1TPk6cvPc

[Lucy522]

Lucy, I think you only can't see it, because you don't believe you'd have done it. You need to have BEEN Sheila -in her head, living her life- before you can say what she'd have done.

So would everyone else have to of been Jeremy to say what he would of done?

[Steve_uk]

So would everyone else have to of been Jeremy to say what he would of done?

I think what Jane means is that mental illness manifests itself in a variety of forms, and whilst undoubtedly women have killed their families though gunshots before it remains an extremely rare means of extermination by the female gender.

[Jane]

So would everyone else have to of been Jeremy to say what he would of done?

I have tried, Lucy. My job was about understanding what OTHERS would be capable of doing/feeling. In order not to be any part of this, it meant having to leave outside the door, any of "me".

[Jane]

I think what Jane means is that mental illness manifests itself in a variety of forms, and whilst undoubtedly women have killed their families though gunshots before it remains an extremely rare means of extermination by the female gender.

That's a huge part of it, Steve. Someone whom has a mental/psychological problem can give you the weirdest of thoughts in a perfectly concise way which they totally believe. It can be very difficult to hang on to self under those circumstances.

[Roch]

But do you accept that she would have to reload the weapon and as Jane says beat her father to it?  https://youtu.be/xG1TPk6cvPc

Boyce showed how lightweight and easy the weapon was to use and load.  During the confrontation with her parents, they received gunshot wounds while Sheila did not.

[Jane]

Boyce showed how lightweight and easy the weapon was to use and load.  During the confrontation with her parents, they received gunshot wounds while Sheila did not.

"Lightweight and easy................to use and load" is entirely relative, Roch. I expect, that to a gun handler, such was the case. However, Sheila wasn't a gun handler. It's perfectly understandable that Sheila wouldn't have sustained any injuries. Jeremy had organized it to look as if Sheila had carried out the murders before turning the gun on herself.

[Lucy522]

"Lightweight and easy................to use and load" is entirely relative, Roch. I expect, that to a gun handler, such was the case. However, Sheila wasn't a gun handler. It's perfectly understandable that Sheila wouldn't have sustained any injuries. Jeremy had organized it to look as if Sheila had carried out the murders before turning the gun on herself.

How did Jeremy know she wouldn't of attacked him? Got in the way? Thrown herself over her boys? If this is the case she would of needed to be shot first so not to attack him? Or she would of had defence wounds that would of proved she wasnr the killer, Jeremy  didn't know how she'd react, it's a massive risk  to take.

[Adam]

Roch, what one piece or pieces of evidence make you think Sheila? I personally think it was her to, I can't see her laying down to be shot in the neck totally compliant.

Is that you're basis for believing Sheila comnitted the massacre ?That a fit young man holding a rifle couldn't move her a few feet & shoot her.

Sheila was asleep & on Haloperidol. So wouldn't of had a clue what was happening.

You can't explain how Sheila committed the massacre. You've just said Nevill phoned Bamber & the police 16 minutes later after he was shot 4 times. Which was impossible as he couldn't speak. Sheila couldn't brutally beat Nevill. He was 15 stone & 6.4.

[ngb1066]

From post 171 onwards - the title of this thread changes.  How has that happened?

I have changed it back.

[Jane]

How did Jeremy know she wouldn't of attacked him? Got in the way? Thrown herself over her boys? If this is the case she would of needed to be shot first so not to attack him? Or she would of had defence wounds that would of proved she wasnr the killer, Jeremy  didn't know how she'd react, it's a massive risk  to take.

Lucy, we all take massive risks on a daily basis -someone driving a car could have a heart attack and drive their car into us on the pavement. We could slip whist carrying a knife, cut an artery and bleed to death- it's part of life. Of course there were things he wouldn't 'know' but the difference here is that there doesn't appear to have been anything he didn't believe he could handle.

[Roch]

How did Jeremy know she wouldn't of attacked him? Got in the way? Thrown herself over her boys? If this is the case she would of needed to be shot first so not to attack him? Or she would of had defence wounds that would of proved she wasnr the killer, Jeremy  didn't know how she'd react, it's a massive risk  to take.

I asked the same thing several months ago.  How did he know that she would not have become a wildcat in defence of her children (not forgetting the other two adults needing to be also dealt with).  It's proposterous.  One injury received by Jeremy and the game is up.