Police V family

[Steve_uk]

hell could well of done just at the relatives could of planted the evidence when they had acese to the house.

That's true but they didn't have access those first hours when the Raid Team entered.

[Caroline]

Protecting integrity by knowingly framing an innocent man thus putting the force in a worse position?
How would members of the public know that Jeremy was an innocent man?  Most people wouldn't necessarily know this (though some may have felt that he was).  I'm not referring to the inner consciousness of individual police officers.  I'm referring to perceptions among the public, the integrity of the force.

According to you, they had proof that Sheila was responsible - that would have gotten the relatives off their back.
But it didn't though did it?  Two relatives accpeted Sheila could have been the killer, after DCI Jones explained to them in no uncertain terms.  But that didn't stop the mission of the relatives.  Jeremy's uncle Bobby was prepared to incorporate anything in to a Jeremy scenario.

The relatives had no power, especially if there was evidence of Sheila's guilt.
They had police officers carrying out 'experiments' on the kitchen window behind DCI Jones' back.  They had another leading officer (who just happened to be the direct persecutor of Jeremy and the leading coach of Julie) drinking whiskey at the farm - before driving away with the main exhibit - which they introduced to the case.  They employed the head of the second investigation after he retired early.  They got the original head of the investigation sidelined and had him replaced with a future consultant employee. They had power in spades.


There is no motive for such openness.
Early retirement is a motive.  A nice fat police pension and some consultancy work.

Just because they could isn't really a convincing argument.
Power corrupts.  People get cocky and start acting like 'God'.

There wouldn't need to be ignorance towards Sheila if there was proof.
Not sure what this means.

I wasn't talking about members of the public. People don't generally want to incarcerate an innocent man - even police officers and certainly not on the say so of greedy relatives.  Sure I can accept that he was fitted up because everyone thought he was guilty but NOT when they had evidence to the contrary.

You keep saying that David and Anthony were persuaded by Jones that Sheila could have been responsible but haven't posted anything to back that up. It was also early days and I am sure even the relatives weren't sure what was what. When they found out more details, they realised it couldn't have been Sheila.

On you third point, so what? They thought he was guilty Taff didn't - I wouldn't be happy to let a 5 times murderer get away with it either. Had their back door investigation come to nothing - no harm done. But why should they investigate behind Taff's back if there was evidence of Sheila being guilty. Surely they would know they were wasting their time?

Early retirement? I wouldn't say that was a motive.

People can get cocky but unless they're a complete psychopath, they generally don't take away someone's freedom i the full knowledge that they innocent.

It wouldn't matter how much the relatives knew of Sheila's illness if they had been shown evidence of her guilt.

[Adam]

Why would the police framing Bamber result in an early retirement ?

There is no reason the relatives would persist in getting Bamber put in jail if they were given evidence Sheila was the culprit. Roch has said twice this week the relatives were given such evidence but they still persisted. What this evidence was & how Roch knows this has not been said. No sources have been supplied either. 

Other policemen don't have to tell Taff Jones there every move. A policeman checked a window & had a drink with the relatives when collecting a silencer. So what ?

The relatives got Peter Simpson to re investigate the case because there was so much evidence against Bamber. Not because RB had something on Simpson as Roch has also suggested this week.

[Lucy522]

That's true but they didn't have access those first hours when the Raid Team entered.

Maybe that's why the police thought murder/suicide before all the incriminating evidence was "found" by the relatives

[Adam]

these facts are disputed adam, the silencer wasn't used imo, not shielas blood in it imo, bike no evidence at all, windows locked.

It does matter who brought these things up as the relatives had a motive to frame him.

Why is Sheila's blood in the silencer then ?  Just saying in you're opinion it's not Sheila's blood doesn't negate the evidence that it is. It's human blood via back splatter. So the silencer was used.

Do you think it was a coincidence Bamber brought June's bike to his cottage just before the massacre ?

The kitchen window could be banged shut from outside. This is evidence.

The relatives were already rich farmers with no criminal record. Framing an innocent relative of murdering his family. Total rubbish.

[Adam]

the family were not rich, he didn't comits the massacre and certainly not because he didn't like farming. He had already done what he wanted to do and it was his decision to go back to it. He was always going to inherit and although he had had struggles with his family ( nothing new in any famiky) it doesn't poin't to him wanting to kill them all.

If you believe the bike theory ! Well that's as nuts as the person who brought that theory into play in the first place  no evidence

The relatives were rich. Source supplied. With no criminal records.

Bamber didn't like farming & testified the wills stated he had to continue to work on the farm in order to inherit.

Do you think it was a coincidence that Bamber brought the bike to his cottage just before the massacre ?

[Adam]

hell could well of done just at the relatives could of planted the evidence when they had acese to the house.

What evidence could the relatives have planted ? The police had finished with WHF as a crime scene. Photos had been taken.

It was impossible for them to put Sheila's blood into the silencer via a contact shot back splatter as they did not have access to Sheila's body.

[Adam]

Maybe that's why the police thought murder/suicide before all the incriminating evidence was "found" by the relatives

Do you think it was a coincidence that Bamber brought June's bike to his cottage just before the massacre ?

[lookout]

Maybe that's why the police thought murder/suicide before all the incriminating evidence was "found" by the relatives

Lucy,there must have been some indication for the police to have concluded that it was murder/suicide,as they're not stupid,especially those who are higher-up with years of service and experience of such scenes. There wasn't even a mention of a re-enactment initially, because they'd been so sure of the verdict.

Then a month later it went pear-shaped when the relatives undermined the police,by talking about a woman who they'd known nothing whatsoever about.Enough to convince the police that it hadn't been Sheila.No mention of EP checking medical records----nothing.

[Lucy522]

Do you think it was a coincidence that Bamber brought June's bike to his cottage just before the massacre ?

Not at all I think he bought it for Julie like she asked

[Lucy522]

Lucy,there must have been some indication for the police to have concluded that it was murder/suicide,as they're not stupid,especially those who are higher-up with years of service and experience of such scenes. There wasn't even a mention of a re-enactment initially, because they'd been so sure of the verdict.

Then a month later it went pear-shaped when the relatives undermined the police,by talking about a woman who they'd known nothing whatsoever about.Enough to convince the police that it hadn't been Sheila.No mention of EP checking medical records----nothing.

I know, surely of all those officers that went through that house and not one said murder? Until a month later?

[Adam]

Not at all I think he bought it for Julie like she asked

Do you think it was a coincidence he brought June's bike for Julie just before the massacre ?

[Lucy522]

Do you think it was a coincidence he brought June's bike for Julie just before the massacre ?

No, I'm sure if he used it as a getaway vehicle he wouldn't be that stupid to leave it outside his house?? Nothing was found on that bike at all no mud, blood prints anything, yet it was used to cycle to and from a massacre in the middle of the night across fields, really?

[lookout]

I know, surely of all those officers that went through that house and not one said murder? Until a month later?

Really and truthfully,it was still a murder scene which should have been treated as such,but never was.

[Jane]

Caroline made an interesting comment when the said that, at the beginning, the relatives "wouldn't have known what was what". I think it should be looked at more closely.

The relatives would have been given the information BY the police, that Jeremy had given TO the police. There was no other source of information at that point. What would their initial reaction have been? Shock? Horror? Disbelief? Yes, all of those. Sheila had gone mad? She'd got hold of a gun and killed everyone? That's an awful lot to take on board when they didn't actually know, save from a letter she'd written Ann from hospital in March in which it said something about her being stressed, that she'd been ill. Certainly not MENTALLY ill. Still, I imagine that, at this point they accepted it because they couldn't get their heads round what had happened. I think it likely that the only words which passed between them were those of disbelief.

I believe it likely, that, at the start, any differences they had with Jeremy, would have been put aside. as we ALL would join ranks and pull together in a family crisis. We have Ann being supportive. Offering the hand of friendship. Being there for him. I remain totally convinced that had Jeremy conveyed himself to them as being 100% innocent -indeed, had he BEEN 100% innocent, they'd have believed it. I don't think they doubted what they'd been told until glimpses of Jeremy's behaviours began to suggest that everything may NOT be as it seemed.

For a start, Jeremy rejects offers of help. Did he consult the family over the funeral arrangements -which took place with unseemly haste. Was Colin consulted about what he'd like to happen to Sheila? OK, as her divorced husband he had no legal rights, but as the mother of his children, he arguably had the right to say he wanted them to be together. Jeremy, it seems, did all the arranging as if there were no other family. I think they'd have felt rejected by what he was doing.

I fully accept that everyone grieves differently. Some may appear not to grieve at all. I imagine this may have been how the relatives started to view Jeremy's behaviour. They may have seen their rejected offers of help as meaning that he didn't want them to know what he was planning. That he was deliberately keeping them out of the loop. Effectively, I think they'd have started to feel like the outsiders in their own family. It probably would have been at that point when they started to ask questions. Make comparisons. Notice that Jeremy wasn't telling the truth.  In fact, it's very likely that, in the beginning, they over compensated and made allowances for him because of the circumstances, but as 'outsiders, looking in, hearing, watching, I think there would have been a gradual dawning that it wasn't Sheila who'd been responsible. I don't believe there was ever a unanimous blinding flash of revelation such as Saul experienced on the road to Damascus.