Audio

[joolz1975]

CuriousEssex.  We only have Jeremys word for it that he left a gun out at all.Its another one of those (did Nevill really indeed ring Jeremy) problems isnt it.Its something I doubt we are ever going to know for sure,so I myself have stopped agonising over those issues and have begun to look at other evidence.Evidence that can only be interpretated one way.
Personally, I myself would like to see a re-trial.But as both yourself and NGB point out,it is very unlikely,due to evidence being destroyed,some of the prosecution witnesses may be deceased etc.I too am torn.One half of me wants to see him released as I feel strongly that he had an unfair trial,and I just cant seem to feel satisfied that his guilt was proven beyond all reasonable doubt.The other half of me thinks,what if he is released and is blagging it? I would just have to console myself that he served 26 years in prison fo his crime and didnt actually get away  scot free.But I sincerly want to believe that isnt the case.

I ssort of get where your coming from and im a big believer in life meaning life but theres a little part of me that thinks even if he did get released on a technicality for us to find out after he did do it then yes at least he has served a very VERY lengthy sentence (longer than some killers have anyway) i do hate to think like that though!

Just another quick question to put in the mix, if he was released on a techincality or retrial but further down the line more evidence came to light that he was guilty could he be charged and tryed again?? (unlikely i know)

[Jackiepreece]

Joolz are you someone that would like all the evidence released to jb s defence team

[curiousessex]

I still believe there were a number of factors why the police thought it was a suicide and part of the cover up is I still believe Sheila could well have been alive later than what we have been led to believe.

5 dead bodies and we are led to believe the decision it was a suicide was led by Jeremys comments I still think the next piece of information to get is File 1 complete and any recordings we have to have everything out in the open or this will go on forever.

I actually wonder if Jeremy even remembered where he left the gun if he was as bad as me when I lived at my Mum and Dads I used to leave stuff everywhere and then couldnt remember where I had left it.
He didnt really come across very responsible and the danger of the gun he wasnt used to having kids around.

I really would like to know more about Sheila having more food left in her stomach and any further observations on that.

Also if jeremy left the farm at 9.30 june was having a conversation after that time with her sister saying sheila was acting strangely i take it jeremy did not hear that conversation but at least its not hearsay as Jeremy saying they were discussing custody with sheila

I also want to know about this bucket of bloody clothes how quickly did Ann Eaton remove them after access to the house i meant how quickly did she start poking around

Imagine the shock horror of the relatives if when they heard about the murders it must have been pandemonium I suppose Jeremy might have ended up as the overall boss

June had the telephone conversation with her sister at around 10 pm.

The telephone conversation at 9.30 pm was with the Farm Secretary.

And if Jeremy did not remember where he had left THE gun then why not just say I do not remember where I left THE gun?

[Jackiepreece]

Are you saying Jeremy was there for the call to pam and was it in the statement I am just checking up on stuff because if this hitman was used that had to be organised

[curiousessex]

Are you saying Jeremy was there for the call to pam and was it in the statement I am just checking up on stuff because if this hitman was used that had to be organised

No....... I am sorry I do not follow your logic and reason for your question

[ngb1066]

Part of me thinks if one lifted Jeremy's trial verbatim into a Criminal Court as of today the case would be thrown out but then again the rules are very different now. Some of those rules are different now because of what happened in Jeremy's case / police investigation and the mistakes that were made as a result of the initial conclusions of 4 murders and a suicide. It cannot be denied that Jeremy was involved in the reporting of key information / intel which meant the Police thought they were dealing with a live situation which involved someone going beserk with a gun. The eventual result was there were 5 people who lost their lives.

Another part of me thinks Jeremy possibly knows what really happened and knows the events portrayed in court which secured his conviction are not how things actually happened. In reality only Jeremy knows what really happened.

 

Does this make Jeremy to be proven guilty............ I honestly do not know but I do know when tried in 1986 by 12 of his peers 10 of them found him guilty on a majority verdict of 10 to 2.

Should Jeremy get another trial......... probably to settle all the controvosy.

Is there a risk the Crown may not be able to win a second trial. Most probably. Does that make Jeremy not guilty......... only Jeremy knows. If it is the case Jeremy did actually commit the murders and the Crown were not able to prove a case at retrial and Jeremy is given his freedom where does that leave us all?

curiousessex - you have summed up very clearly the dilemma faced by a number of members of this forum. I sense that there is a fairly widespread feeling that all was not right with the original trial, mainly because of the non disclosure of evidence by the DPP/Essex Police.  However a number of posters have said that whilst they are not satisfied that justice was done and that Jeremy Bamber's case requires fresh consideration by the Court of Appeal, they are not convinced of his innocence and because of the really dreadful nature of the crimes they do not want him to be released on a technicality.  I can understand those feelings and it is right that the debate on this forum should not just be about whether Jeremy Bamber has strong grounds for appeal but should also cover views on what in fact happened at WHF.

Looking at this from the legal viewpoint and from the viewpoint of basic fairness, if we take the view that Jeremy Bamber's trial was flawed and his convictions are therefore unsafe, his appeal should be allowed.  If the Court of Appeal orders a retrial, a jury can evaluate the evidence again.  I strongly suspect that he would be acquitted on a retrial.  However, as I have posted earlier today I believe that in view of the passage of time and the fact that important evidence has been destroyed, if the Court of Appeal allow the appeal there will not be a retrial.  Jeremy Bamber will be declared not guilty and immediately released from prison, but he will not have a second chance to present his case before a jury. However from what I have read if Jeremy Bamber is succesful in a third appeal he is unlikely to leave the matter there.  He will pursue civil action against Essex Police and possibly others and there might through that process be an opportunity for all the evidence to be tested again.

I am sorry that this is a rather lengthy post but I do think that it is important to accept that in order to succeeed in overturning his convictions Jeremy Bamber does not have to prove his innocence, he only has to show that there is a reasonable doubt about his guilt.  If there is such a doubt, all fair minded people should support his appeal being allowed and his release from imprisonment.

How ironic would it be if Jeremy was released and he then pursued Essex Police and others through the Courts for what I imagine would be very substantial compension. Money being the very motive portrayed in the original trial.

From the legal viewpoint do you beleive Jeremy would be successful in pursuit of civil action?

Are you from a legal background?

If he succeeds on appeal I believe that Jeremy Bamber would almost certainly be eligible for substantial compensation from the state under the discretionary scheme currently in place. Depending upon the evidence he now has available he could launch a civil claim for damages against Essex Police for malicious prosecution.  He would have to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, that Essex Police Officers falsified or withheld key evidence with a view to securing a conviction.  I do not have access to the latest evidence so it is not possible for me to assess the likelihood of success in such an action at this stage.

I do have a legal background.  I practised as a barrister for a number of years.

[Jackiepreece]

Because the impression that is given was that Jeremy did not witness the arguement about custody I have seen it posted this could have been made up but there was a conversation between june and pam that night Sheila was behaving strangely

For the people on this forum who believe jb used a hitman and he told jm tonights the night he didnt have a very big window to organise this hitman.  I dont live in Darcy and i dont know how many hitmen live in Darcy but presumably he was local

[Alias]

Because the impression that is given was that Jeremy did not witness the arguement about custody I have seen it posted this could have been made up but there was a conversation between june and pam that night Sheila was behaving strangely

For the people on this forum who believe jb used a hitman and he told jm tonights the night he didnt have a very big window to organise this hitman.  I dont live in Darcy and i dont know how many hitmen live in Darcy but presumably he was local

Yes, that is so true. To think that a hitman was just sitting around waiting for Jeremy to call on him to go out to kill five people any day, any night at Jeremy's whim just doesn't hold water in my opinion. For 2000£. Nah.
Julie's account isn't plausible. Not at all!

[curiousessex]

Because the impression that is given was that Jeremy did not witness the arguement about custody I have seen it posted this could have been made up but there was a conversation between june and pam that night Sheila was behaving strangely

For the people on this forum who believe jb used a hitman and he told jm tonights the night he didnt have a very big window to organise this hitman.  I dont live in Darcy and i dont know how many hitmen live in Darcy but presumably he was local

I have not mentioned anything about a hitman.

Besides Jeremy's statements do not support the use of a hitman. Jeremy reported that Nevill had allegedly mentioned Sheila had gone beserk with THE gun.

I also beleive it was Jeremy who has stated there was a discussion about custody of Sheila's children.

[Jackiepreece]

Ngb1066
Do you think that the huge sum of money that Jeremy could get in compensation could have a bearing on if this case was referred to the court of appeal and do any secret deals take place like we will let you if (i know it sounds far fetched and I dont want any details but do things like that go on)

I know in the Eddie Gilfoyle case he was freed but there was some sort of gagging order on him that he couldnt talk to the media.  I know he was fighting this

[curiousessex]

Part of me thinks if one lifted Jeremy's trial verbatim into a Criminal Court as of today the case would be thrown out but then again the rules are very different now. Some of those rules are different now because of what happened in Jeremy's case / police investigation and the mistakes that were made as a result of the initial conclusions of 4 murders and a suicide. It cannot be denied that Jeremy was involved in the reporting of key information / intel which meant the Police thought they were dealing with a live situation which involved someone going beserk with a gun. The eventual result was there were 5 people who lost their lives.

Another part of me thinks Jeremy possibly knows what really happened and knows the events portrayed in court which secured his conviction are not how things actually happened. In reality only Jeremy knows what really happened.

 

Does this make Jeremy to be proven guilty............ I honestly do not know but I do know when tried in 1986 by 12 of his peers 10 of them found him guilty on a majority verdict of 10 to 2.

Should Jeremy get another trial......... probably to settle all the controvosy.

Is there a risk the Crown may not be able to win a second trial. Most probably. Does that make Jeremy not guilty......... only Jeremy knows. If it is the case Jeremy did actually commit the murders and the Crown were not able to prove a case at retrial and Jeremy is given his freedom where does that leave us all?

curiousessex - you have summed up very clearly the dilemma faced by a number of members of this forum. I sense that there is a fairly widespread feeling that all was not right with the original trial, mainly because of the non disclosure of evidence by the DPP/Essex Police.  However a number of posters have said that whilst they are not satisfied that justice was done and that Jeremy Bamber's case requires fresh consideration by the Court of Appeal, they are not convinced of his innocence and because of the really dreadful nature of the crimes they do not want him to be released on a technicality.  I can understand those feelings and it is right that the debate on this forum should not just be about whether Jeremy Bamber has strong grounds for appeal but should also cover views on what in fact happened at WHF.

Looking at this from the legal viewpoint and from the viewpoint of basic fairness, if we take the view that Jeremy Bamber's trial was flawed and his convictions are therefore unsafe, his appeal should be allowed.  If the Court of Appeal orders a retrial, a jury can evaluate the evidence again.  I strongly suspect that he would be acquitted on a retrial.  However, as I have posted earlier today I believe that in view of the passage of time and the fact that important evidence has been destroyed, if the Court of Appeal allow the appeal there will not be a retrial.  Jeremy Bamber will be declared not guilty and immediately released from prison, but he will not have a second chance to present his case before a jury. However from what I have read if Jeremy Bamber is succesful in a third appeal he is unlikely to leave the matter there.  He will pursue civil action against Essex Police and possibly others and there might through that process be an opportunity for all the evidence to be tested again.

I am sorry that this is a rather lengthy post but I do think that it is important to accept that in order to succeeed in overturning his convictions Jeremy Bamber does not have to prove his innocence, he only has to show that there is a reasonable doubt about his guilt.  If there is such a doubt, all fair minded people should support his appeal being allowed and his release from imprisonment.

How ironic would it be if Jeremy was released and he then pursued Essex Police and others through the Courts for what I imagine would be very substantial compension. Money being the very motive portrayed in the original trial.

From the legal viewpoint do you beleive Jeremy would be successful in pursuit of civil action?

Are you from a legal background?

If he succeeds on appeal I believe that Jeremy Bamber would almost certainly be eligible for substantial compensation from the state under the discretionary scheme currently in place. Depending upon the evidence he now has available he could launch a civil claim for damages against Essex Police for malicious prosecution.  He would have to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, that Essex Police Officers falsified or withheld key evidence with a view to securing a conviction.  I do not have access to the latest evidence so it is not possible for me to assess the likelihood of success in such an action at this stage.

I do have a legal background.  I practised as a barrister for a number of years.

When did you give up practising as a Barrister? (If you do not mind me asking)

[Jackiepreece]

Curiousessex I didnt mention the hitman being involved but a number of forum members have that is why I am discussing that theory like all other theory I do read everyones posts even Mr Angrys

[Jackiepreece]

He won the euro lottery that is too private

[curiousessex]

Curiousessex I didnt mention the hitman being involved but a number of forum members have that is why I am discussing that theory like all other theory I do read everyones posts even Mr Angrys

Jackie

I beleive the hitman theory was discredited by Essex Police as the supposed hitman had an alibi.

As I understand it the hitman theory was only investigated, and discounted, after Jeremy became a suspect.

[grahameb]

Curiousessex I didnt mention the hitman being involved but a number of forum members have that is why I am discussing that theory like all other theory I do read everyones posts even Mr Angrys

Jackie

I beleive the hitman theory was discredited by Essex Police as the supposed hitman had an alibi.

As I understand it the hitman theory was only investigated, and discounted, after Jeremy became a suspect.

Interesting that instead of rejecting Julie Mugford's story as fiction when the story of the hitman was discredited, They rather believed that Jeremy invented the story instead of Julie. Very strange that.