A New Approach

[maggie]

To the best of my memory, at the time,m such was her reputation, she may as well have committed the murders herself.

I'm sure Jane but surely this is local gossip and rumour which would have affected anyone connected with the crime at that time.   

[David1819]

The two sums are for two different incidents. Don't know why you keep bringing this up? Jeremy borrowed the two grand from Nevil YEARS before the murders. There is no suggestion that Jeremy used this money to pay a hit man - that would be stupid given the time between his trip and the deaths of his family.

That's beside the point. RWB does not know the full circumstances behind the money. He comes up with stupid ideas.
 
Back to the question. How does the sum of £2000 end up on his radar before Julie 'comes forward'?

[susan]

I know we cannot take our own experiences and upbringing to judge others, I would have been terrified at the thought of cheque fraud and stealing but I accept that is me at 20 not Julie.  By the time I was 20 I was a Student Nurse with no energy  but work and sleep  .  I can't help wondering what was in her head, she was intelligent enough to get into Goldsmith's which was the top Teachers Training College before it became part of the university system.   This makes me wonder where she learned her morals, makes me wonder about her mother, I'm afraid, we do tend to learn our morals and our behaviour by the example of those closest to us.

Hello Maggie

Good post IMO morals I believe we learn from our parents especially our Mothers and they mould us throughout our lives and the way Julie behaved would have horrified me even when I was 20 not just now in my later years.

[maggie]

Would the 1984 minor cheque book fraud with Susan Battersby have negated Julie's disadvantages below in trying to frame an innocent Bamber ?


She didn't know what evidence existed.

There would be no evidence against Bamber. He was innocent.

There would be evidence showing Sheila was guilty. As she was.

She would be charged by the police. When caught lying.

Having a criminal record may effect her teaching career.

To make Bamber look bad, she had to implicate herself in the caravan break in. Effecting her teaching career ?

Her own 1984 crime may come to light. Effecting her teaching career ?

There was no financial reward in approaching the police.

It shows she was upset about splitting up with Bamber.

She would be on her own. No other witnesses could support her claims.

Bamber would have the last laugh. When Julie was exposed.

She would have to follow through her approach. Right through to the ultimate (unlikely) conviction. Lying to the world.

It would show she was vindictive. Once exposed.

She may quickly wilt under pressure.  This is something she had never attempted before, and a massive long term lie. So why bother in the first place ?

It would show she had no sympathy for a grieving man. Once exposed.

It would show how upset she was that she was no longer with Bamber. Once exposed.

It would show she was stupid. Once exposed.

An approach may ultimately be time consuming. Depending on her success. Taking up months or years of her life. Effecting her second degree and teaching career.

It would be her word against Bamber's. For the last month the police had treated it as murder/suicide, which was correct as she knew he was innocent.

She will not know the details of the forensic evidence. It may show Sheila was the killer. Which would not be surprising as Bamber was innocent.

It would be bringing other people into this, such the deceased grieving relatives and her own friends and relatives.

She may feel bad after her initial approach. But is coming clean now an option ?

She had already given a WS and gone around with Bamber for one month. The police will know she had approached them after she split with Bamber.

She was attempting to reverse a decision announced in the media, which the police were in public sticking to - murder/suicide. One month after the massacre.

Her approach may only last a few minutes. Experienced police officers may dismiss it, after all Bamber was innocent. Bamber may not even find out about Julie's attempt for revenge.

If an unsuccessful police approach  became news in the media, she would forever be looked upon as a heartless and lying woman. Friends and relatives may desert her.

Thanks for that Adam but I'm afraid it doesn't really make any difference to my reasoning although I am sure it makes perfect sense to you. 

[maggie]

That's beside the point. RWB does not know the full circumstances behind the money. He comes up with stupid ideas.
 
Back to the question. How does the sum of £2000 end up on his radar before Julie 'comes forward'?

I imagine you are thinking that RWB is insinuating the £2000 he borrowed was used to pay the hitman? 

How naive was RWB?  I do get the impression he lived in a different time but of course that is just an impression.

[Jane]

I know we cannot take our own experiences and upbringing to judge others, I would have been terrified at the thought of cheque fraud and stealing but I accept that is me at 20 not Julie.  By the time I was 20 I was a Student Nurse with no energy for anything but work and sleep  .  I can't help wondering what was in her head, she was intelligent enough to get into Goldsmith's which was the top Teachers Training College before it became part of the university system.   This makes me wonder where she learned her morals, makes me wonder about her mother, I'm afraid, we do tend to learn our morals and our behaviour by the example of those closest to us.

Well, that was the direction I was attempting to guide posters to. Not for one moment am I suggesting there was anything immoral about Mary Mugford, but if the necessity to have money was her raison d'etre, A) she'd have passed it on to Julie, B) she'd have thoroughly approved Julie's choice in Jeremy, MAYBE encouraging her to hang on to him so that her future was secured?

[JackieD]

Yes, she was, but whom of us, at 20, haven't become involved with things we'd sooner not come back to haunt us?

Its no excuse using Mugfords age to excuse what she did, at 20 she can be married she can vote and she can be incarcerated in a womens prison

She was involved in cheque book fraud, robbery and drug dealing, she was aware a serious crime was going to happen 'supposedly', she was aware her boyfriend was responsible for the murders of 2 children and three adults 'supposedly', she volunteered to identify the bodies of two children and three adults her boyfriend had 'supposedly' murdered, she tried to smother Jeremy when he finished their relationship,
she stood shoulder to shoulder with Colin Caffell at the funeral 'knowing' Jeremy had murdered his two children and just to rub salt in everyone's wounds she agreed to pose for the News of the World to get a bonus of £25,000 without a thought for Colin or any of Neville and Junes close friends

She has never been punished for any of her crimes and must have been laughing all the way to the bank

[Jane]

I'm sure Jane but surely this is local gossip and rumour which would have affected anyone connected with the crime at that time.   

Oh absolutely. No evidence, was there. Just people's opinion...............bit like here, really

[maggie]

Well, that was the direction I was attempting to guide posters to. Not for one moment am I suggesting there was anything immoral about Mary Mugford, but if the necessity to have money was her raison d'etre, A) she'd have passed it on to Julie, B) she'd have thoroughly approved Julie's choice in Jeremy, MAYBE encouraging her to hang on to him so that her future was secured?

Exactly except it is quite extreme imo and it does lead me further in that direction which makes me seriously question Mary Mugford's attitudes.  I am just following a thought process but it does make me think and begs some questions.  Goes to show without knowing the true characters of all the people involved in his crime it's hard to know where the whole thing begins and ends.

[maggie]

Hello Maggie

Good post IMO morals I believe we learn from our parents especially our Mothers and they mould us throughout our lives and the way Julie behaved would have horrified me even when I was 20 not just now in my later years.

I do agree Bron, the mother figure is very powerful and can in some instances be very destructive.  Makes you think....

[Jane]

Exactly except it is quite extreme imo and it does lead me further in that direction which makes me seriously question Mary Mugford's attitudes.  I am just following a thought process but it does make me think and begs some questions.  Goes to show without knowing the true characters of all the people involved in this crime it's hard to know where the whole thing begins and ends.

None of it started with any of the characters as they were the day it happened.

[maggie]

Oh absolutely. No evidence, was there. Just people's opinion...............bit like here, really

True. 

[Adam]

Still not sure what Julie did once as a 19 year old has got to do with her ignoring at least 26 huge & obvious disadvantages in trying to frame an innocent man of killing his family. A month after the massacre.

[susan]

Well as I believe Jeremy is 100% innocent my feeling towards her is quite natural.  Anyone that is as deceitful and greedy as Mugford will always get their comeuppance in the end.

Hi Jackie I agree with your post but IMO HATE is a very strong emotion and to feel it you have to be personally involved with that person just like to LOVE you have to be involved with the person.  I c an understand how you feel about her she IMO was a shameful greedy selfish person.  She will get her comeuppance no doubt about that.

[maggie]

Poor Mary Mugford, imagine the shame when she saw her daughter on the front of the News of the World

I bet she hid for months

I was actually just wondering if JM's mother encouraged her to do that interview and dress the way she did?  It is possible she hoped there may be more in it for her daughter if she showed some flesh?
We will never know the answer but it is a possibility.