A New Approach

[Steve_uk]

is that a joke, I think you need to look closely at yourself Steve and wonder why you get taken in by all the books you read

I take the gossip with a pinch of salt, but the authors have researched the documents, which have footnotes in the text for ease of access. It's a shortcut really.

[Jan]

I take the gossip with a pinch of salt, but the authors have researched the documents, which have footnotes in the text for ease of access and which give me quick access to them. It's a shortcut really.

Then you read carol lees book then ? And some of the interviews about Sheila's demeanour before the murders ?

[Steve_uk]

Then you read carol lees book then ? And some of the interviews about Sheila's demeanour before the murders ?

Well surely not everybody can be lying..

[Jan]

Well surely not everybody can be lying..

Did not say that , it seemed to indicate that her mood was up and down , not in a permanent zombie  state . It was possible they were all telling the truth .

[Steve_uk]

Did not say that , it seemed to indicate that her mood was up and down , not in a permanent zombie  state . It was possible they were all telling the truth .

I was referring to June's mood altering after the Vaulty Manor visit. There's not much evidence to suggest that Sheila was acting normally at all those last few hours.

[Caroline]

Then you read carol lees book then ? And some of the interviews about Sheila's demeanour before the murders ?

Specifically?

[Jan]

Specifically?

 In one of the books and I read two close together there were comments by different people from the party and other situations that varied quite a lot . Some said she seemed cheerful and normal and participating and socialising others that said she seemed depressed and vacant .

[Adam]

I have already created a recent thread on Sheila's final days/hours -


Sheila was on a high dosage of Haloperidol. Haloperidol has 60+ side effects which effect mental & physical co ordination as well as having strong sedative effects.

Sheila's best friend said Sheila needed help getting off sofa's a week before the massacre.

Sheila smiled at Leonard Foakes earlier in the day. He did not say Sheila seemed agitated or aggressive. 

Michael Horsnell saw Sheila walking on the massacre day and noticed clear body co ordination problems. He did not say Sheila seemed agitated or aggressive.

Sheila walked to Bamber's tractor with the twins. Bamber cannot remember what they spoke about. Bamber has never said Sheila seemed agitated or aggressive. 

Sheila was'vacant', non responsive & not paying attention to alleged supper conversations about fostering according to Bamber. He did not say Sheila seemed agitated or aggressive.

Sheila spent 3 minutes just saying "yes/no" to Pamela Boutflour on the telephone. She did not say Sheila seemed agitated or aggressive.

Sheila was going to bed at 10pm according to Pamela Boutflour. Supporting this is she was found in her nightdress in the exact same condition you would expect someone to be in who had been killed seconds after getting out of bed.

                                                    -----------------

If anyone has any other witnesses in the days or hours before the massacre, please post.

[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.

Revising my post yesterday.

Julie committing minor cheque book fraud in 1984 with Susan Battersby would influence her decision on whether to attempt to frame Bamber.

It would make her less willing to attempt to frame Bamber. She knew that Bamber knew about the 1984 fraud & would inform the police if Julie turned on him. Which is what happened.

[maggie]

Revising my post yesterday.

Julie committing minor cheque book fraud in 1984 with Susan Battersby would influence her decision on whether to attempt to frame Bamber.

It would make her less willing to attempt to frame Bamber. She knew that Bamber knew about the 1984 fraud & would inform the police if Julie turned on him. Which is what happened.

You still insist on calling it 'minor' cheque fraud.  They reported the cheque book stolen and then blatantly used it to buy goods in Oxford Street. That takes some nerve imo.  Speaks volumes to me..... the young JM wanted possessions and was prepared to steal for them.  She was tough enough to carry through such a scam.  She didn't appear to have moral boundaries, she was 21, not 12 and was training to be a teacher.
It's sometimes suggested JB put her up to it and ineffective little Julie couldn't say no to him.  That's a poor argument as she was in life and in the eyes of the law a grown up and quite capable of making her own decisions.

[Steve_uk]

You still insist on calling it 'minor' cheque fraud.  They reported the cheque book stolen and then blatantly used it to buy goods in Oxford Street. That takes some nerve imo.  Speaks volumes to me..... the young JM wanted possessions and was prepared to steal for them.  She was tough enough to carry through such a scam.  She didn't appear to have moral boundaries, she was 21, not 12 and was training to be a teacher.
It's sometimes suggested JB put her up to it and ineffective little Julie couldn't say no to him.  That's a poor argument as she was in life and in the eyes of the law a grown up and quite capable of making her own decisions.

I'm not excusing them but I think they did it more for a dare and a giggle. Jeremy had chidden them for being a "goody two shoes" and it wasn't as if they purposefully targeted luxury goods. As Julie herself said most of the stuff was put into bags and given to charity or thrown away after the event.

[Jane]

I'm not excusing them but I think they did it more for a dare and a giggle. Jeremy had chidden them for being a "goody two shoes" and it wasn't as if they purposefully targeted luxury goods. As Julie herself said most of the stuff was put into bags and given to charity or thrown away after the event.

I'm inclined to agree, Steve. I somehow don't see her as having the potential to be the arch criminal some present her as being.

[Jan]

I'm inclined to agree, Steve. I somehow don't see her as having the potential to be the arch criminal some present her as being.

Combine the fraud, drugs, robbery and then because of the calls and then not telling the police of Jeremy's plans (alleged) she could have been in an awful lot of trouble . And awful lot .

[Steve_uk]

Combine the fraud, drugs, robbery and then because of the calls and then not telling the police of Jeremy's plans (alleged) she could have been in an awful lot of trouble . And awful lot .

But leaving the Oxford Street fraud aside Jeremy was involved in the lot.

[Jane]

Combine the fraud, drugs, robbery and then because of the calls and then not telling the police of Jeremy's plans (alleged) she could have been in an awful lot of trouble . And awful lot .

There seem to be an awful lot of "could haves", many of which sound like wishful thinking. Thing is, whatever predictions COULD have occurred, didn't.