I've gone from thinking JB guilty to now not being sure. If he did do it, why didn't he shoot the dog that he openly hated and wanted put down in the aftermath?
I'm trying to look at all angles, especially ones that are a bit obscure. My thoughts are that if JB did actually murder everyone, killing the dog would have been easy.
Would Sheila have shot the dog? What do you think Jeremy Bambers plans were? Wouldn't shooting the dog have given the police more reason to suspect him?
He would have known the history building up with regards Sheila and he would have thought through how the police would have perceived the state of her mental health along with evidence at the crime scene. All he had to do was set the scene and feed the police his story.
This was a premeditated murder. He was waiting for the right time to carry out his plans. He would have already gathered enough circumstantial evidence in order to help give him plausible deniability and to finger Sheila.
In his defence, he states there was a conversation going on that night in the kitchen regarding fostering of the twins. This wasn't thought through too well because Colin and Sheila had joint custody of the twins, therefore as Colin states in his WS this would not have been possible.
What I don't think he'd thought of was that his father would put up such a fight and that he ended up needing to shoot Sheila twice.
Welcome to the forum by the way
