Who Killed Sheila Caffell? Part Two: Jeremy's Plan

[Steve_uk]

That's helpful, thanks.  You know a lot more than I do about the background.  I must concede, the lack of forensic evidence in Sheila's bedroom presents a setback for the scenario I have outlined, but it's not fatal to it.  What I am trying to understand, then, is how and why Sheila would have made it into the master bedroom, given that Jeremy needed to shoot her while she was lying down somewhat?  Do you have any thoughts on that?  Is it that she is believed to have been sleeping in the master bedroom for some reason?  Or is it assumed she ran there?  If the latter, how did Jeremy manage to shoot her in that way?  And just as importantly, how does June fit into that scenario?

I think he more or less manhandled her into it, possibly at the point of a gun. Did he speak on the way to the master bedroom, was she conscious it was her brother who was the intruder, did she climb over June's body to reach the cabinet and then lie down there?

We may never know.

[Luminous Wanderer]

I think he more or less manhandled her into it, possibly at the point of a gun. Did he speak on the way to the master bedroom, was she conscious it was her brother who was the intruder, did she climb over June's body to reach the cabinet and then lie down there?

We may never know.

Sorry but I can't accept that.

I don't believe your or the Crown's account of what happened works logically and my intention is to run through the scenario using logic.

I've explained everything above in the opening post, but briefly (this being just a summary), if Bamber did it then he must have shot Sheila first, so we have to explain why she was shot in the way she was shot, why she wasn't shot with the moderator (if my estimation of the gunshot wounds is right); also we must explain why Bamber would then attach the moderator to the rifle after alerting everybody in the house to his presence, and also - if you're right about the blood evidence - we have to explain why Sheila was in the master bedroom given that Bamber had to shoot her in a particular way.  Thinking it through in logical terms, understanding the nature and trajectory of the wounds to her throat and considering carefully the surrounding fact pattern, it doesn't quite cohere - which is not to say it is impossible.

For one thing - and this being only one point that occurs to me - why are there no marks on Sheila if Jeremy:

- woke her up; and,
- coerced here - must have dragged her, actually - into the master bedroom?

Wouldn't she put up a struggle of some kind? Bear in mind that the blood is on her nightdress, so Jeremy hasn't changed her.

And importantly, if we're accepting that in fact she was found by Jeremy in her own bedroom (which does make sense), then why wouldn't Bamber just shoot her there, while she is subdued or asleep?  Well, why?  You surely need to explain that.

Sorry to say this (and I am sorry, because I don't want to be seen to be defending a common murderer), the more I think about it, the less confidence I have in the Crown's case.  . 

[Adam]

Sheila was on Haliperiodol and under sedation. She would not have a clue what was happening in the few seconds it would take for Bamber to move Sheila a few feet.

--------

How do you believe Sheila committed the massacre ? Please include -

The build up with a fully fit Nevill.

1/2 phone calls,

A big kitchen fight.

2 chambers/breachs & reloads.

[Adam]

It is very doubtful Sheila woke from a deep sleep, under sedation & behind walls and closed doors, during the massacre.

I have said it would be easy for Bamber to scoop up off the bed a very light & zonked out woman such as Sheila. I know I could. Then carry her a few feet. Even if she did start to wake, it would be too late.

[Luminous Wanderer]

Sheila was on Haliperiodol and under sedation. She would not have a clue what was happening in the few seconds it would take for Bamber to move Sheila a few feet.

What you're saying is that Jeremy pulled Sheila into the master bedroom as part of his staging plan, and that explains why he didn't just do it the easy way and shoot her while subdued or asleep and then stage it from there.  I can accept that as a possibility because shooting her in her own bedroom might have left forensic clues and bungled the staging.  I'm not saying I agree, but I understand the point.

But that still leaves the problem of how he managed to shoot a peripatetic Sheila in the throat, which I don't necessarily have to deny is possible in order to believe that it is also quite doubtful.  Wouldn't she resist and wouldn't there be signs of this?  I think that the absence of indications of a struggle on Sheila's nightdress could be turned in Bamber's favour.

--------

How do you believe Sheila committed the massacre ? Please include -

The build up with a fully fit Nevill.

1/2 phone calls,

A big kitchen fight.

2 chambers/breachs & reloads.

I don't believe she did or didn't do anything.  I'm neutral.  And in my view, Bamber's supporters don't have to explain an alternative narrative to overturn his conviction.  It's only necessary to throw one pillar of the Crown's case into doubt and it collapses, but just to emphasise, I don't believe the 'kitchen struggle' is a significant probative issue.  It's a red herring.  It stands to reason that a deranged psychotic woman with a gun could have overpowered Nevill.  I only need say 'could' and that is all the defence requires, just as on other points, that is all the Crown requires. 

[lookout]

Sheila hadn't had a clue because she'd been in a delusional state of not knowing where she was or who she was. This is the effect that Haldol has when the full quota isn't administered,along with the voices who were ordering her to destroy all things evil. 

[Adam]

What you're saying is that Jeremy pulled Sheila into the master bedroom as part of his staging plan, and that explains why he didn't just do it the easy way and shoot her while subdued or asleep and then stage it from there.  I can accept that as a possibility because shooting her in her own bedroom might have left forensic clues and bungled the staging.  I'm not saying I agree, but I understand the point.

But that still leaves the problem of how he managed to shoot a peripatetic Sheila in the throat, which I don't necessarily have to deny is possible in order to believe that it is also quite doubtful.  Wouldn't she resist and wouldn't there be signs of this?  I think that the absence of indications of a struggle on Sheila's nightdress could be turned in Bamber's favour.

--------

I don't believe she did or didn't do anything.  I'm neutral.  And in my view, Bamber's supporters don't have to explain an alternative narrative to overturn his conviction.  It's only necessary to throw one pillar of the Crown's case into doubt and it collapses, but just to emphasise, I don't believe the 'kitchen struggle' is a significant probative issue.  It's a red herring.  It stands to reason that a deranged psychotic woman with a gun could have overpowered Nevill.  I only need say 'could' and that is all the defence requires, just as on other points, that is all the Crown requires.

You ask how Bamber got Sheila into the main bedroom. Then hide behind the 'neutral' stance when I ask how Sheila committed the massacre.

It is true that Bamber just needs to find a technicality on one thing to have a chance of COA referral. However this is a forum and posters give opinions rather than respond to questions by just saying Bamber doesn't have to answer that.

Sheila's nightdress highlights she didn't fight with Nevill or Bamber. She was too weak, zonked out and uncordinated. Espescially for a fit determined man such as Bamber.

[Nigel]

You ask how Bamber got Sheila into the main bedroom. Then hide behind the 'neutral' stance when I ask how Sheila committed the massacre.

It is true that Bamber just needs to find a technicality on one thing to have a chance of COA referral. However this is a forum and posters give opinions rather than respond to questions by just saying Bamber doesn't have to answer that.

Sheila's nightdress highlights she didn't fight with Nevill or Bamber. She was too weak, zonked out and uncordinated. Espescially for a fit determined man such as Bamber.

Why are you so certain Sheila had a 'nightdress' on?, and not 'naked' or 'semi naked'?..

.., then, she 'cleansed' herself. Before putting a 'fresh' nightdress on to protect her modesty in preparation for her final journey.

[Adam]

Why are you so certain Sheila had a 'nightdress' on?, and not 'naked' or 'semi naked'?..

.., then, she 'cleansed' herself. Before putting a 'fresh' nightdress on to protect her modesty in preparation for her final journey.

Well everyone else had gone to bed & were found in their nightclothes & bare footed.

I don't know why Sheila would take her nightdress to WHF & then not wear it to bed.

[Nigel]

Sheila could not sleep that night, she had a late night snack.

As per autopsy.

[Luminous Wanderer]

You ask how Bamber got Sheila into the main bedroom. Then hide behind the 'neutral' stance when I ask how Sheila committed the massacre.

That's because Bamber doesn't need to explain how Sheila would have committed the massacre.  If he is innocent, he doesn't know any more than anybody else.  It's another red herring of yours. 

It is true that Bamber just needs to find a technicality on one thing to have a chance of COA referral.

Thank you for confirming I am right.  Not that confirmation from you was required.

However this is a forum and posters give opinions rather than respond to questions by just saying Bamber doesn't have to answer that.

Where does it say in the Forum Rules that unsupported opinions and speculations are required of any poster in particular?  And why should I oblige you anyway?

Sheila's nightdress highlights she didn't fight with Nevill or Bamber. She was too weak, zonked out and uncordinated. Espescially for a fit determined man such as Bamber.

You know this how?  Do post up your evidence for us all to see.  Presumably this will include mention in the autopsy, a toxicology report, a blood test, a psychiatric report, perhaps a psychopharmacological report too, as well as witness statements from employers confirming she wasn't attending work and from the relatives, all confirming that Sheila Caffell was a walking zombie.  How convenient that she should be like that, but you have the evidence, so let's see it and be impressed. 

[Adam]

That's because Bamber doesn't need to explain how Sheila would have committed the massacre.  If he is innocent, he doesn't know any more than anybody else.  It's another red herring of yours. 

Thank you for confirming I am right.  Not that confirmation from you was required.

Where does it say in the Forum Rules that unsupported opinions and speculations are required of any poster in particular?  And why should I oblige you anyway?

You know this how?  Do post up your evidence for us all to see.  Presumably this will include mention in the autopsy, a toxicology report, a blood test, a psychiatric report, perhaps a psychopharmacological report too, as well as witness statements from employers confirming she wasn't attending work and from the relatives, all confirming that Sheila Caffell was a walking zombie.  How convenient that she should be like that, but you have the evidence, so let's see it and be impressed.

You obviously don't know the evidence. Which is why you keep creating long threads asking questions. Then say 'Bamber doesn't need to explain' when other questions are asked.

Of course it was easy for Bamber to move & kill Sheila. She was a recovering anorexic, on Haliperiodol & under sedation. She was also an uncordinated woman in a nightie confronted by a dressed man with a rifle. If she actually woke up.

[Adam]

Sheila could not sleep that night, she had a late night snack.

As per autopsy.

Her digestive system was just slower than the other peoples.

That just means she would put her nightie on. Rather than walk around WHF naked with her father in the house.

[Nigel]

Her digestive system was just slower than the other peoples.

Really!

That just means she would put her nightie on. Rather than walk around WHF naked with her father in the house.

I am not saying Sheila was walking around the house naked PRIOR to the Psychotic episode.

[Adam]

I am not saying Sheila was walking around the house naked PRIOR to the Psychotic episode.

So why wouldn't she be wearing her nightdress during this mysterious midnight snack ? She had just got out of bed.