This is another 'policy' thread, for anybody interested, and is not specifically about the case but a wider issue.
When it comes to criminal justice and penal issues, I am a liberal - but in the old-fashioned sense of the term. I believe in harsh punishments, but I also believe in strongly upholding due process. I believe the courts should have the option of imposing the death penalty, and in my own view, the just punishment for pre-meditated murder is death. I regard that as an imperative.
In this regard, I think an interesting question arises in the case of Jeremy Bamber (I realise this is hypothetical):
In a capital murder system, would Jeremy have been found guilty by a jury?
In attempting to answer that question, I won't take sides over his actual culpability, but would offer this observation:
This is a case in which a logical and plausible competing factual matrix is available that explains the same killings with a different culprit who was already inside the farmhouse and who did not need a rational motive.
I also note there is no direct forensic evidence of Jeremy's involvement, that the police bungled the crime scene, and much of the Crown's evidence was irrelevant: Julie Mugford being a case in point, but arguably even the moderator falls into the 'irrelevant' category, which is quite apart from the question of its dubious provenance as a piece of evidence and the potential for innocent contamination. There are other points we can make, such as the over-rationalised criminal motive ascribed to Jeremy. While the question of motive isn't probative, we can observe that Jeremy had at least equally-strong motives not to kill anybody.
Taking all that into account, I would question whether a capital jury would have convicted Jeremy, and I present that hypothetical question for consideration by both camps. Whether you are pro- or anti-Bamber, the flaws in the police investigation and the Crown's case are evident.
Those of you oppose or disagree with the death penalty might wish to reflect on this, and also reflect on the fact that Jeremy was sent down on a majority verdict, a result of abandoning an important legal protection against mob justice that goes to the heart of a rational jury system.
I favour serious punishments and serious juries, with proper evidence and unanimous verdicts.
