Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: guest29835 on July 16, 2020, 01:24:AM
-
Adam quite reasonably asks me why I am sceptical regarding DI Cook's deductions about bullet choreography. To be clear, I am not questioning DI Cook's integrity or competence. I'm simply suggesting that he and his colleagues may have made a mistake - which we all do from time-to-time.
Here's why:
(i). I gather that there was almost no discernible blood trail between the main landing and the kitchen, aside from two isolated spots of blood - respectively, on the main stairway wall and the jamb between the kitchen and the main foyer.
(ii). Poor old Nevill suffered eight gunshot wounds. I am open to correction on this, but my understanding is that of these, only two were non-head shots.
What this evidence is telling me is that Nevill was not shot four times upstairs. I don't doubt that Nevill was shot outside the kitchen. Probably he was shot at least once upstairs - most likely it was on the main landing rather than in the master bedroom (perhaps with the perpetrator firing from the vantage point of the master bedroom while Nevill is on the landlng) - and then he is also shot on the main stairway.
As an aside, my personal view is that the shot to Nevill on the main stairway may have been with Nevill going up the stairs rather than down - if so, the prosecution have problems. But we'll skip that point. For present purposes, let's keep it simple and assume that Nevill is shot on the main stairway with the perpetrator behind him, meaning Nevill is heading down the stairs for the kitchen.
With that preamble, let's get down to the business I want to address: If Nevill was shot upstairs at all, never mind four times, then the following is happening:
(i). He is in pain.
(ii). He is in shock.
(iii). He is bleeding.
(iv). He is touching his own wounds and getting blood on his hands and fingers.
On top of this, if we accept what the Crown say, we think Nevill is shot in the head while he is somewhere upstairs. Perhaps the shot to Nevill's head at this stage is to the jaw/mouth area, which might - might - not incapacitate him, but we need to account for one more head region shot. The problem for the prosecution seems obvious to me. It is of course possible that DI Cook was correct and there was one more head shot at this stage that didn't incapacitate Nevill, but it seems to me rather unlikely.
But let's stick to the Crown's choreography for now. Nevill has been shot upstairs and he is on the main stairway. Then we say Nevill runs to the kitchen. Why? Myself and Adam have been discussing this on another thread. I think I have shown that Nevill could not have made a 999 call, given the evidence available (though, importantly, it does not follow from this that he didn't intend to and try to reach the phone). Following further discussions with Adam, I am also satisfied that it is at least plausible that Nevill was running for the back door (i.e. the side door on the 'white' side of the house) in the belief that the key was in it and he could make an escape. He would be going out into the night barefoot and in pyjamas, so it's not a perfect theory, but let's remember that he was fleeing an armed lunatic in the middle of the night and didn't have much time for carefully-considered thought. Maybe he had it in mind to flee and try to rouse somebody in the nearby farm cottages.
Here's where I see a problem with it: the lampshade. We're told the glass lampshade in the kitchen was broken and shattered. The background to this is that the prosecution and people who hold to Jeremy being guilty have always maintained there was a struggle in the kitchen. This has been thought to be a point against Jeremy on the basis that Nevill would easily overcome Sheila.
The problems with this theory are:
(a). We are asked to believe that Nevill had been shot four times before even reaching the kitchen, including twice in the head region, but then we have him struggling with Jeremy.
(b). The blood distribution in the kitchen doesn't cohere with Nevill attempting to transit the kitchen to flee. For instance, why are there three blood prints on the worktop?
(c). Following on from (b) above, given that there are blood prints on the worktop, how come, at the very least, there is no blood on the kitchen phone very near it, if not also a recorded 999 call from Nevill?
(d). Adam tells us - and I accept this is plausible (I am not being disrespectful) - that Nevill wasn't running for the phone, but to flee via the kitchen out the back door. So where does the struggle fit into that? How come the lampshade is shattered?
One possibility, which we'll park for now, is that Adam is correct and Jeremy staged the scene by breaking the lampshade, etc., in order to give the impression of a fight or struggle between Nevill and Sheila.
Now let's compare and contrast. Let's see if the above issues can be resolved by making Sheila the killer rather than Jeremy. Interestingly, they can.
Jeremy need not struggle with Nevill if he has a gun, he would just shoot him, but we've already seen the problems with that scenario.
But Sheila would struggle with Nevill because she is not necessarily intending to kill anybody, she is just going crazy with the gun. Nevill would be trying to get the gun off her. One can imagine a scenario in which the lampshade is broken and shattered. Nevill would not be shot upstairs at all - there is no conclusive evidence to say he was anyway - he would be shot once as he ascends the stairs approaching Sheila, then Sheila pursues him back to the kitchen where he intends to round on her and wrestle the gun off her, but she manages to keep the weapon and she fires seven more times into Nevill.
This is consistent with almost-all the evidence, with one exception: the position of the ejected bullet cartridge casings as found and recorded at the scene. The question arises: Is it possible that the other evidence could override the casing positions? Or is there an explanation for the apparent paradoxy in the crime scene? Should we instead accept the recorded casing positions on their face and assume that Jeremy staged the kitchen scene to make it look like a struggle between Nevill and Sheila? If we do accept this, then how do we reconcile this with the forensic evidence and ordinary common-sense?
-
Jeremy would have watched the family routine on the Sunday and Monday night, establishing that the twins would be in bed by 7pm following their bath, with Sheila following shortly afterwards, her lethargy ever evident. Remember he has to pick an occasion when the whole family is under one roof, when the Bambers don't have ready access to a telephone, when the main obstacle to his plans had been ill for some time and would be tired after harvesting the whole day.
What happened in the kitchen? Impossible to know for sure, but remember Jeremy has to make it look as if Nevill did call him at some stage, so no use leaving him dead in the master bedroom sans telephone. Similarly with Sheila: he can't have her dead in bed (let's say his plan was a single gunshot to the head) as the twins were found if she's supposed to have turned into Lynda Carter Wonder Woman for an hour or so of this drama.
Jeremy incapacitates the twins first, with one gunshot each to the head. He can come back to them later to hone his artistry. He then moves into the master bedroom, where Nevill and June are sleeping. Adrenaline has taken over now and he's shooting randomly at this stage, surprisingly not targeting Nevill first as the blood in the bed confirms. For the Jeremy is guilty contingent the confirmatory feature is that none of the initial shots (nor any of them discharged that morning) missed their target, ruling out a Sheila in psychosis, when in that state she was totally unaware of any other person's thoughts or actions, and totally unable to function normally, save a few fist beatings against the wall, an outlet offering momentary relief for pent-up frustration of mental illness.
June has been pinned to the bed now, one shot hitting the right side of the head and passing through the pillow. But Nevill manages to rise up from bed, though Jeremy shoots him however many times with the remainder before having to reload.
Have you got that Bamberettes? A lethargic, schizophrenic poorly-coordinated young woman who couldn't drive a car has to reload the Anschutz at least twice, and more importantly has to be allowed the opportunity by Nevill so to do.
It's not clear whether Jeremy chased Nevill down the stairs or vice versa, but remember Nevill told Barbara he had a premonition of a shooting accident so he too is running on adrenaline as more likely he descends the stairs first with Jeremy in pursuit. Jeremy has stuffed his pockets with bullets and manages to target Nevill once more in a downward trajectory on the stairwell, leaving Type O blood on the wallpaper in the hallway. Nevill's hands are bloodied as he hurtles into the kitchen, realizing he won't have enough time to make a telephone call, though speaks from the grave as his bloodied fingerprints are left on the blue and white chequered worktop and he removes his watch, kicking it under the rug as a signal to who the perpetrator was, the same person who had stolen two Cartier watches from an Antipodean jeweller three years previously.
Nevill turns to face his attacker and manages to get a hand on the murder weapon. A tussle ensues in which Nevill, given his height advantage, is able to lift the Anschutz with one arm to light fitting level and the shade is smashed. The gun with silencer attached is unwieldy and also scrapes the side of the mantelpiece, depositing slivers of red paint thereon.
Jeremy is now totally absorbed in the crime and relishes the final moments. Here is the master, the wizard businessman, the paterfamilias who despatched him to spend eight long years of purgatory in a student dormitory for what purpose, for this purpose as he succumbs to the final humiliation as his head receives the last bullet discharge and is bashed vindictively by the rifle stock, red striped pyjamas fall to his ankles, the ultimate violation of a man who for all his faults still remained loyal given the onslaught from the outside world, faithful in his last will and testament and trusting that his son would relent to fulfil the farming duties for which he was brought to the Farm twenty-four years ago.
-
remember Jeremy has to make it look as if Nevill did call him at some stage, so no use leaving him dead in the master bedroom sans telephone.
Not true, and I've noticed that even the Court of Appeal repeats this canard, but the simple point is that the claimed phone call does not involve Nevill reporting himself as injured and it need not.
-
There is no reason why Bamber would stage the kitchen to make it look like Sheila had been in a struggle with Nevill.
There was a violent kitchen fight between Nevill & Bamber. Resulting in the upturned furniture and Nevill's horrific injuries.
The smashed lampshade and aga scratches happened while Nevill and Bamber wrestled for the rifle.
-
Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. At the same time June was shot.
Bamber shot June in several locations. To try to show an erratic Sheila. With Nevill he would have wanted 4 head shots, but only managed two.
-
Not true, and I've noticed that even the Court of Appeal repeats this canard, but the simple point is that the claimed phone call does not involve Nevill reporting himself as injured and it need not.
It's not a canard. If Nevill is found dead under the covers with (say) bullets passing through his head and the pillow behind how can he possibly have made the telephone call to his son requesting help when the bedroom telephone has been removed?
-
It's not a canard. If Nevill is found dead under the covers with (say) bullets passing through his head and the pillow behind how can he possibly have made the telephone call to his son requesting help when the bedroom telephone has been removed?
Because Nevill phoned him before the shooting started, or as the shooting started, as I've just said.
Jeremy's detractors, and the courts, have taken it upon themselves to assume that Nevill could only call after the shooting started, but why must that be the case? It's entirely plausible for Nevill to call before Sheila starts shooting. Why is it assumed otherwise? Has Jeremy himself ever said otherwise?
There is no blood on the upstairs phone or in the upstairs office and there is no blood trail to the kitchen (a problem for the prosecution that none of you seem able to explain).
The idea that Nevill would casually ring Jeremy after being shot four times, including twice in the head, has to be considered a fairy story - a canard, advanced to suit the prosecution argument in that it makes Jeremy's defence seem implausible.
-
There is no reason why Bamber would stage the kitchen to make it look like Sheila had been in a struggle with Nevill.
There was a violent kitchen fight between Nevill & Bamber. Resulting in the upturned furniture and Nevill's horrific injuries.
The smashed lampshade and aga scratches happened while Nevill and Bamber wrestled for the rifle.
It seems to me you keep having to change your story to suit. First you tell us that Nevill was running for the exit and Jeremy stopped him. Now it's Jeremy and Nevill in a struggle. Those two things are incompatible and make no sense in the context of four shots into Nevill upstairs. Why does Jeremy need to struggle with Nevill at all?
Doesn't a struggle, if it happened, point to Sheila? She would hesitate about killing her father and her father would hesitate about dialling 999, and he would also be hesitant about being physically decisive with her. One can imagine them returning to the kitchen, Sheila shouting and screaming, they are then struggling, the lampshade smashes, Nevill is trying to wrestle the gun off her. Normally he would prevail, but he is injured and his powers fade; she pushes him away, and fires.
-
It seems to me you keep having to change your story to suit. First you tell us that Nevill was running for the exit and Jeremy stopped him. Now it's Jeremy and Nevill in a struggle. Those two things are incompatible and make no sense in the context of four shots into Nevill upstairs. Why does Jeremy need to struggle with Nevill at all?
Doesn't a struggle, if it happened, point to Sheila? She would hesitate about killing her father and her father would hesitate about dialling 999, and he would also be hesitant about being physically decisive with her. One can imagine them returning to the kitchen, Sheila shouting and screaming, they are then struggling, the lampshade smashes, Nevill is trying to wrestle the gun off her. Normally he would prevail, but he is injured and his powers fade; she pushes him away, and fires.
Nevill ran to the kitchen after being shot 4 times upstairs. Bamber caught up with him & there was a violent fight.
Keep digging.
-
Nevill ran to the kitchen after being shot 4 times upstairs. Bamber caught up with him & there was a violent fight.
Keep digging.
So why doesn't Jeremy just shoot him? Why does a struggle happen at all? And why does Jeremy then change his mind and shoot him? And why run that risk of having the gun wrestled off him?
You're saying he is running for the exit, despite being a 61 year old man who has been shot four times, including twice in the head. He's in his pyjamas and he's barefoot. Is that likely? Even if we accept the possibility, why the struggle? It's illogical.
Maybe Jeremy was chasing him across the kitchen and that's how the lampshade broke, but the kitchen isn't large enough to allow for that scenario, and again, Jeremy would just shoot him, he wouldn't pursue him. Indeed, that's your own premise here: that Nevill never made it out of the kitchen because Jeremy had a gun, yet you now inconsistently (even contradictorily) posit that they struggled. Why?
Maybe Jeremy had to pursue him because Nevill had opened the door between the kitchen and the back hallway, which opens into the kitchen. But then, why isn't there blood on that door?
I think we are running into problems here.
Maybe Nevill was going for the phone, as that's instinctive whatever his injuries were. However, the problem is there's no blood on the phone.
Maybe Jeremy caught up with him in the kitchen just as he'd reached the worktop and that's when he shot him. This is just about possible, but if there's blood on the worktop near the phone, why isn't there blood on the phone? We also have the problem of how Nevill gets to the other side of the kitchen. A struggle would explain it, but a struggle is illogical for the reasons already explained. There is no reason for Jeremy to risk a struggle to position Nevill in one particular part of the kitchen. Possibly Nevill crawls to the other side of the kitchen trying vainly to get away from Jeremy, or Jeremy drags him there for some reason while holding the gun and that's why the lampshade was broken; but in the latter case, we're back to why Jeremy would want to do that.
Not that I am saying Jeremy is innocent, but I do find a Sheila scenario much easier to explain given the evidence.
-
While Sheila took the gun upstairs to shoot June. Nevill rang Jeremy. Nevil ended the call and ran upstairs as he heard shots being fired. Sheila had fired five shots at June. She then pivoted and shot Nevill with the remaining four bullets in the magazine as Nevill came up the stairs.
Nevill retreated the to the kitchen and then collapsed where his body was later found. Sheila then wacked him with the rife. Before reloading to shoot him another four times in the head.
-
While Sheila took the gun upstairs to shoot June. Nevill rang Jeremy. Nevil ended the call and ran upstairs as he heard shots being fired. Sheila had fired five shots at June. She then pivoted and shot Nevill with the remaining four bullets in the magazine as Nevill came up the stairs.
Nevill retreated the to the kitchen and then collapsed where his body was later found. Sheila then wacked him with the rife. Before reloading to shoot him another four times in the head.
Thanks David. I think your explanation of the Sheila-Nevill encounter on the stairs is superior to mine, but my explanation of the initial kitchen confrontation is better.
In my scenario I have Nevill and Sheila at stand-off in the kitchen. Sheila is screaming and shouting, etc. (maybe the lampshade gets broken at this point). Nevill now decides to ring Jeremy, while Sheila is there. Jeremy takes a long time to answer. When he does, as soon as Nevill starts talking into the phone, Sheila is haring off upstairs, which is why Nevill ends the calls or puts the receiver down [the telephonic mechanics of that will need to be ironed out on another thread].
As I say, your explanation of what happens next on the stairs is superior.
I differ from you about what happened in the kitchen. I think Nevill struggles with her, the context of that being that Sheila has only actually fired the gun once up to that point, so we have him trying to wrestle the gun off her, but she is able to push him away and Nevill is killed in a fusillade.
I take the view that almost-all the evidence points to this, with the except of the recorded position of the bullet casings.
-
Thanks David. I think your explanation of the Sheila-Nevill encounter on the stairs is superior to mine, but my explanation of the initial kitchen confrontation is better.
In my scenario I have Nevill and Sheila at stand-off in the kitchen. Sheila is screaming and shouting, etc. (maybe the lampshade gets broken at this point). Nevill now decides to ring Jeremy, while Sheila is there. Jeremy takes a long time to answer. When he does, as soon as Nevill starts talking into the phone, Sheila is haring off upstairs, which is why Nevill ends the calls or puts the receiver down [the telephonic mechanics of that will need to be ironed out on another thread].
As I say, your explanation of what happens next on the stairs is superior.
I differ from you about what happened in the kitchen. I think Nevill struggles with her, the context of that being that Sheila has only actually fired the gun once up to that point, so we have him trying to wrestle the gun off her, but she is able to push him away and Nevill is killed in a fusillade.
I take the view that almost-all the evidence points to this, with the except of the recorded position of the bullet casings.
The pathologist stated that one of the Shots Nevil received upstairs to his arm made it impossible to use that arm. Wrestling is out the question.
-
The pathologist stated that one of the Shots Nevil received upstairs to his arm made it impossible to use that arm. Wrestling is out the question.
I don't quite make the same deduction that you do. It was two shots to the left arm/shoulder, which must have immobilised the arm. The deduction from there depends on where we think the bullet casings should be as opposed where they found. In my scenario, he is shot once on the stairs, in the shoulder, which makes sense for a shot from above. This doesn't necessarily immobilise the arm, but even if you're right and it does, it needn't preclude a physical struggle in the kitchen - it merely explains more fully why Sheila prevailed.
I suppose that means we both come to the same conclusion, but for slightly different reasons. I accept that one problem with my scenario is that it is rather unlikely that the police would accidentally displace more than one bullet casing upstairs. I am suggesting they displaced maybe two. You seem to be implying they displaced one. I must admit that suggests your version of the scenario is more likely. Still, as I say, if he was shot twice upstairs/on the stairs, the scenario still gels overall; in fact your version makes a struggle with Sheila prevailing much more likely if anything.
-
So why doesn't Jeremy just shoot him? Why does a struggle happen at all? And why does Jeremy then change his mind and shoot him? And why run that risk of having the gun wrestled off him?
You're saying he is running for the exit, despite being a 61 year old man who has been shot four times, including twice in the head. He's in his pyjamas and he's barefoot. Is that likely? Even if we accept the possibility, why the struggle? It's illogical.
Maybe Jeremy was chasing him across the kitchen and that's how the lampshade broke, but the kitchen isn't large enough to allow for that scenario, and again, Jeremy would just shoot him, he wouldn't pursue him. Indeed, that's your own premise here: that Nevill never made it out of the kitchen because Jeremy had a gun, yet you now inconsistently (even contradictorily) posit that they struggled. Why?
Maybe Jeremy had to pursue him because Nevill had opened the door between the kitchen and the back hallway, which opens into the kitchen. But then, why isn't there blood on that door?
I think we are running into problems here.
Maybe Nevill was going for the phone, as that's instinctive whatever his injuries were. However, the problem is there's no blood on the phone.
Maybe Jeremy caught up with him in the kitchen just as he'd reached the worktop and that's when he shot him. This is just about possible, but if there's blood on the worktop near the phone, why isn't there blood on the phone? We also have the problem of how Nevill gets to the other side of the kitchen. A struggle would explain it, but a struggle is illogical for the reasons already explained. There is no reason for Jeremy to risk a struggle to position Nevill in one particular part of the kitchen. Possibly Nevill crawls to the other side of the kitchen trying vainly to get away from Jeremy, or Jeremy drags him there for some reason while holding the gun and that's why the lampshade was broken; but in the latter case, we're back to why Jeremy would want to do that.
Not that I am saying Jeremy is innocent, but I do find a Sheila scenario much easier to explain given the evidence.
Bamber did shoot him. Four times upstairs. He had no more bullets until reloading. So there was the kitchen fight.
-
Bamber did shoot him. Four times upstairs. He had no more bullets until reloading. So there was the kitchen fight.
There were 10 or 11 bullets in a fully-loaded rifle (the precise number depending on whether there was already a cartridge in the breech), so to me your numbers can only add up if one of the following applies:
(i). Jeremy embarked on this massacre with a rifle that wasn't fully-loaded; or,
(ii). Jeremy decided to attack the twins first.
Neither of these makes sense to me. Possibility (i) doesn't make sense because Jeremy would make sure he had a fully-loaded rifle to deal with all eventualities, and while I accept this is an assumption, it is a reasonable operating assumption in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Possibility (ii) doesn't make sense because Nevill is the threat; by attacking the twins first, even with a silencer, he runs a high risk of discovery with Nevill fleeing outside or to the kitchen phone.
I thought he was supposed to have planned it all? You lot do keep telling me that, so I'm afraid we'll have to base our assumptions and conclusions on that premise and accept what follows. Of course, Nevill fleeing is exactly what happened (if we accept Jeremy is the killer), but the point is that Jeremy would not have pre-planned things that way, it being much more likely that he attacked the parents first and something went wrong at that early stage.
Ainsley agreed with me at least on this point. He said in his report to the DPP that Jeremy attacked the parents first and he has Jeremy attacking the twins only after re-loading.
But I now see why a lot of dogmatic pro-guilt people need Jeremy to have killed the twins first. It's because otherwise the scenario doesn't make a great deal of sense ballistically and choreographically.
Let's err on the side of the pro-guilt camp and say that the twins were attacked first. For now, we'll shelve the problems with the scenario and just assume it. This means the twins have nine bullets in them. That means Jeremy has only one or two bullets left, depending on whether he started with a cartridge in the breech. Let's be conservative and say he has two bullets left.
Does Jeremy go to the master bedroom now or does he go downstairs and re-load? Or was he carrying the bullets with him?
What wakes up Nevill? What wakes up June? Is the dog barking? Nevill wasn't shot in bed, but it looks like June was.
If Jeremy doesn't re-load on the move and we say, to give the Crown the benefit of the doubt, that he has two bullets left, then does he shoot June with the two bullets, then realise he is out of ammunition and there then follows the struggle in the kitchen with Nevill?
If so, how do you explain the bullet casings on the landing, which seem to point to somebody being shot on the stairs? Where does Jeremy get the ammunition from?
Another thing - let's say Jeremy doesn't fire nine times into the twins in the first fusillade in that room, meaning Jeremy has more bullets available for his assault on the master bedroom, then how come June is still crawling around the master bedroom while Nevill and Jeremy are struggling downstairs? The bullet count does not reckon with what is claimed happened.
Also, if Jeremy is out of bullets upstairs, why does Nevill even need to go downstairs? Why isn't there evidence of a struggle upstairs in which Nevill endeavours to save June, Sheila and the twins, perhaps even barricading himself in the twins' bedroom (not realising that Jeremy has already shot them)? And given that, in actuality, Nevill does go downstairs, that means Jeremy is going downstairs as well, presumably to re-load, so why is there no blood on the phone? Why is there no 999 call from Nevill? And what is Sheila doing while all this is happening? Are you seriously telling me she is asleep?
Unless I am missing some key fact, I'm sorry to say at the moment it doesn't make sense. Obviously there will always be problems and questions with any scenario, but this doesn't fundamentally hang together. Worryingly, a coherent Sheila scenario is much easier to construct.
-
Because Nevill phoned him before the shooting started, or as the shooting started, as I've just said.
Jeremy's detractors, and the courts, have taken it upon themselves to assume that Nevill could only call after the shooting started, but why must that be the case? It's entirely plausible for Nevill to call before Sheila starts shooting. Why is it assumed otherwise? Has Jeremy himself ever said otherwise?
There is no blood on the upstairs phone or in the upstairs office and there is no blood trail to the kitchen (a problem for the prosecution that none of you seem able to explain).
The idea that Nevill would casually ring Jeremy after being shot four times, including twice in the head, has to be considered a fairy story - a canard, advanced to suit the prosecution argument in that it makes Jeremy's defence seem implausible.
Yes and then he conveniently went back upstairs to bed under the covers so Sheila could shoot him like a sitting duck..
-
While Sheila took the gun upstairs to shoot June. Nevill rang Jeremy. Nevil ended the call and ran upstairs as he heard shots being fired. Sheila had fired five shots at June. She then pivoted and shot Nevill with the remaining four bullets in the magazine as Nevill came up the stairs.
Nevill retreated the to the kitchen and then collapsed where his body was later found. Sheila then wacked him with the rife. Before reloading to shoot him another four times in the head.
Yes and as she was shooting her dad she says: "Nevill dear don't come near or my nightie will get dirty and my nail polish and mascara will get smudged.."
-
Yes and then he conveniently went back upstairs to bed under the covers so Sheila could shoot him like a sitting duck..
What specifically is your evidence for that?
-
There were 10 or 11 bullets in a fully-loaded rifle (the precise number depending on whether there was already a cartridge in the breech), so to me your numbers can only add up if one of the following applies:
(i). Jeremy embarked on this massacre with a rifle that wasn't fully-loaded; or,
(ii). Jeremy decided to attack the twins first.
Neither of these makes sense to me. Possibility (i) doesn't make sense because Jeremy would make sure he had a fully-loaded rifle to deal with all eventualities, and while I accept this is an assumption, it is a reasonable operating assumption in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Possibility (ii) doesn't make sense because Nevill is the threat; by attacking the twins first, even with a silencer, he runs a high risk of discovery with Nevill fleeing outside or to the kitchen phone.
I thought he was supposed to have planned it all? You lot do keep telling me that, so I'm afraid we'll have to base our assumptions and conclusions on that premise and accept what follows. Of course, Nevill fleeing is exactly what happened (if we accept Jeremy is the killer), but the point is that Jeremy would not have pre-planned things that way, it being much more likely that he attacked the parents first and something went wrong at that early stage.
Ainsley agreed with me at least on this point. He said in his report to the DPP that Jeremy attacked the parents first and he has Jeremy attacking the twins only after re-loading.
But I now see why a lot of dogmatic pro-guilt people need Jeremy to have killed the twins first. It's because otherwise the scenario doesn't make a great deal of sense ballistically and choreographically.
Let's err on the side of the pro-guilt camp and say that the twins were attacked first. For now, we'll shelve the problems with the scenario and just assume it. This means the twins have nine bullets in them. That means Jeremy has only one or two bullets left, depending on whether he started with a cartridge in the breech. Let's be conservative and say he has two bullets left.
Does Jeremy go to the master bedroom now or does he go downstairs and re-load? Or was he carrying the bullets with him?
What wakes up Nevill? What wakes up June? Is the dog barking? Nevill wasn't shot in bed, but it looks like June was.
If Jeremy doesn't re-load on the move and we say, to give the Crown the benefit of the doubt, that he has two bullets left, then does he shoot June with the two bullets, then realise he is out of ammunition and there then follows the struggle in the kitchen with Nevill?
If so, how do you explain the bullet casings on the landing, which seem to point to somebody being shot on the stairs? Where does Jeremy get the ammunition from?
Another thing - let's say Jeremy doesn't fire nine times into the twins in the first fusillade in that room, meaning Jeremy has more bullets available for his assault on the master bedroom, then how come June is still crawling around the master bedroom while Nevill and Jeremy are struggling downstairs? The bullet count does not reckon with what is claimed happened.
Also, if Jeremy is out of bullets upstairs, why does Nevill even need to go downstairs? Why isn't there evidence of a struggle upstairs in which Nevill endeavours to save June, Sheila and the twins, perhaps even barricading himself in the twins' bedroom (not realising that Jeremy has already shot them)? And given that, in actuality, Nevill does go downstairs, that means Jeremy is going downstairs as well, presumably to re-load, so why is there no blood on the phone? Why is there no 999 call from Nevill? And what is Sheila doing while all this is happening? Are you seriously telling me she is asleep?
Unless I am missing some key fact, I'm sorry to say at the moment it doesn't make sense. Obviously there will always be problems and questions with any scenario, but this doesn't fundamentally hang together. Worryingly, a coherent Sheila scenario is much easier to construct.
Bamber went upstairs with 11 bullets.
Two into the twins. Nine into June & Nevill.
Nevill ran downstairs to the kitchen as he was being shot 4 times. Either being caught before reaching the door. Or Bamber had disabled the door by taking the key out.
-
Bamber went upstairs with 11 bullets.
Two into the twins. Nine into June & Nevill.
Nevill ran downstairs to the kitchen as he was being shot 4 times. Either being caught before reaching the door. Or Bamber had disabled the door by taking the key out.
He must have been caught before reaching the door, as there is no blood evidence to the contrary.
So you're saying that Jeremy ran out of bullets upstairs.
This means he fired twice into the twins, five times into June and four times into Nevill.
I can accept that Jeremy might attack the twins first because he may have been thinking about the risk of one or both of them up and moving around and maybe hiding somewhere in the dark or even escaping the house.
The problems with all this are as follows:
(i). How does June move around after being shot five times?
(ii). Where is Sheila? Don't tell me she was asleep. There was gun fire on the main landing right outside her bedroom, and all the bedrooms are close together.
(iii). When Jeremy enters the master bedroom (I'm not sure from which door), he must have intended to fire on Nevill first because Nevill is the threat. Yet Jeremy is firing five times into June and Nevill escapes. That tells me Nevill has a considerable head start. Jeremy does catch him on the stairs, firing at him twice from the landing (after hitting him twice in the bedroom, if you believe the bullet casings), nevertheless the question is why Nevill doesn't make it to the back door or the kitchen phone - one or the other - or maybe even his den. He hadn't been shot in the leg.
(iv). Where is the blood trail between the main landing and the kitchen?
-
June was able to move after being shot 5 times. She later received 2 shots which would have killed her quickly.
Sheila was asleep. The 11 upstairs shots were fired with a silencer attached in other rooms. Daniel & Nicholas did not wake. June woke for a short while after she had been shot 5 times.
Bamber did shoot Nevill 4 times upstairs before running out of bullets and Nevill getting past him.
Bamber caught up with Nevill in the kitchen. Probably a few feet behind him as Nevill ran downstairs.
-
June was able to move after being shot 5 times. She later received 2 shots which would have killed her quickly.
Sheila was asleep. The 11 upstairs shots were fired with a silencer attached in other rooms. Daniel & Nicholas did not wake. June woke for a short while after she had been shot 5 times.
Bamber did shoot Nevill 4 times upstairs before running out of bullets and Nevill getting past him.
Bamber caught up with Nevill in the kitchen. Probably a few feet behind him as Nevill ran downstairs.
For me, the points of issue here are:
(i). I do not believe the silencer was used in the killings, and anyway, there is no conclusive evidence to say it was.
(ii). If we assume the silencer was used in the killings, the issue then is the noise impact of a small calibre moderated rifle inside the farmhouse using subsonic bullets. Jeremy may have used the silencer in anticipation of this problem, but he would not necessarily know what the impact would be as he could hardly practice beforehand. Personally I suspect the effect of the moderator would not have been great and I find it hard to believe Sheila would not have woken.
(iii). You assume that Jeremy fires expertly at the twins from some distance. That being the case, how was Nevill able to escape the master bedroom? Whichever way you look at it, at that point Jeremy has the advantage and could have felled Nevill easily.
(iv). How can June move around if she has been shot five times? We need to know what the extent of the blood trail is in the master bedroom and her movements have to be explained. The wounds to her should be expected to have incapacitated her.
(v). How can an injured Nevill, having been shot four times, move from the master bedroom to the kitchen while leaving almost no discernible blood trail? How is that possible?
(vi). How can Nevill even move at all? How can it be that the two shots to his face don't fell him there and then? Did he get up and start moving again? If so, why didn't Jeremy just kill him or overcome him? And where is all the blood?
(vii). Why does Jeremy return to the twins' bedroom later and shoot them again, another six times? What was the purpose of this?
(viii). What doesn't Sheila investigate the commotion and get Nevill and June's blood on her hands and feet and night dress?
(ix). If Sheila really did sleep through the whole thing, when does she wake? And what does Jeremy do when she wakes? Does Jeremy wake her up to move her to the master bedroom? Does he carry her while she is asleep or drowsy?
Bamber caught up with Nevill in the kitchen. Probably a few feet behind him as Nevill ran downstairs.
Logic tells me that Jeremy has to catch him, and if he didn't catch him, then that must mean he had a considerable head start, and if he has a considerable head start and he isn't shot in the legs, then how does Jeremy catch up with him in the kitchen? Why didn't he either make his escape or dial 999 from the kitchen phone? We know he didn't make it to the back door because there's no blood.
If Nevill can survive four gun shots, why can't he survive a physical assault from Jeremy and make it to the back door before Jeremy can re-load? If the blood evidence was lost and he did make it there and found the back door locked, why did he return to the kitchen where Jeremy was? Why not barricade himself in the den, which also housed the gun cupboard?
Whose blood prints are on the worktop? If it's Nevill's, then how come there isn't blood on the phone as well?
-
Sheila's blood is in the silencer. She recieved a contact shot in a location with high blood flow. The aga paint was also in the silencer.
June moved after being shot 5 times in bed, because the shots did not kill her.
The 4 upstairs shots to Nevill did not incapacitate him.
There is a recent poll on how Bamber would move Sheila around 15 feet.
Nevill won't dial 999 as Bamber is a few feet behind him & trying to kill him.
Bamber won't reload until Nevill has been knocked out in the kitchen. The injuries Nevill received shows he would have been knocked out.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10125.msg474635.html#msg474635
Bamber committing the massacre to match the evidence is straight forward.
People want to make it more complicated than it would be. Creating obsacles that won't exist using there own variables. Then refusing to give a Sheila scenario to match the evidence.
But each to their own.
-
Sheila's blood is in the silencer.
Sorry but I think you're wrong from the very beginning. It has not been proved that Sheila's blood is in the silencer.
June moved after being shot 5 times in bed, because the shots did not kill her.
Just because somebody has not been killed, it doesn't follow that they can move. I think she did move, but the question is what was the probable order of firing in relation to the shots to her given that there is evidence she moved. You want to say she was shot five times but you also say she was still moving around, because it suits you. Personally I have no stake in this, I just want to know what the evidence says. For that, I would need to be clearer about the extent of the blood found.
There is a recent poll on how Bamber would move Sheila around 15 feet.
And I reminded you in that thread that sedation cannot figure in any explanation, so you've now dropped that and you're now relying on her being asleep.
won't dial 999 as Bamber is a few feet behind him & trying to kill him.
Depends. Nevill may instinctively go for the phone on the basis that as soon as he notifies the outside world, the gaff is blown.
won't reload until Nevill has been knocked out in the kitchen. The injuries Nevill received shows he would have been knocked out.
For me, whether that is plausible depends on a number of things prior to it, for which questions are unresolved. I really don't understand how, if Nevill is ahead of Jeremy, he doesn't reach the back door or the den.
-
June was shot 5 times in bed. In the opening 11 shots. She was not killed and able to move a few feet. The evidence shows this. Not sure what else can be said.
Sheila's blood and the aga paint is in the silencer. Not sure what else can be said.
Sheila was under sedation as stated by the Court of Appeal. Although would have slept through the upstairs shots anyway.
If Nevill was trying to get outside, he didn't make it. Bamber could have taken the key out.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10125.msg474635.html#msg474635
Bamber committing the massacre to match the evidence is straight forward.
People want to make it more complicated than it would be. Creating obsacles that won't exist using there own variables. Then refusing to give a Sheila scenario to match the evidence.
But each to their own.
This is not true.
First, I have contributed a Sheila scenario. I have also mentioned it several times. I have also established that the sedation explanation for Sheila's placidity has no foundation and I now see that you no longer mention it. You now say she was asleep throughout the massacre of her family taking place yards away in the same house.
I have put forward a case for why, on the evidence, Nevill could not have dialled 999.
I've also narrowed you down to a precise incident sequence and chronology. You now tell us that Jeremy ran out of bullets upstairs and you say that Nevill was running for the back door.
I've also raised questions about Jeremy's actions, in particular the 3 a.m. phone call, which I consider very suspicious.
I've also advanced a new theory about Julie Mugford involving the possibility that she was in fact Jeremy's accomplice.
What I'm doing is testing the Crown's case using the evidence. I have no stake in the matter, one way or the other. I'm not on Jeremy's side, but I'm not on the side of the authorities either.
Don't mislead people about me again and don't tell me what I should or should not do. Nobody forces you to read my posts or engage me.
-
Sheila was under sedation as stated by the Court of Appeal. Although would have slept through the upstairs shots anyway.
This post crossed with my own and we've gone over the other points.
The Court of Appeal did not say that Sheila was under sedation - you're providing a simplified interpretation of what they stated in the judgment. They said that the drug has sedative effects at the levels prescribed, which is a general statement - and there's plenty of informed opinion to suggest it is wrong. Did the Court of Appeal take evidence from experts on this?
The bottom line is this:
It has not been established she was sedated, and if you want to advance this as your explanation, then the onus is on you to prove it, which you can't.
-
This post crossed with my own and we've gone over the other points.
The Court of Appeal did not say that Sheila was under sedation - you're providing a simplified interpretation of what they stated in the judgment. They said that the drug has sedative effects at the levels prescribed, which is a general statement - and there's plenty of informed opinion to suggest it is wrong. Did the Court of Appeal take evidence from experts on this?
The bottom line is this:
It has not been established she was sedated, and if you want to advance this as your explanation, then the onus is on you to prove it, which you can't.
Sheila wad on Haloperiodol. As said, she would have slept through the upstairs shots anyway.
-
87.
Thereafter Sheila Caffell received monthly injections of Haloperidol, a drug used to treat agitated states which had anti-psychotic and tranquillising properties. It also has sedative side effects at the levels prescribed.
-
148.
Sheila Caffell, probably in a sedated state from her medication, was also shot in the bedroom.
-
This is not true.
First, I have contributed a Sheila scenario. I have also mentioned it several times. I have also established that the sedation explanation for Sheila's placidity has no foundation and I now see that you no longer mention it. You now say she was asleep throughout the massacre of her family taking place yards away in the same house.
I have put forward a case for why, on the evidence, Nevill could not have dialled 999.
I've also narrowed you down to a precise incident sequence and chronology. You now tell us that Jeremy ran out of bullets upstairs and you say that Nevill was running for the back door.
I've also raised questions about Jeremy's actions, in particular the 3 a.m. phone call, which I consider very suspicious.
I've also advanced a new theory about Julie Mugford involving the possibility that she was in fact Jeremy's accomplice.
What I'm doing is testing the Crown's case using the evidence. I have no stake in the matter, one way or the other. I'm not on Jeremy's side, but I'm not on the side of the authorities either.
Don't mislead people about me again and don't tell me what I should or should not do. Nobody forces you to read my posts or engage me.
I have always said Bamber ran out of bullets upstairs. Otherwise Nevill would have been shot more.
I don't believe Nevill was running downstairs to phone 999. However agree he may have wanted to get outside.
I will look for your Sheila scenario.
-
You miss out the word "probably" from your quote of paragraph 148 and you fail to make clear that the judges are not giving their own view in that paragraph, but summarising the prosecution case.
In fact, nowhere in that judgment to my knowledge do the appellate judges claim that Sheila was sedated. Besides, in and of themselves, statements from the court are not evidence. That would be like saying that Judge Drake's summing-up to the jury is proof.
Did the 2002 appeal judges hear expert evidence on sedative effects of the drug?
And just so we're clear, is it your argument that she was sedated and that is why she heard nothing and/or did not leave her bedroom?
-
You miss out the word "probably" from your quote of paragraph 148 and you fail to make clear that the judges are not giving their own view in that paragraph, but summarising the prosecution case.
In fact, nowhere in that judgment to my knowledge do the appellate judges claim that Sheila was sedated. Besides, in and of themselves, statements from the court are not evidence. That would be like saying that Judge Drake's summing-up to the jury is proof.
Did the 2002 appeal judges hear expert evidence on sedative effects of the drug?
And just so we're clear, is it your argument that she was sedated and that is why she heard nothing and/or did not leave her bedroom?
There's impartial evidence from house painter Michael Horsnell that she was walking stiffly that afternoon, we have the account by Tiptree shopkeeper Barry Parker that she was "vague and distant", and of course the final telephone call from Pamela in which Sheila spoke very little and didn't muster enough energy even to say goodbye.
Anyway isn't it time to give your steed a brief respite for the weekend..
-
There's impartial evidence from house painter Michael Horsnell that she was walking stiffly that afternoon, we have the account by Tiptree shopkeeper Barry Parker that she was "vague and distant", and of course the final telephone call from Pamela in which Sheila spoke very little and didn't muster enough energy even to say goodbye.
Anyway isn't it time to give your steed a brief respite for the weekend..
Bamber said himself Sheila was very quiet at dinner & didn't even react when there were suggestions of fostering.
Impossible she woke at that time of night from hearing 11 shots with a silencer attached. In other rooms. Even if awake it would be impossible to hear.
-
https://youtu.be/SNrlfDPC_xs
--------
COA
Examination of the rifle 69. The rifle was a German made Anschutz model 525 .22 self-loading rifle in good working order. Cartridges are loaded into a magazine, which has a capacity of 10. It is, as the jury found when they conducted the exercise themselves, progressively harder to load as the number of cartridges increases. Loading the tenth is exceptionally hard. Assuming a full capacity at the commencement of the shooting at the farm, the discharge of the rifle twenty-five times would require it to be re-loaded a minimum of two more times.
--------
-
So far the main arguments against the straight forward Bamber scenario are -
Nevill didn't dial 999 - With Bamber seconds behind him.
Sheila may not have been under sedation - Although she was on Haloperidol & the rifle with silencer would be impossible to hear anyway.
Bamber fought Nevill in the kitchen rather than shoot him - He had run out of bullets.
-
There's impartial evidence from house painter Michael Horsnell that she was walking stiffly that afternoon, we have the account by Tiptree shopkeeper Barry Parker that she was "vague and distant", and of course the final telephone call from Pamela in which Sheila spoke very little and didn't muster enough energy even to say goodbye.
Anyway isn't it time to give your steed a brief respite for the weekend..
All that is subjective and can be picked apart. Did Mr Horsnell give evidence or at least provide a statement to the police? I can't recall seeing it.
-
So far the main arguments against the straight forward Bamber scenario are -
Nevill didn't dial 999 - With Bamber seconds behind him.
Sheila may not have been under sedation - Although she was on Haloperidol & the rifle with silencer would be impossible to hear anyway.
Bamber fought Nevill in the kitchen rather than shoot him - He had run out of bullets.
I notice you are studiously avoiding the problem of a lack of a blood trail from the main landing to the kitchen. That's rather a serious hole in the prosecution case. It could be resolved by saying that Sheila was the killer, but you would prefer not to do that.
The reason I think Nevill didn't dial 999 is because there is no blood on the kitchen phone. The issue isn't really whether he dialled 999 but whether he made it to the phone. It seems to me it would be instinctive for him to do this under attack from Jeremy, regardless of injuries; either that, or flee the house. But he would be fleeing the house bare-foot in his pyjamas.
It's a bold statement to say that the gun fire would have been impossible to hear. I'm not so sure, even if a silencer was a fitted, because it all depends on acoustics. A moderated rifle can still have a noticeable report, even with subsonic bullets. I also don't accept she was sedated and I don't accept that it has been proved the silencer was even used. It's not even certain that Haloperidol would help her sleep. One possible side-effect of it is insomnia. We know she had cannabis in her system and I wonder what contraindications this produced. I also wonder about the effect of reducing her Haloperidol dosage by half.
I note your scenario depends on Jeremy running out of bullets. Otherwise, you can't explain why Jeremy would need to struggle with Nevill.
In my view, what's needed is:
Expert pharmacological evidence.
An incident reconstruction looking at sequencing/time-and-motion and the noise impact of the same make and model of silencer (ideally the very same silencer) using the same make and model of gun (ideally the very same gun) and the same bullets.
Expert blood evidence, to explain the almost total lack of a discernible blood trail between the main landing and the kitchen. Maybe the blood soaked into his clothes and didn't drip?
-
Why would there be a blood trail? Nevill had been shot 4 times with a rifle used for shooting rabbits. Then ran down stairs. Blood wouldn't be flying off him like it does in slasher movies.
Nevill didn't phone 999. He would not consider it. Bamber was right behind & going to try to kill him.
I have just posted a video of rifle with silencer. No noise.
-
Why would there be a blood trail? Nevill had been shot 4 times with a rifle used for shooting rabbits. Then ran down stairs. Blood wouldn't be flying off him like it does in slasher movies.
I didn't say it would be like a slasher movie.
Do you accept he would be bleeding?
didn't phone 999. He would not consider it. Bamber was right behind & going to try to kill him.
This is based on an assumption and we really don't know. He was behind him because the bullet casings on the landing suggest this, but he stops to fire - twice - and the stairs are steep and narrow, and he is carrying a long rifle, with - as you claim - a silencer on it as well. It would have been awkward. I therefore wonder why Nevill doesn't make it to either the phone or the back door or the den.
I have just posted a video of rifle with silencer. No noise.
I can't see it anywhere here, but it may not be of much use. I have seen videos showing a similar moderated rifle with a quite noticeable report. I really think it depends on the interior acoustics.
-
I didn't say it would be like a slasher movie.
Do you accept he would be bleeding?
This is based on an assumption and we really don't know. He was behind him because the bullet casings on the landing suggest this, but the stairs are steep and narrow and he is carrying a long rifle, with - as you claim - a silencer on it as well. It would have been awkward. I therefore wonder why Nevill doesn't make it to either the phone or the back door.
I can't see it anywhere here, but it may not be of much use. I have seen videos showing a similar moderated rifle with a quite noticeable report. I really think it depends on the interior acoustics.
https://youtu.be/SNrlfDPC_xs
-
https://youtu.be/SNrlfDPC_xs
I've seen that before. It tells us nothing, unfortunately, because it's outside. The acoustics within a building are entirely different. I know this for a fact.
Incidentally, this seems to be another of the flaws of the 1986 trial. They demonstrated the rifle on an outdoor range, they did not reconstruct the incident using an interior range with similar acoustic properties, nor did they have the jury visit the farmhouse and look around - which I find shocking.
-
Adam why do you always quote something as a fact when you clearly don’t know when most other posters quote scenarios
It’s bloody annoying, can you stop please it’s making you look ridiculous
-
All that is subjective and can be picked apart. Did Mr Horsnell give evidence or at least provide a statement to the police? I can't recall seeing it.
The problem with you (and to be fair to you it's some other posters here as well) is that you lack a general overview of any given situation, but pinpoint details for which often you do have a case but which by themselves are insufficient to convince a sceptical audience and do not tally with the information available in the round. Part of the reason I read the books associated with the case (is egap1's thread Murder/Suicide at White House Farm possibly the best on the Forum?) is that some of them give footnotes to the sources, as well as giving an insight into the minds of the major characters in the drama, which is lacking in the dry-as -dust documents you and others often peruse.
To answer your question directly: Michael Horsnell gave a witness statement on 23rd September 1985.
-
I notice you are studiously avoiding the problem of a lack of a blood trail from the main landing to the kitchen. That's rather a serious hole in the prosecution case. It could be resolved by saying that Sheila was the killer, but you would prefer not to do that.
The reason I think Nevill didn't dial 999 is because there is no blood on the kitchen phone. The issue isn't really whether he dialled 999 but whether he made it to the phone. It seems to me it would be instinctive for him to do this under attack from Jeremy, regardless of injuries; either that, or flee the house. But he would be fleeing the house bare-foot in his pyjamas.
It's a bold statement to say that the gun fire would have been impossible to hear. I'm not so sure, even if a silencer was a fitted, because it all depends on acoustics. A moderated rifle can still have a noticeable report, even with subsonic bullets. I also don't accept she was sedated and I don't accept that it has been proved the silencer was even used. It's not even certain that Haloperidol would help her sleep. One possible side-effect of it is insomnia. We know she had cannabis in her system and I wonder what contraindications this produced. I also wonder about the effect of reducing her Haloperidol dosage by half.
I note your scenario depends on Jeremy running out of bullets. Otherwise, you can't explain why Jeremy would need to struggle with Nevill.
In my view, what's needed is:
Expert pharmacological evidence.
An incident reconstruction looking at sequencing/time-and-motion and the noise impact of the same make and model of silencer (ideally the very same silencer) using the same make and model of gun (ideally the very same gun) and the same bullets.
Expert blood evidence, to explain the almost total lack of a discernible blood trail between the main landing and the kitchen. Maybe the blood soaked into his clothes and didn't drip?
1. Why would there necessarily be a blood trail if Nevill is shot with a rifle used to kill vermin? Why would Nevill be fleeing from Sheila anyway if he could see who the perpetrator was, unlike Jeremy, who would probably be wearing a mask?
2. You're getting there. Slowly.
3. Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson gave a statement (which is in the archives here) in which he refuted the idea of interaction between cannabis and Haloperidol.
4. Of course Jeremy runs out of bullets at some stage and has to reload. Don't fall for the staged bullets by the kitchen telephone either: there are too many there for Sheila to have tipped them out and used 25 on the night.
-
Adam why do you always quote something as a fact when you clearly don’t know when most other posters quote scenarios
It’s bloody annoying, can you stop please it’s making you look ridiculous
This post is a hoot. I suppose we have to be grateful that:
i) Jackie has not cut and pasted anything here (at least not yet).
ii) Jackie hasn't quoted or mentioned Mark Williams-Thomas at all here.
iii) She hasn't claimed in this thread that Warwick Hislop's testimony has finally solved the case.
-
The problem with you (and to be fair to you it's some other posters here as well) is that you lack a general overview of any given situation, but pinpoint details for which often you do have a case but which by themselves are insufficient to convince a sceptical audience and do not tally with the information available in the round. Part of the reason I read the books associated with the case (is egap1's thread Murder/Suicide at White House Farm possibly the best on the Forum?) is that some of them give footnotes to the sources, as well as giving an insight into the minds of the major characters in the drama, which is lacking in the dry-as -dust documents you and others often peruse.
To answer your question directly: Michael Horsnell gave a witness statement on 23rd September 1985.
How do you know what I know and don't know? I've read up on this case for years.
-
1. Why would there necessarily be a blood trail if Nevill is shot with a rifle used to kill vermin? Why would Nevill be fleeing from Sheila anyway if he could see who the perpetrator was, unlike Jeremy, who would probably be wearing a mask?
Was Nevill bleeding or not? I assume Adam's away as he hasn't answered me yet. Maybe you could? When you reply, bear in mind that Nevill is wearing pyjamas, which are loose fitting, he's been shot four times - including twice in the face - and the blood has to go somewhere. He's also touching his own wounds and therefore getting blood on his hands and fingers. I suppose you could just deny he was bleeding.
I assume Nevill flees Sheila because she's firing at him with a gun, but the point is that he still tries to wrestle the gun off her, whereas with Jeremy he wouldn't necessarily do so.
And wouldn't he be able to tell it is Jeremy, even with a mask? Wouldn't he just guess? There's Barbara's sexed-up dossier, remember? Wouldn't he recognise breathing noises, gait, build, etc.? Do you really think Jeremy could effectively disguise himself?
I don't doubt Jeremy would have used a mask, but the utility of it wasn't as a disguise, rather it was for facial protection.
2. You're getting there. Slowly.
Don't patronise me or I'll start patronising you, and I'm much better at it.
3. Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson gave a statement (which is in the archives here) in which he refuted the idea of interaction between cannabis and Haloperidol.
You're referring to page 3 of Dr. Ferguson's statement of 18th. September 1985.
I am not a psychiatrist or a pharmacologist, but I do NOT accept Dr. Ferguson's opinion on the point. I think he is likely to be wrong when he says that recreational drugs can have no impact on the effect of anti-psychotics.
It is important to recognise that a psychiatrist is not an expert on psycho-pharmacology and does not necessarily have anything more than a working knowledge of how drugs work. I think Dr. Ferguson's view in that paragraph is obviously flawed and wrong and I think it would be easy to show this.
Indeed, I see that in sheet 4 of his own statement of 8th. August 1985, Dr. Ferguson clearly states that the use of illicit drugs would exacerbate Sheila's psychosis, which is inconsistent with his later claim.
I find that quite suspicious, actually. The first claim seems right. The second claim, made after Jeremy became a suspect, seems wrong but convenient for the police.
4. Of course Jeremy runs out of bullets at some stage and has to reload. Don't fall for the staged bullets by the kitchen telephone either: there are too many there for Sheila to have tipped them out and used 25 on the night.
I don't think anybody is doubting that he runs out of bullets. That's obvious.
-
How do you know what I know and don't know? I've read up on this case for years.
But you were ignorant of the fact that Michael Horsnell had made a witness statement to Police.
-
Was Nevill bleeding or not? I assume Adam's away as he hasn't answered me yet. Maybe you could? When you reply, bear in mind that Nevill is wearing pyjamas, which are loose fitting, he's been shot four times - including twice in the face - and the blood has to go somewhere. He's also touching his own wounds and therefore getting blood on his hands and fingers. I suppose you could just deny he was bleeding.
I assume Nevill flees Sheila because she's firing at him with a gun, but the point is that he still tries to wrestle the gun off her, whereas with Jeremy he wouldn't necessarily do so.
And wouldn't he be able to tell it is Jeremy, even with a mask? Wouldn't he just guess? There's Barbara's sexed-up dossier, remember? Wouldn't he recognise breathing noises, gait, build, etc.? Do you really think Jeremy could effectively disguise himself?
I don't doubt Jeremy would have used a mask, but the utility of it wasn't as a disguise, rather it was for facial protection.
Don't patronise me or I'll start patronising you, and I'm much better at it.
You're referring to page 3 of Dr. Ferguson's statement of 18th. September 1985.
I am not a psychiatrist or a pharmacologist, but I do NOT accept Dr. Ferguson's opinion on the point. I think he is likely to be wrong when he says that recreational drugs can have no impact on the effect of anti-psychotics.
It is important to recognise that a psychiatrist is not an expert on psycho-pharmacology and does not necessarily have anything more than a working knowledge of how drugs work. I think Dr. Ferguson's view in that paragraph is obviously flawed and wrong and I think it would be easy to show this.
Indeed, I see that in sheet 4 of his own statement of 8th. August 1985, Dr. Ferguson clearly states that the use of illicit drugs would exacerbate Sheila's psychosis, which is inconsistent with his later claim.
I find that quite suspicious, actually. The first claim seems right. The second claim, made after Jeremy became a suspect, seems wrong but convenient for the police.
I don't think anybody is doubting that he runs out of bullets. That's obvious.
I thought you had said in an earlier post that Nevill was less likely to tackle Sheila because of her alleged frailty than Jeremy. You seem to be contradicting yourself here.
I don't know about the blood trail because there aren't any photographs of the staircase carpet. Maybe Nevill didn't touch his wounds until he reached the blue and white chequered worktop, or he wiped his hand on the pyjama jacket and the bleeding didn't protrude onto the carpet.
I don't think it matters whether Jeremy is wearing a mask or not as far as Nevill is concerned. But he would recognize his own daughter in a nightie and be far more likely to attempt to disarm her given the physical contrast in both individuals.
As far as Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson's witness statement is concerned, I'd far rather take a doctor's advice on this matter, thank you.
-
But you were ignorant of the fact that Michael Horsnell had made a witness statement to Police.
Who says I'm ignorant of it? I've read all kinds of contradictory guff about Sheila from shopkeepers and random Joe Blows who swear they saw her the day before. Am I supposed to be a walking encyclopaedia of all the statements given in this case? There must have been hundreds.
-
I thought you had said in an earlier post that Nevill was less likely to tackle Sheila because of her alleged frailty than Jeremy. You seem to be contradicting yourself here.
No, I did not say this. You are misrepresenting me - intentionally, out of mischief, like you did before when you tried to suggest I was insulting Lookout when I wasn't, something I have not forgotten.
I think Nevill was more likely to struggle with Sheila than with Jeremy, but he would also be hesitant with her. There's no contradiction in what I say, it's just that you're glossing over the nuances in what I say because it suits your shallow-minded approach to the case.
I don't know about the blood trail because there aren't any photographs of the staircase carpet. Maybe Nevill didn't touch his wounds until he reached the blue and white chequered worktop, or he wiped his hand on the pyjama jacket and the bleeding didn't protrude onto the carpet.
Nevill would, very probably, touch his wounds immediately. That's what gunshot victims do. It's the natural thing to do and it's done automatically without thought. That discounts completely your explanation.
Nevill was shot in the face - twice. How could his bleeding not protrude on to the carpets?
I'm sure there will be an explanation. I'm still waiting for it.
I don't think it matters whether Jeremy is wearing a mask or not as far as Nevill is concerned. But he would recognize his own daughter in a nightie and be far more likely to attempt to disarm her given the physical contrast in both individuals.
I agree, but what if they were stood some distance apart and Sheila had a loaded rifle which she was threatening to fire? Perhaps they ended up at stand-off in the kitchen. In those circumstances, especially if it was the culmination of a long argument, he might ring his son rather than involve the authorities. At this point, he might assume she was inept with the gun and would never actually fire it or use it other than as a bludgeon.
As far as Doctor Hugh Cameron Ferguson's witness statement is concerned, I'd far rather take a doctor's advice on this matter, thank you.
Intellectual fallacy: Argument from authority. Having a title does not in and of itself mean you are correct.
However, an argument from authority is not always fallacious. It would not be a fallacy to rely on Dr. Ferguson if it could be shown that Dr. Ferguson had relevant expertise, and that has not been shown. Psychiatry is a very learned profession, but it only implies a working knowledge of the impact of anti-psychotics. Psychiatrists are not pharmacologists. Moreover, the view of a clinical psychiatrist might be clouded by loyalty to a patient - even though they are professionals, psychiatrists are still human like the rest of us.
Thus, in that statement of his, Dr. Ferguson advances a view outside his strict expertise. You're simply relying on his title and you're ignoring the inconsistency in his evidence.
It's also noted that Dr. Ferguson only makes a general comment on the effect of cannabis on Haloperidol, he fails to mention its effect on Sheila's use of Haloperidol, which is not really the same question.
-
Who says I'm ignorant of it? I've read all kinds of contradictory guff about Sheila from shopkeepers and random Joe Blows who swear they saw her the day before. Am I supposed to be a walking encyclopaedia of all the statements given in this case? There must have been hundreds.
It's not random guff from shopkeepers-it's an eyewitness account from Barry Parker. I doubt it would be random guff from shopkeepers if it suited your argument, which at times is inconsistent.
If you wish to belabour the point about Michael Horsnell I refer you to your post #38 this morning.
-
It's not random guff from shopkeepers-it's an eyewitness account from Barry Parker. I doubt it would be random guff from shopkeepers if it suited your argument, which at times is inconsistent.
I'm very sorry, but this has got to stop. I don't have an 'argument'. I don't have any loyalty to Jeremy Bamber or the authorities. I am neutral. If I find a point that goes against Jeremy Bamber, I will highlight it.
The difficulty here is yours in that your approach to the case is fundamentally emotional rather than intellectual.
You just can't accept any rigorous testing of the case, and when somebody does try, then you jump in and accuse them of bad faith.
It's got to stop. You need to grow up, Steve. If you can't, then I'm just going to stop commenting here and I'll just stick to reading the threads and archive.
And if you have a copy of the statement of Michael Horsnell, post it up, or tell us your source.
-
No, I did not say this. You are misrepresenting me - intentionally, out of mischief, like you did before when you tried to suggest I was insulting Lookout when I wasn't, something I have not forgotten.
I think Nevill was more likely to struggle with Sheila than with Jeremy, but he would also be hesitant with her. There's no contradiction in what I say, it's just that you're glossing over the nuances in what I say because it suits your shallow-minded approach to the case.
Nevill would, very probably, touch his wounds immediately. That's what gunshot victims do. It's the natural thing to do and it's done automatically without thought. That discounts completely your explanation.
Nevill was shot in the face - twice. How could his bleeding not protrude on to the carpets?
I'm sure there will be an explanation. I'm still waiting for it.
I agree, but what if they were stood some distance apart and Sheila had a loaded rifle which she was threatening to fire? Perhaps they ended up at stand-off in the kitchen. In those circumstances, especially if it was the culmination of a long argument, he might ring his son rather than involve the authorities. At this point, he might assume she was inept with the gun and would never actually fire it or use it other than as a bludgeon.
Intellectual fallacy: Argument from authority. Having a title does not in and of itself mean you are correct.
However, an argument from authority is not always fallacious. It would not be a fallacy to rely on Dr. Ferguson if it could be shown that Dr. Ferguson had relevant expertise, and that has not been shown. Psychiatry is a very learned profession, but it only implies a working knowledge of the impact of anti-psychotics. Psychiatrists are not pharmacologists. Moreover, the view of a clinical psychiatrist might be clouded by loyalty to a patient - even though they are professionals, psychiatrists are still human like the rest of us.
Thus, in that statement of his, Dr. Ferguson advances a view outside his strict expertise. You're simply relying on his title and you're ignoring the inconsistency in his evidence.
It's also noted that Dr. Ferguson only makes a general comment on the effect of cannabis on Haloperidol, he fails to mention its effect on Sheila's use of Haloperidol, which is not really the same question.
You're in complete denial. You did insult Lookout, stating quite blatantly that she was playing games, when she's just as knowledgeable about the case or even more so than yourself.
I just can't work out your stance on Nevill tacking Sheila or Jeremy. It's you who wants it both ways.
I have no idea why there was no blood trail from the bedroom to the kitchen as I have said twice before now, but this does not automatically indicate that Nevill was not located in the bedroom when the shooting started, nor does it suggest that the culprit firing that morning was more likely to be Sheila than Jeremy.
-
I'm very sorry, but this has got to stop. I don't have an 'argument'. I don't have any loyalty to Jeremy Bamber or the authorities. I am neutral. If I find a point that goes against Jeremy Bamber, I will highlight it.
The difficulty here is yours in that your approach to the case is fundamentally emotional rather than intellectual.
You just can't accept any rigorous testing of the case, and when somebody does try, then you jump in and accuse them of bad faith.
It's got to stop. You need to grow up, Steve. If you can't, then I'm just going to stop commenting here and I'll just stick to reading the threads and archive.
And if you have a copy of the statement of Michael Horsnell, post it up, or tell us your source.
If you go to your account settings. You can add Steve_uk to your ignore list.
-
You're in complete denial. You did insult Lookout, stating quite blatantly that she was playing games, when she's just as knowledgeable about the case or even more so than yourself.
I did not.
I just can't work out your stance on Nevill tacking Sheila or Jeremy. It's you who wants it both ways.
I elucidated it multiple times, and I have explained it to you above in clear and concise terms.
If you still can't work it out, the reason is known only to you and is your problem, not mine.
If you have difficulty following complex arguments, then that, again, is your problem, not mine.
I have no idea why there was no blood trail from the bedroom to the kitchen as I have said twice before now, but this does not automatically indicate that Nevill was not located in the bedroom when the shooting started, nor does it suggest that the culprit firing that morning was more likely to be Sheila than Jeremy.
That being the case, please kindly refrain from commenting on things you have no idea about.
You are cluttering up threads and causing problems here with your poisonous and toxic personalisation of everything and your tendency towards stoking conflict.
-
I've seen that before. It tells us nothing, unfortunately, because it's outside. The acoustics within a building are entirely different. I know this for a fact.
Incidentally, this seems to be another of the flaws of the 1986 trial. They demonstrated the rifle on an outdoor range, they did not reconstruct the incident using an interior range with similar acoustic properties, nor did they have the jury visit the farmhouse and look around - which I find shocking.
It shows that Sheila would not hear the upstairs shots in other rooms. Even if awake. I could barely hear it with the sound up. The acoustics would not change that.
-
The problem with you (and to be fair to you it's some other posters here as well) is that you lack a general overview of any given situation, but pinpoint details for which often you do have a case but which by themselves are insufficient to convince a sceptical audience and do not tally with the information available in the round. Part of the reason I read the books associated with the case (is egap1's thread Murder/Suicide at White House Farm possibly the best on the Forum?) is that some of them give footnotes to the sources, as well as giving an insight into the minds of the major characters in the drama, which is lacking in the dry-as -dust documents you and others often peruse.
To answer your question directly: Michael Horsnell gave a witness statement on 23rd September 1985.
Reading QCChevalier posts has made me consider that Nevill was running to the kitchen door. He also confirmed this door had a key in. Which Bamber could have taken out pre shooting. Resulting in the kitchen fight. Unless Bamber had already caught up with Nevill.
He also made me consider Nevill could have been running to the office den. Although I suspect the gun cupboard was underneath the stairs.
All other points raised have made no impact to the straight forward process of the massacre which matches the evidence.
-
It shows that Sheila would not hear the upstairs shots in other rooms. Even if awake. I could barely hear it with the sound up. The acoustics would not change that.
It does not show that at all. I'm sorry but I just think you're wrong. Of course, you may be right for the wrong reasons - i.e. it may turn out that the particular weapon used and silencer does have a similarly unobtrusive report, but personally I doubt it, and anyway, the point is that the question has to be properly tested, we can't just rely on YouTube videos that capture tests that take place outdoors.
I have already outlined that the test would need to be indoors in an environment with similar acoustic properties. I remain astonished that this was not done for the jury at the 1986 trial.
-
Reading QCChevalier posts has made me consider that Nevill was running to the kitchen door. He also confirmed this door had a key in. Which Bamber could have taken out pre shooting. Resulting in the kitchen fight. Unless Bamber had already caught up with Nevill.
He also made me consider Nevill could have been running to the office den. Although I suspect the gun cupboard was underneath the stairs.
All other points raised have made no impact to the straight forward process of the massacre which matches the evidence.
I don't know how to take that Adam, but I have to say, I think our exchanges have been civil, and for me, it has been very helpful in advancing my knowledge and understanding of the case. I don't entirely agree with you, but it would be boring if we agreed on everything.
-
Reading QCChevalier posts has made me consider that Nevill was running to the kitchen door. He also confirmed this door had a key in. Which Bamber could have taken out pre shooting. Resulting in the kitchen fight. Unless Bamber had already caught up with Nevill.
He also made me consider Nevill could have been running to the office den. Although I suspect the gun cupboard was underneath the stairs.
All other points raised have made no impact to the straight forward process of the massacre which matches the evidence.
I don't think we have enough information on the layout of the Farm to analyse Nevill's movements, nor can we second guess the movements of an individual who would have been in shock.
-
I'm very sorry, but this has got to stop. I don't have an 'argument'. I don't have any loyalty to Jeremy Bamber or the authorities. I am neutral. If I find a point that goes against Jeremy Bamber, I will highlight it.
The difficulty here is yours in that your approach to the case is fundamentally emotional rather than intellectual.
You just can't accept any rigorous testing of the case, and when somebody does try, then you jump in and accuse them of bad faith.
It's got to stop. You need to grow up, Steve. If you can't, then I'm just going to stop commenting here and I'll just stick to reading the threads and archive.
And if you have a copy of the statement of Michael Horsnell, post it up, or tell us your source.
The source is Carol Ann Lee's book. I don't care whether you post or not. The Forum was fine before you arrived, you have enhanced it in some of your posts, but if you left the Forum it would survive without you.
-
This post is a hoot. I suppose we have to be grateful that:
i) Jackie has not cut and pasted anything here (at least not yet).
ii) Jackie hasn't quoted or mentioned Mark Williams-Thomas at all here.
iii) She hasn't claimed in this thread that Warwick Hislop's testimony has finally solved the case.
Everyone here cuts and pastes parts of the case
I know you hate MWT because he had a ticket waiting to go to Canada to interview your friend
I know Mark and I like him and why does it wind you up so much.
Mark contacted me not the other way around
The only time I have mentioned a friend of mine Warwick is because he knew Neville well and Jeremy and ????
-
The source is Carol Ann Lee's book. I don't care whether you post or not. The Forum was fine before you arrived, you have enhanced it in some of your posts, but if you left the Forum it would survive without you.
Carol Anne Lees book?? The desperate author that leaks false information to the press
She’s a disgrace. As desperate for cash as your mate
-
I don't think we have enough information on the layout of the Farm to analyse Nevill's movements, nor can we second guess the movements of an individual who would have been in shock.
Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. Then ran to the kitchen.The evidence shows it can be nothing else.
Nevill may have had a few feet head start. Bamber would have known he was out of bullets & stepped back as Nevill rose. Then maybe hesitated, Nevill going downstairs was not part of the plan
Nevill being injured & bare footed would have soon been caught. Or he was trapped as Bamber had taken out the kitchen door key. Either way, the violent kitchen fight was about to take place.
-
Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. Then ran to the kitchen.The evidence shows it can be nothing else.
Nevill may have had a few feet head start. Bamber would have known he was out of bullets & stepped back as Nevill rose. Then maybe hesitated, Nevill going downstairs was not part of the plan
Nevill being injured & bare footed would have soon been caught. Or he was trapped as Bamber had taken out the kitchen door key. Either way, the violent kitchen fight was about to take place.
That's interesting Adam. I suppose it was supposed to look like Nevill had used the blue telephone in the office with the memory facility, so Police would check and see the Bourtree Cottage number flash up, though this was unintentionally scuppered when a Police Officer used the same telephone for official business that morning, thus erasing the record.
-
Carol Anne Lees book?? The desperate author that leaks false information to the press
She’s a disgrace. As desperate for cash as your mate
It's a witness statement Jackie, not tabloid gossip.
-
If the silencer made the rifle silent/near-silent, then why does Jeremy only shoot the twins twice in the first firing round? If firing multiple times into the poor twins was part of Jeremy's staging to make it look like Sheila did it, then why not fire more there and then before going downstairs to reload? After all, the rifle is silent, you say, so what would he have to worry about?
Also, since the rifle is silent, and given Jeremy's precision shots into the twins, how does Nevill end up outside the master bedroom and fleeing for the kitchen? Adults are larger targets than children and both Nevill and June were in bed, having not been disturbed by the silent killer prowling around the house. Whichever way you look at it, they're sitting ducks. What's the problem?
-
Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs. Then ran to the kitchen.The evidence shows it can be nothing else.
Nevill may have had a few feet head start. Bamber would have known he was out of bullets & stepped back as Nevill rose. Then maybe hesitated, Nevill going downstairs was not part of the plan
Nevill being injured & bare footed would have soon been caught. Or he was trapped as Bamber had taken out the kitchen door key. Either way, the violent kitchen fight was about to take place.
To be honest, I'd simply assumed that Nevill running downstairs was not part of the plan. I can't imagine that Jeremy would let him run out the master bedroom on purpose. It may also be that this was what triggered Jeremy's idea for the phone call, in order to explain why Nevill's body was in the kitchen, or that may be down to something else.
The sticking point is how Nevill was able to escape the master bedroom and why Jeremy is putting five bullets into June instead of stopping Nevill. Even if you are right about Jeremy running out of ammunition, I would differ to you in the explanation. Jeremy was clearly firing at Nevill from the landing, and this would explain why Nevill didn't then turn and fight Jeremy when it became clear he had run out of ammunition: Nevill was already on his way down the stairs. To that extent, the theory is coherent.
But you also still have the problem that there is very little blood along the path you say Nevill took, and I don't really understand why Nevill only made it to the kitchen and didn't try to ring 999: he wasn't injured in the legs and he had one arm available to make a call. Maybe that was ambitious, but then why not make it to the back door and leave blood in the back hallway? Why not barricade himself in the den? In my view, the time-and-motion doesn't favour Jeremy catching him.
-
If the silencer made the rifle silent/near-silent, then why does Jeremy only shoot the twins twice in the first firing round? If firing multiple times into the poor twins was part of Jeremy's staging to make it look like Sheila did it, then why not fire more there and then before going downstairs to reload? After all, the rifle is silent, you say, so what would he have to worry about?
Also, since the rifle is silent, and given Jeremy's precision shots into the twins, how does Nevill end up outside the master bedroom and fleeing for the kitchen? Adults are larger targets than children and both Nevill and June were in bed, having not been disturbed by the silent killer prowling around the house. Whichever way you look at it, they're sitting ducks. What's the problem?
The twins are out of the way with one bullet each, not running around the confines of the Farm complicating matters. Jeremy has removed the bedroom telephone lifeline, which really is the giveaway in all this. I don't know whether Pamela was in the habit of telephoning at 10:00pm but it seems awfully late for a farming community, and wouldn't June have preferred to take the call in bed rather than standing up in the kitchen?
The point I repeat about Nevill being moved out of the bedroom is that if he supposed to have telephoned Jeremy for assistance he has to have moved out of the master bedroom or Jeremy replaces a telephone in that room before returning to Bourtree Cottage.
-
To be honest, I'd simply assumed that Nevill running downstairs was not part of the plan. I can't imagine that Jeremy would let him run out the master bedroom on purpose. It may also be that this was what triggered Jeremy's idea for the phone call, in order to explain why Nevill's body was in the kitchen, or that may be down to something else.
The sticking point is how Nevill was able to escape the master bedroom and why Jeremy is putting five bullets into June instead of stopping Nevill. Even if you are right about Jeremy running out of ammunition, I would differ to you in the explanation. Jeremy was clearly firing at Nevill from the landing, and this would explain why Nevill didn't then turn and fight Jeremy when it became clear he had run out of ammunition: Nevill was already on his way down the stairs. To that extent, the theory is coherent.
But you also still have the problem that there is very little blood along the path you say Nevill took, and I don't really understand why Nevill only made it to the kitchen and didn't try to ring 999: he wasn't injured in the legs and he had one arm available to make a call. Maybe that was ambitious, but then why not make it to the back door and leave blood in the back hallway? Why not barricade himself in the den? In my view, the time-and-motion doesn't favour Jeremy catching him.
Actually, I'd like to re-phrase that last remark of mine.
In my view, the time-and-motion favours one of two outcomes of 'the chase':
(i). Jeremy catches Nevill before they reach the kitchen.
(ii). Jeremy doesn't catch Nevill and Nevill reaches the back door or the den or maybe the kitchen phone to make the call.
Which applies depends on how much of a head start Nevill has on Jeremy. Nevill has the advantage, for several reasons - the steepness and narrowness of the stairs, the awkwardness for Jeremy of carrying a long rifle down the stairs, the fact that Nevill is motivated to escape and (we assume) has no leg injuries at this point.
The flaw, as I see it, is this:
If we accept (i), then Jeremy must catch him before they reach the kitchen. Now, it could be that this is what really happened and Jeremy dragged him or cajoled him to the kitchen, but why is there almost no blood and signs of struggle on the main stairway and in the main foyer, other than two isolated blood spots? We simply can't put that down to the police missing it because the police were observant enough to find the blood they found.
If we accept that Jeremy doesn't catch him and we consider (ii), then we're left with what I consider to be a paradox: Jeremy has failed to catch him, but somehow does catch up with him in the kitchen. That's strange, isn't it? It doesn't quite cohere.
It suggests that Nevill, for some reason, has hesitated in the kitchen. I would have thought the obvious reason would be the phone, but there's no blood on the phone. So what was he doing? Why didn't he just run to the back door, then on realising that was locked, run to the den? He knew the house.
Is it that he got to the back door, realised that was locked, and ended up going back in the kitchen? Maybe, but why is there no blood in the back hallway?
-
The twins are out of the way with one bullet each, not running around the confines of the Farm complicating matters. Jeremy has removed the bedroom telephone lifeline, which really is the giveaway in all this. I don't know whether Pamela was in the habit of telephoning at 10:00pm but it seems awfully late for a farming community, and wouldn't June have preferred to take the call in bed rather than standing up in the kitchen?
The point I repeat about Nevill being moved out of the bedroom is that if he supposed to have telephoned Jeremy for assistance he has to have moved out of the master bedroom or Jeremy replaces a telephone in that room before returning to Bourtree Cottage.
Bamber may have also been going for an 11 shot massacre. But emptied the rifle when Nevill rose.
Even if he wasn't, as you said, one shot each into the twins negates them both & he can return later. He then has a short distance to the main bedroom.
If Bamber was going to fire mulfiple bullets in one room first, then go downstairs to reload, it would have been the main bedroom, not the twins room.
As it happened he did fire multiple bullets in the main bedroom in the opening salvo. After negating the twins.
-
It is surprising that people think Nevill would dial 999 when Bamber was a few feet behind him in pursuit & had just shot him 4 times. It is a new theory.
How will dialling 999 help him?
Anyway, there is no evidence he did.
-
It is surprising that people think Nevill would dial 999 when Bamber was a few feet behind him in pursuit & had just shot him 4 times. It is a new theory.
How will dialling 999 help him?
Anyway, there is no evidence he did.
To inform the outside world I suppose, though he would have had to turn his back on the attacker, if that's what you're getting at. I wonder how long the telephone had been absent from the master bedroom? It mustn't have been an immediate concern or the Bambers would have put one there from another room had they felt in imminent danger.
-
To inform the outside world I suppose, though he would have had to turn his back on the attacker, if that's what you're getting at. I wonder how long the telephone had been absent from the master bedroom? It mustn't have been an immediate concern or the Bambers would have put one there from another room had they felt in imminent danger.
Inform them of what? That his son is trying to kill everyone. That won't save Nevill or his family, who may still be alive.
There is no way Nevill could do this in around 5 seconds.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9971.msg455277.html#msg455277
Here is a breakdown of the kitchen fight.
-
It is surprising that people think Nevill would dial 999 when Bamber was a few feet behind him in pursuit & had just shot him 4 times. It is a new theory.
How will dialling 999 help him?
Anyway, there is no evidence he did.
You slightly miss the point. It's not so much whether he dials 999, it's the notion that he instinctively would go for the phone. Probably if he did reach the phone and dial, he'd suddenly find he couldn't speak due to his injuries.
The time-and-motion thing is your assumption: I've outlined my issue with it above. I can't reconcile how Jeremy catches up with him in the kitchen. You claim Jeremy is only a few feet behind him, which to me leaves us with a paradox.
And actually, the theory of Nevill going for the phone is not new: I got the idea from people who think he is guilty.
-
It is correct that the phone was in the kitchen. Off the hook aa part of Bamber's staging.
I do not believe dialling 999 would be considered by Nevill. The massacre had started & Bamber was a few feet behind Nevill. So no time.
The police said they did not receive a 999 call from Nevill.
-
Bamber's priority was catching & killing Nevill after he got past him.
There was nothing keeping Bamber upstairs. The twins & June were negated after being shot 7 times and Sheila was sleeping.
The violent kitchen fight started less than 30 seconds after Nevill received his forth shot.
-
I do not believe there would be much of a blood trail from Nevill.
He was moving quickly down the stairs. So no time for blood to travel from his face & body onto the floor. He had been shot 4 times by a rifle used for shooting rabbits.
June left a blood trail as she crawled & died on the floor.
Were the hallway and stair carpets tested or disposed?
The bullet casing evidence shows Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs by Bamber. They both then went downstairs.
-
I do not believe there would be much of a blood trail from Nevill.
He was moving quickly down the stairs. So no time for blood to travel from his face & body onto the floor. He had been shot 4 times by a rifle used for shooting rabbits.
June left a blood trail as she crawled & died on the floor.
Were the hallway and stair carpets tested or disposed?
The bullet casing evidence shows Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs by Bamber. They both then went downstairs.
Have you any idea what impact being shot in the face 4 times would have on anyone? The shock to the system would be massive and a person might even lose consciousness for a time. The face and mouth bleed copiously therefore there is a strong possibility of considerable blood loss. As for a fierce fight in the kitchen, it’s a wonder Nevill was still standing. Your assumptions may be correct, Nevill may have somehow overcome his injuries to put up a fierce fight but surely you should consider the possibility that you are wrong.
-
He had been shot 4 times by a rifle used for shooting rabbits.
It seems it was also used for shooting people.
-
57.
Five carpet samples taken from the main bedroom were examined and found to bear numerous spots of dripped blood. These were tested and found to match the blood groupings of June Bamber.
Wallpaper from the hallway to the left-hand side of the kitchen door was found, on examination, to be stained with human blood consistent with the blood grouping shared by Nevill Bamber and the twin boys. Since the boys seem to have been shot in their beds, it is a clear inference that this was Mr. Bamber's blood.
----------
It seems the hallway & stairs carpet was either -
Not tested & disposed.
Tested and no blood was found.
---------
Either way, Nevill was shot 4 times upstairs and then went to the kitchen.
-
From the COA. It seems the gun cupboard was in Nevill's office den -
Recovery of the sound moderator 73. On 10 August 1985 members of the family, who were far from convinced that Sheila Caffell had been responsible for the killings, went to White House Farm with the executor of the estate, Basil Cock. During the afternoon David Boutflour found the sound moderator together with the telescopic sights for the murder weapon at the back of the gun cupboard in the downstairs office. His father, his sister Ann Eaton, the executor and the farm secretary all witnessed the recovery.
----------
-
Can we have from pro-guilt people a Jeremy-Nevill-June incident reconstruction for upstairs? This should include gun shot and other wounds inflicted in this part of the incident and where these wounds are inflicted and how.
-
Can we have from pro-guilt people a Jeremy-Nevill-June incident reconstruction for upstairs? This should include gun shot and other wounds inflicted in this part of the incident and where these wounds are inflicted and how.
May I refer you to your #134:
Were you there? No, you weren't. Sorry but I disagree! And I'm entitled to form my own view. You're not judge and jury.
So we are supposed to guess, check Wikipedia, or what..
-
Can we have from pro-guilt people a Jeremy-Nevill-June incident reconstruction for upstairs? This should include gun shot and other wounds inflicted in this part of the incident and where these wounds are inflicted and how.
Bamber entered the bedroom & shot June & Nevill 9 times.
Nevill got past Bamber & went downstairs.
-
Bamber entered the bedroom & shot June & Nevill 9 times.
Nevill got past Bamber & went downstairs.
What injuries were inflicted to Nevill and June at this stage and where in the house and how?
-
May I refer you to your #134:
Were you there? No, you weren't. Sorry but I disagree! And I'm entitled to form my own view. You're not judge and jury.
So we are supposed to guess, check Wikipedia, or what..
We don't know what happened. That's why I'm neutral, in the absence of stronger evidence. In order to try and understand what happened, we can use the evidence to construct scenarios.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I am trying to have an intelligent discussion about the case with an adult.
-
What injuries were inflicted to Nevill and June at this stage and where in the house and how?
All in the COA document.
-
All in the COA document.
The appeal judgment claims that the shots to Nevill were entirely in the master bedroom. How do you explain that two bullet casings, DRH/13 and DRH/14, are found on the landing?
-
The appeal judgment claims that the shots to Nevill were entirely in the master bedroom. How do you explain that two bullet casings, DRH/13 and DRH/14, are found on the landing?
It could be transference by the Raid Team traipsing round a relatively small space. How are we supposed to know..
-
It could be transference by the Raid Team traipsing round a relatively small space. How are we supposed to know..
I'm not asking you. I'm asking a knowledgeable person. It's none of your business. Go away.
-
I suspect the first 7 shots in the main bedroom were from June's side of the bed. The rifle along with Bamber's arms were long enough to hit Nevill in the face.
Nevill getting up would have seen Bamber moving away from the bed to fire his remaining two shots into Nevill's torso.
The 4 shots did not floor Nevill and he moved towards the door to escape. Nevill is a big man & was able to get past Bamber, who was in temporary shock that things were not going to plan.
-
Nevill may have been going for the office den.
If the gun cupboard door was open & it had a loaded weapon in, he may have had time to fire some bullets prior to the kitchen fight. This would be espescially useful if there was a loaded shot gun, which would kill Bamber.
It would mean killing his son, who was trying to kill him. But if that meant he saved himself & everyone else, in the spur of the moment he would shoot.
However Nevill did not make it to the office den.
-
I'm not asking you. I'm asking a knowledgeable person. It's none of your business. Go away.
Some of your posts are so pathetic that I xxxxx xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxxxxx:
i.e. my own theory that Jeremy may have shot her in the second bedroom while she was propped-up in bed or sitting-up or doing something similar
he would have had to kill her first before everybody else, then after killing the other four, he would have had to go back and change the bed clothes, which we can assume would have aspirated blood on them because the first shot didn't kill her. Then, he had to carry her to the master bedroom, which in itself is easy work, but he had to do so without leaving any forensic trace of this in the second bedroom or on the landing, or indeed in the master bedroom itself. #147
I go back to my belief that Jeremy's actions were unplanned. Probably what really happened is that Jeremy formed a vague idea in his head of leaving a rifle on or by Sheila's body, maybe influenced by something he had seen in a film or on TV. #148
As for going away:
Date Registered:
July 09, 2012, 04:14:PM
Get used to it matey. I'm here and I'm here to stay.
Edited to remove personal attack.
-
Some of your posts are so pathetic that I xxxxx xxxx xxxxx xxxxxxxxx:
i.e. my own theory that Jeremy may have shot her in the second bedroom while she was propped-up in bed or sitting-up or doing something similar
he would have had to kill her first before everybody else, then after killing the other four, he would have had to go back and change the bed clothes, which we can assume would have aspirated blood on them because the first shot didn't kill her. Then, he had to carry her to the master bedroom, which in itself is easy work, but he had to do so without leaving any forensic trace of this in the second bedroom or on the landing, or indeed in the master bedroom itself. #147
I go back to my belief that Jeremy's actions were unplanned. Probably what really happened is that Jeremy formed a vague idea in his head of leaving a rifle on or by Sheila's body, maybe influenced by something he had seen in a film or on TV. #148
As for going away:
Date Registered:
July 09, 2012, 04:14:PM
Get used to it matey. I'm here and I'm here to stay.
Can I ask the moderators to intervene and speak to this person?
First, in the above post he quotes from two different threads in which I theorise different scenarios, that's why there is an apparent contradiction. I'm allowed to explore the case and ask questions. This person is badgering and ridiculing me and has done so from the start. He is toxic and aggressive, twists things, tries to stoke up conflict and makes everything personal.
It could be that he has xxxxx xxxxxx, but I have to wonder if he is doing this on purpose due to having some close connection to the case.
His aim is clearly to try to deter myself and others from asking questions about the case.
I see he's posted here since 2012, but I also see that he has fallen out with you and other people here repeatedly and I wonder if one reason why the forum is so quiet is because his behaviour puts people off trying to post about the case and ask questions?
Thanks.
Edit to reflect edit of quoted post and direct response to that.
-
I suspect the first 7 shots in the main bedroom were from June's side of the bed. The rifle along with Bamber's arms were long enough to hit Nevill in the face.
Nevill getting up would have seen Bamber moving away from the bed to fire his remaining two shots into Nevill's torso.
The 4 shots did not floor Nevill and he moved towards the door to escape. Nevill is a big man & was able to get past Bamber, who was in temporary shock that things were not going to plan.
Both you and the 2002 appeal court assume the poor parents were fired on within the master bedroom (albeit maybe with Jeremy standing at the threshold of that room). This makes sense for June, but there is a question mark over what happened with Nevill.
It seems to me that a number of points of evidence are not consistent with Nevill receiving four shots in the master bedroom.
Two of the bullet casings aren't consistent with it. Maybe we could let this go on the basis that somebody accidentally moved them, but that's only a 'maybe'. I'm not sure it's as easy as people might think to accidentally move them, and they would have to be moved not just several feet, but through walls. I tend to the view that the bullet casings may have been negligently displaced instead, due to deficiencies in the SOCO procedures, rather than just being 'kicked'.
However, whatever the explanation, it does seem that even the Crown implicitly rest on the premise that the bullet casings had to be moved. This surprises me. The whole scenario surprises me, because I would have thought it easier to say that Jeremy shot Nevill from the landing as Nevill is descending the stairs. I wonder why that isn't your scenario? Is it because you would then struggle to explain the lack of blood on the main landing and stairs?
That observation neatly brings me to the blood. The blood evidence doesn't fit, but I need to research that more. It could well be that you are right to some extent and the drippage of blood would have been minimal, but let's bear in mind that Nevill was wearing pyjamas, which are presumably loose-fitting, so we can't account for the problem by saying the blood absorbed into his clothing. Where did it go? You say there wasn't much of it. I reserve some considerable doubt about that given the nature of the injuries. I note from the pathologist's report that Nevill's pyjamas were soaked with blood at the end, so he bled heavily at some point.
There is also the problem that we have to believe that a grievously injured Nevill would barge past Jeremy.
Another issue is that Jeremy is firing five times into June when he knows he needs to fell Nevill. I don't quite understand that. Was June a serious threat to him? Bear in mind here that he unquestionably shot her in bed, a fact that adds to the puzzle. Then we have her moving around the bedroom, to an extent that I'm not yet clear about, even though she's been shot five times.
I also don't quite understand why such a sharp shot as Jeremy would bungle this. Nevill and June are surely easier targets than the twins. They're bigger.
Then we have the problem of choreographing the melee downstairs.
If Jeremy has run out of bullets at the threshold of the master bedroom, this means implicitly that he no longer fires into June, and we know June receives no other corporeal injuries, so his full attention is on Nevill.
Nevill barges past him, you say.
That means Jeremy would be closely behind Nevill.
Jeremy can't stop to fire. He's out of ammunition.
So why does't Jeremy catch up with Nevill before they reach the kitchen? The fight should be over and done with long before they reach the kitchen, shouldn't it? The old warhorse has four bullets in him and he's 61. It should be easy for Jeremy, no? And it was easy for Jeremy in the kitchen, wasn't it, so we have the proof. So why didn't Jeremy deal with Nevill earlier? What difference does it make to the big plan? In fact, the nearer Nevill is to the master bedroom, the better, surely? Thus, they should be having a struggle on the stairs, or in the main foyer at the very farthest, would they not?
-
Bamber may have fired his second two shots into Nevill on the landing. After Nevill got past him. This would explain why Nevill was able to get to the kitchen before being caught. Be surprised if this was how it happened.
Or Bamber shot Nevill by the bedroom door as he was coming towards him. Resulting in the bullet casings being by the door.
Nevill getting past Bamber is no surprise. Nevill was a big fit man. Bamber would have stood back when seeing Nevill advancing.
Bamber caught up with Nevill a few seconds later.
-
Bamber may have fired his second two shots into Nevill on the landing. After Nevill got past him. This would explain why Nevill was able to get to the kitchen before being caught.
Or Bamber shot Nevill by the bedroom door as he was coming towards him. Resulting in the bullet casings being by the door.
Bamber caught up with Nevill a few seconds later.
The first, which I have put in bold, is the better explanation, because it allows for Nevill having a bit of a head start. I think Jeremy firing at Nevill within the bedroom is awkward altogether, due to the length of the rifle (and that probably explains how Nevill got past him).
But, Nevill's four wounds are on his left side, so firing at him from the landing in the direction of the stairs is a bit a problem. I do appreciate that maybe two of the wounds would have been inflicted in the bedroom. Perhaps the facial wounds while Nevill was in bed, as he is on the right hand side of the bed; then, the arm and neck/shoulder wound is while fleeing Jeremy.
Would Nevill have faced back in the direction of Jeremy at any point as he descended the stairs and Jeremy stood on the main landing? I think there is [was] a 90-degree turn in the stairs.
-
The first, which I have put in bold, is the better explanation, because it allows for Nevill having a bit of a head start. I think Jeremy firing at Nevill within the bedroom is awkward altogether, due to the length of the rifle (and that probably explains how Nevill got past him).
But, Nevill's four wounds are on his left side, so firing at him from the landing in the direction of the stairs is a bit a problem. I do appreciate that maybe two of the wounds would have been inflicted in the bedroom. Perhaps the facial wounds while Nevill was in bed, as he is on the right hand side of the bed; then, the arm and neck/shoulder wound is while fleeing Jeremy.
Would Nevill have faced back in the direction of Jeremy at any point as he descended the stairs and Jeremy stood on the main landing? I think there is [was] a 90-degree turn in the stairs.
Yes the two accurate face shots were while Nevill was in bed. The arm & neck shots were while Nevill was standing.
-
Yes the two accurate face shots were while Nevill was in bed. The arm & neck shots were while Nevill was standing.
Adam, these exchanges we have had have been helpful to me. Your posts are succinct and knowledgeable.
Regrettably, I'm not convinced about the scenario you outline. There are a number of flaws, in my view, due to the ballistic and forensic evidence.
For now, I'll pull out one, which is the manner in which the poor twins were shot. The casing pattern I think can be relied on because it is discrete to that room - a factor that pretty much precludes professional error.
The shooting pattern in the twin's bedroom suggests to me one change of position, which means there is something in your suppositions. Like you, I think the killer must have returned to the twins' bedroom to fire again rather than negate the boys in one fusillade.
If Jeremy was 'going back to make sure' (which I appreciate is plausible), he would have changed position and we see that clearly in the fusillade pattern.
Where I differ is that I surmise two things from the manifest casing pattern:
(i). The killer has shot the twins six times at close range in rapid fire, roughly in an arc pattern: DRH/16, DRH/17, DRH/37, and DRH/18 and DRH/39(double case).
(ii). The killer has shot the twins twice at intermediate range roughly from the door: DRH/38 and DRH/40.
Note: For present purposes, I'm ignoring/disregarding DRH/36.
I conclude from this that the first fusillade was (i) and the second fusillade was (ii).
In other words, at least as far as the twins' bedroom is concerned, I am reversing your scenario and saying that the killer starts by firing at close range six times, then a second fusillade is initiated at intermediate range 'to make sure'.
I believe this makes logical sense.
This has implications. It means Jeremy does not have sufficient bullets to attack both Nevill and June in the way that the Crown allege. It also makes sense that he would not at this stage go downstairs to re-load (assuming he does not carry the ammunition with him). We can also say that it makes sense that Jeremy, if he was the killer, would have the nous to ensure that he launched his assault with a fully-loaded weapon. We will assume he also had a cartridge in the breech at the outset.
From this, we deduce that after the first assault on the twins, he had five cartridges left.
If the killer was Jeremy, his priority would have been Nevill. For the purposes of exploring this scenario with you, I am assuming however that he has attacked the twins first - perhaps even to test the gun, but also perhaps because, rightly or wrongly, he perceives them as the line of least resistance and he also wants to preclude the possibility of them running around the house, hiding and even escaping.
I tentatively deduce from all this that he must have then attacked Nevill and June in the master bedroom.
Let's assume, as it's your premise, that the rifle is silent. But let's err on the side of caution and say that June has heard something - maybe just Jeremy moving about - and she stirs Nevill. Nevill is now up. That would help explain things. Jeremy senses this and reaches the master bedroom.
His assault on his parents is incomplete. He fires into June but she only receives maybe two bullets, which explains why she could move around. I think we can say it must have been at least two bullets. If it was only one bullet into June at this stage, then she potentially escapes and blows the gaff.
Thus, there are three bullets left for Nevill. Probably Nevill is shot before June actually. As I think we've agreed, maybe the shot to the face comes first, then two more shots into poor Nevill's left side - i.e. arm and neck/shoulder.
From the perspective of time-and-motion consistency, three shots to Nevill is better than four at this stage because we need Nevill to run through the house to the kitchen and we have the embarrassment of a lack of blood evidence to contend with and explain.
Here's the problem I'm left with: the bullet casings are wrong in this scenario. The only way I think we can make it fit and be consistent with D.I. Cook's findings is if we say that the twins were shot in three sessions, but why would Jeremy do that, it makes little sense, and is it consistent ballistically with what we find and what the pathologist opinionated?
-
Adam, these exchanges we have had have been helpful to me. Your posts are succinct and knowledgeable.
Regrettably, I'm not convinced about the scenario you outline. There are a number of flaws, in my view, due to the ballistic and forensic evidence.
For now, I'll pull out one, which is the manner in which the poor twins were shot. The casing pattern I think can be relied on because it is discrete to that room - a factor that pretty much precludes professional error.
The shooting pattern in the twin's bedroom suggests to me one change of position, which means there is something in your suppositions. Like you, I think the killer must have returned to the twins' bedroom to fire again rather than negate the boys in one fusillade.
If Jeremy was 'going back to make sure' (which I appreciate is plausible), he would have changed position and we see that clearly in the fusillade pattern.
Where I differ is that I surmise two things from the manifest casing pattern:
(i). The killer has shot the twins six times at close range in rapid fire, roughly in an arc pattern: DRH/16, DRH/17, DRH/37, and DRH/18 and DRH/39(double case).
(ii). The killer has shot the twins twice at intermediate range roughly from the door: DRH/38 and DRH/40.
Note: For present purposes, I'm ignoring/disregarding DRH/36.
I conclude from this that the first fusillade was (i) and the second fusillade was (ii).
In other words, at least as far as the twins' bedroom is concerned, I am reversing your scenario and saying that the killer starts by firing at close range six times, then a second fusillade is initiated at intermediate range 'to make sure'.
I believe this makes logical sense.
This has implications. It means Jeremy does not have sufficient bullets to attack both Nevill and June in the way that the Crown allege. It also makes sense that he would not at this stage go downstairs to re-load (assuming he does not carry the ammunition with him). We can also say that it makes sense that Jeremy, if he was the killer, would have the nous to ensure that he launched his assault with a fully-loaded weapon. We will assume he also had a cartridge in the breech at the outset.
From this, we deduce that after the first assault on the twins, he had five cartridges left.
If the killer was Jeremy, his priority would have been Nevill. For the purposes of exploring this scenario with you, I am assuming however that he has attacked the twins first - perhaps even to test the gun, but also perhaps because, rightly or wrongly, he [perceives them as the line of least resistance and he also wants to preclude the possibility of them running around the house, hiding and even escaping.
I tentatively deduce from all this that he must have then attacked Nevill and June in the master bedroom.
Let's assume, as it's your premise, that the rifle is silent. But let's err on the side of caution and say that June has heard something - maybe just Jeremy moving about - and she stirs Nevill. Nevill is now up. That would help explain things. Jeremy senses this and reaches the master bedroom.
His assault on his parents is incomplete. He fires into June but she only receives maybe two bullets, which explains why she could move around. I think we can say it must have been at least two bullets. If it was only one bullet into June at this stage, then she potentially escapes and blows the gaff.
Thus, there are three bullets left for Nevill. Probably Nevill is shot before June actually. As I think we've agreed, maybe the shot to the face comes first, then two more shots into poor Nevill's left side - i.e. arm and neck/shoulder.
From the perspective of time-and-motion consistency, three shots to Nevill is better than four at this stage because we need Nevill to run through the house to the kitchen and we have the embarrassment of a lack of blood evidence to contend with and explain.
Here's the problem I'm left with: the bullet casings are wrong in this scenario. The only way I think we can make it fit and be consistent with D.I. Cook's findings is if we say that the twins were shot in three sessions, but why would Jeremy do that, it makes little sense, and is it consistent ballistically with what we find and what the pathologist opinionated?
The most sensible thing is for Bamber to go upstairs with 11 bullets.
To fire 2 bullets into the twins and then 8 bullets into June and Nevill.
If all goes to plan he has killed 4 people in one upstairs visit. One bullet is left for Sheila who is still sleeping.
Things went to plan with the twins & to a certain extent June. But Nevill woke.
-
There is a possibility Bamber went upstairs with 9 bullets and went straight to the main bedroom. Intending to only fire 8 bullets before focusing on Sheila.
The twins would not wake and could be shot later after a reload. One bullet each.
However Julie Mugford said Bamber told her the twins were shot first.
-
Bamber might not have intended an 11 shot massacre. He might have intended it to to be multi shot.
Only he knows where the 11th bullet was intended prior to Nevill getting up.
-
Bamber could take his time in the twins bedroom. He could psyche himself up & summon up the courage. It's better to do this in the twins bedroom than the main bedroom.
He had least attachment to the twins, so less likely he will bottle it.
Once he had fired the first shot into Daniel/Nicholas, there was no going back. This meant he did not hesitate when going into the main bedroom.