Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Cambridgecutie on June 04, 2026, 08:08:PM
-
If JB's conviction is quashed it is not going to be based on a 'technicality' or some nonsense such as Aga burns, multiple silencers, NB calling EP, someone calling 999 etc, etc. As Patrick O'Connor, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, said it will have to be a slam dunk/blockbuster piece of evidence. So will those who believe JB guilty consider him innocent if the CoA quashes his conviction?
-
If JB's conviction is quashed it is not going to be based on a 'technicality' or some nonsense such as Aga burns, multiple silencers, NB calling EP, someone calling 999 etc, etc. As Patrick O'Connor, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, said it will have to be a slam dunk/blockbuster piece of evidence. So will those who believe JB guilty consider him innocent if the CoA quashes his conviction?
If.
What could be the 'slam dunk'?
-
If JB's conviction is quashed it is not going to be based on a 'technicality' or some nonsense such as Aga burns, multiple silencers, NB calling EP, someone calling 999 etc, etc. As Patrick O'Connor, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, said it will have to be a slam dunk/blockbuster piece of evidence. So will those who believe JB guilty consider him innocent if the CoA quashes his conviction?
Possibly about as much as supporters consider him to be guilty after his conviction?
-
Difficult to conceive what evidence might emerge that shows him innocent (like Malkinson's DNA). Might be something that makes the conviction unsafe - such as Julie saying she lied - but the court would quash and order a retrial (except the Crown would not prosecute again because of the vast passage of time). Bamber would walk free but without proving himself innocent - and spend the remainder of his life litigating to get his inheritance.,
-
If.
What could be the 'slam dunk'?
Don't know, Adam! Cutie says the Aga evidence is nonsense!
-
They have tried the slam dunk route with Sheila still alive and Nevill ringing Chelmsford Police.
For me to change it would have to be a domino effect. Major people saying they lied & experts saying they gave false results.
These people have not retracted & several are deceased. .
-
If.
What could be the 'slam dunk'?
Nothing in his lifetime.
He will end his days as a CAT A.
Whether a posthumous acquittal happens time will tell.
-
Supporters are being optimistic looking for a slam dunk. It would mean all the other evidence is wrong & multiple witnesses lied.
In 2002 & 2012 it was more about getting a technicality. DNA, burn marks & rifle marks suggesting the silencer may not have been used. 'May not' is not proof of innocence but could have been sufficient.
The extra grounds added in 2002 did not show innocence but tried to make the conviction look unsafe.
-
To the media there have been 'slam dunk' claims. Sheila still alive and Nevill calling Chelmsford Police.
Nevill calling Chelmsford Police & Sheila calling 999 are part of the 2021 CCRC submission. Success on either of these grounds would mean all the other evidence has been invented & all witnesses lied.
-
Where's the concrete evidence that JB DID murder the family ?
-
Where's the concrete evidence that JB DID murder the family ?
The forensic evidence it was not Sheila.
-
n what I have just seen? You have to be JOKING ;D
-
Jez is ending his days in the cat A estate.
Whether it becomes a cause celebre posthmously who knows.
-
Hi CC, remember me?!
I suppose it would depend on the reason for quashing the conviction but legally, I would consider him innocent, factually probably not.
I don't think there will ever be a satisfactory conclusion to this case for the guilters and the innocent camp are going to watch JB die in prison, still believing that a few typos and misunderstood police communications are somehow proof he didn't do it.
I sometimes think that if you throw out the silencer there is just about enough reasonable doubt to acquit JB and Sheila too had she been on trial but I just can't believe NB would turn his back on an armed, psychotic Sheila to make a phone call and it doesn't fit the crime scene that strongly suggests N&J were ambushed in bed.
-
Believe the grounds at the CCRC are -
Nevill calling Chelmsford Police.
999 call.
Inheritance.
Disturbance at the scene.
Nevill's burn marks.
Two silencers.
Complaints against officers.
Sheila's condition.
---------
All these were discussed at trial or at previous CCRC/COA submissions. Except Nevill's call & the 999 call. These have received a PSOR.
The burn marks can be linked to 'disturbance at the scene' as that is the insinuation.