Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: bob on April 26, 2012, 10:20:PM
-
One thing I find difficult to understand...
The language that many of you on the pro-JB side use suggests that you are 100% convinced of JB's innocence. For example, Keira posted recently "I remain so confident that Jeremy is Innocent that I pledge to pay for the new tests that Jeremy's next Appeal bid or challenge to the CCRC's decision requires.", and she is not alone (otherwise I would just have aimed this question at you Keira - and I am, of course, very keen to hear your response!).
But why?
I understand that you don't think there is necessarily sufficient evidence to have convicted him, but surely that's not the same thing as being totally convinced that he is innocent?
As many of you know, I've always been "probably guilty" but I could never imagine having the certainty either way in this case that many of you seem to have. So how did you arrive at being so convinced of his innocence, rather than just having some doubts?
-
Hi Bob
I don't think Jeremy had a fair enough trial. I believe in fairness and in all fairness, there is no real evidence that convicted him. It was hearsay.
I would not like to think that I had my hand in releasing a murder. I don't think Jeremy is insane or a Psychopath. Alls he is trying to do is make people believe him, he wants his freedom.
There is stronger hearsay evidence that places someone else responsible that night, but it all has to be proved.
I admire Keira for her/his pledge......
I'm afraid I can''t do the same as I am stony broke. To be fair I don't think a Jeremy fund would be appropriate. :)
-
egap, I agree with your post, you are a good listener and a very perceptive thinker. I agree with most of what you say.
-
I can go to raw basics no one saw him enter or leave that night at WHF , there was no trace he had been there , no manhunt was ordered .
-
Thank you for your kind words Maggie.
No probs egap.
-
One thing I find difficult to understand...
The language that many of you on the pro-JB side use suggests that you are 100% convinced of JB's innocence. For example, Keira posted recently "I remain so confident that Jeremy is Innocent that I pledge to pay for the new tests that Jeremy's next Appeal bid or challenge to the CCRC's decision requires.", and she is not alone (otherwise I would just have aimed this question at you Keira - and I am, of course, very keen to hear your response!).
But why?
I understand that you don't think there is necessarily sufficient evidence to have convicted him, but surely that's not the same thing as being totally convinced that he is innocent?
As many of you know, I've always been "probably guilty" but I could never imagine having the certainty either way in this case that many of you seem to have. So how did you arrive at being so convinced of his innocence, rather than just having some doubts?
Bob,
I've worked long hours today and I'm too tired to give you a considered reply now. All I will say this evening is that it's all about one thing for me: justice. I loathe the manner with which justice and democracy are being eroded in our country and with which people like Jeremy Bamber are denied justice.
If one person can be denied justice in our country, then any of us could be denied it. I worry for our children, about the sort of society we are bequeathing them. I want my children to live in the sort of society where justice is respected and cherished.
I want to go to my grave able to look myself in the eyes, knowing that I stood up for the things I care about and believe in: and justice is one of those things I care about.
-
I have said this before,but I do not believe that Jeremy pulled the trigger on that fateful night.
To plan the murders in advance,carry them out and then be so calm in the aftermath,would,in my opinion make him a pyschopath.
Also,I put alot of weight on PC Mercer and his dog.The german shepherd is said to have approached Jeremy but gave no positive response that Jeremy had fired any weapon.for which it was trained to do.
However,I am not fully convinced that Sheila was responsible either.
For me,it boils down to this - If Nevill was not in bed when it all started,then I can believe that Sheila was responsible.
If Nevill was in bed with June when it all started,then logic tells me that Jeremy is indeed guilty.
-
I have said this before,but I do not believe that Jeremy pulled the trigger on that fateful night.
To plan the murders in advance,carry them out and then be so calm in the aftermath,would,in my opinion make him a pyschopath.
I totally agree with you there Tyler.
Also,I put alot of weight on PC Mercer and his dog.The german shepherd is said to have approached Jeremy but gave no positive response that Jeremy had fired any weapon.for which it was trained to do.
However,I am not fully convinced that Sheila was responsible either.
That is something of a dilemma isn't it? For she was so clean, no bruises, nothing. She could have showered?
For me,it boils down to this - If Nevill was not in bed when it all started,then I can believe that Sheila was responsible.
I think Shelia was downstairs having something to eat and Nevill went downstairs because he heard her, then a confrontation emerged and she took hold of the gun.
If Nevill was in bed with June when it all started,then logic tells me that Jeremy is indeed guilty.
-
Bob,
I've worked long hours today and I'm too tired to give you a considered reply now. All I will say this evening is that it's all about one thing for me: justice. I loathe the manner with which justice and democracy are being eroded in our country and with which people like Jeremy Bamber are denied justice.
If one person can be denied justice in our country, then any of us could be denied it. I worry for our children, about the sort of society we are bequeathing them. I want my children to live in the sort of society where justice is respected and cherished.
I want to go to my grave able to look myself in the eyes, knowing that I stood up for the things I care about and believe in: and justice is one of those things I care about.
I go with what you say here Keira. You are one of the smartest people I know and that your research is thorough.
-
I go with what you say here Keira. You are one of the smartest people I know and that your research is thorough.
Thanks, G. I respect your views too.
-
Sheila's autopsy showed that there was still undigested food in her stomach when she died. The others had no undigested food in their stomachs. The stomach is empty in half an hour. Now what does that tell you?
-
Thanks, G. I respect your views too.
Keira I must say I admire your dedication and strength an excellent post...on Justice. I am a strong believer in fairness and we haven't see any of that today....:)
-
Keira I must say I admire your dedication and strength an excellent post...on Justice. I am a strong believer in fairness and we haven't see any of that today....:)
No we haven't. Well you know what they say? "The best committee consists of two people with one absentee". ;D
-
I go with what you say here Keira. You are one of the smartest people I know and that your research is thorough.
Egap I totally understand what you are saying. I have issues with other countries who are being verbally attacked ,as well as we are, actually from the left as much as the right. There is too much misrepresentation from people and countries who don't fit the mould. What the world needs is a bloody good war! Sorry I don't personally believe that.
-
Sheila's autopsy showed that there was still undigested food in her stomach when she died. The others had no undigested food in their stomachs. The stomach is empty in half an hour. Now what does that tell you?
Really...So has this been used in the new evidence? Never mind, they wouldn't listen anyway....Good night all....sleep well. :)
-
Really...So has this been used in the new evidence? Never mind, they wouldn't listen anyway....Good night all....sleep well. :)
Well it is these discrepancies that thosewho think JB is guilty will not consider. They just brush it off as unimportant. But what it tells me is that if there was undigested food in Sheilas stomach when she died and that her body was not in rigor when the police broke in put the two together and common sense will tell you that she was still alive when Jeremy was with the police outside. Where is Taff Jones' notebook when you need it? It is destroyed and Taff Jones died just before the trial.
-
Morning Patti I was wondering if it had been possible for Sheila to beat Nevile with the butt of the rifle when he was very close to death so he would not have been able to defend himself and this is why she had no marks on her. Secondly the polygraph test why if nobody heeds the results do they bother having them unless of course if you fail it they will heed the results. I know in America they are accepted in Court and as I said earlier the Secretary of State for Scotland released Joseph Steele on the results of his polygraph test. I find it rather strange and I read the results of Jeremy,s polygraph and it lasted 100minutes and the tester he will have a special name but don,t know it stated he was in no doubt Jeremy was innocent.
-
Morning Patti I was wondering if it had been possible for Sheila to beat Nevile with the butt of the rifle when he was very close to death so he would not have been able to defend himself and this is why she had no marks on her. Secondly the polygraph test why if nobody heeds the results do they bother having them unless of course if you fail it they will heed the results. I know in America they are accepted in Court and as I said earlier the Secretary of State for Scotland released Joseph Steele on the results of his polygraph test. I find it rather strange and I read the results of Jeremy,s polygraph and it lasted 100minutes and the tester he will have a special name but don,t know it stated he was in no doubt Jeremy was innocent.
Well this is something else the antis like to bring up all the time. How could Sheila a petite delicate young woman have tackled a strapping 6ft man? And that there were no marks on her consistent with a struggle.
Well they miss two, perhaps three factors. (1) That Neville was old. Old as me in fact and I find things I used to do quite difficult at my age. (2) There were no marks on Jeremy either and goodness knows the relatives did look for such marks on him. (3) That Ralph was already incapacitated from gunshot wounds (the "assume" that he was beaten "before" he was shot. But when you bring up the fact that he phoned Jeremy they say how could he with gunshots in his throat. So it is double reasoning on there part).
Can you see how their reasoning is twisted to suit their opinion? You may say that I also am twisting things? but if you read my reasoned argument you will see that I am rather offering alternative explanations rather than twisting things to suit what I believe.
-
G Goodness gracious me 61 is not old and I would think Nevile would be quite strong farmers usually are. Do you think he could have been beaten after he had been shot quite a few times this would incapacitate him and render him weak. I think when he phoned the police he had just one gun shot wound to his arm.
-
Well it is these discrepancies that thosewho think JB is guilty will not consider. They just brush it off as unimportant. But what it tells me is that if there was undigested food in Sheilas stomach when she died and that her body was not in rigor when the police broke in put the two together and common sense will tell you that she was still alive when Jeremy was with the police outside. Where is Taff Jones' notebook when you need it? It is destroyed and Taff Jones died just before the trial.
Morning G. I am very interested about the undigested food. It certainly indicates that Shelia ate after the family supper. I'm not sure that food fully digests in half hour; I will research that today....
I am new to all this G, but can you tell me why or where does it say the Shelia's body was not in rigour mortise? What I mean is how do we know this to be 100% sure....Yeah, Taff Jones, a bit of a strange accident that was.....:)
-
Morning Patti I was wondering if it had been possible for Sheila to beat Nevile with the butt of the rifle when he was very close to death so he would not have been able to defend himself and this is why she had no marks on her. Secondly the polygraph test why if nobody heeds the results do they bother having them unless of course if you fail it they will heed the results. I know in America they are accepted in Court and as I said earlier the Secretary of State for Scotland released Joseph Steele on the results of his polygraph test. I find it rather strange and I read the results of Jeremy,s polygraph and it lasted 100minutes and the tester he will have a special name but don,t know it stated he was in no doubt Jeremy was innocent.
Hi there Susan.
I think it very possible, he was weak, she could have had the rage of a bull. I still fine it strange she had no marks, this is what complicates it all......For we are told that Nevill had a violent struggle in the kitchen. I would sustain that most of his injuries where from falls. He was shot on the landing and on the stairs, so he must have fell....The cuts on his lip and both sides of his forehead for example could have been caused when his head hit the scuttle. His black eye could be the result of the bullet that fractured his skull....like it was with the twins.
The polygraph is not excepted here in England and to be honest I don't know a great deal about them. I have read various stuff, but not convinced they are 100% accurate.
I will go and read Ann's statement again....about the blood....:)
-
Keira I must say I admire your dedication and strength an excellent post...on Justice. I am a strong believer in fairness and we haven't see any of that today....:)
Thanks, Patti! And thank you for contributing some excellent posts too.
-
Bob
I'm not one of the ones you have addressed this too - i.e. 100% convinced. But I do err on the side of innocence. One thing that I keep coming back to despite frequent changes in that %age is that the attack seems to have been maniacal rather than methodical, and of the two main likely protagonists, SC seems more likely to have been maniacal than JB.
-
G Goodness gracious me 61 is not old and I would think Nevile would be quite strong farmers usually are. Do you think he could have been beaten after he had been shot quite a few times this would incapacitate him and render him weak. I think when he phoned the police he had just one gun shot wound to his arm.
The short answer to hat is I don't know. This is exactly what I am talking about. There are those who who will only stick to the assumption that he was alive and kicking when he was beaten. What I am doing is putting forward other possibilities.
-
Morning G. I am very interested about the undigested food. It certainly indicates that Shelia ate after the family supper. I'm not sure that food fully digests in half hour; I will research that today....
I am new to all this G, but can you tell me why or where does it say the Shelia's body was not in rigour mortise? What I mean is how do we know this to be 100% sure....Yeah, Taff Jones, a bit of a strange accident that was.....:)
Hi Patti. It doesn't say and neither does it say of the others either. But one wonders why Dr. Craig the police doctor registered all the deaths at 8am? When in fact Ralph's body as depicted in the photo of him in the chair was in rigor. Sheila's body was clearly not in rigor (Mertol will tell us more about this for he is a mortician) as the police were able to move her arm for photos. So there must have been some length of time between his and shiela's deaths? If Ralph was killed shortly after his alleged phone call to JB then you have at least 4 hours between his death and the police raid on the property (rigor takes place about 2 hours after death). Whilst Sheila not being in rigor and with still food in her stomach (medical practitioners give a time of around half an hour for the stomach to be empty. Not fully digested) means that death could not have taken place much before police broke in (around 2 hours). Well logic tells me that if that is the case she must have been shot when the police were outside talking to her on a megaphone (some add with no response). JB was with the police from the time they arrived, around 3.50am or so, can't remember the exact time.
-
Hi Patti. It doesn't say and neither does it say of the others either. But one wonders why Dr. Craig the police doctor registered all the deaths at 8am? When in fact Ralph's body as depicted in the photo of him in the chair was in rigor. Sheila's body was clearly not in rigor (Mertol will tell us more about this for he is a mortician) as the police were able to move her arm for photos. So there must have been some length of time between his and shiela's deaths? If Ralph was killed shortly after his alleged phone call to JB then you have at least 4 hours between his death and the police raid on the property (rigor takes place about 2 hours after death). Whilst Sheila not being in rigor and with still food in her stomach (medical practitioners give a time of around half an hour for the stomach to be empty. Not fully digested) means that death could not have taken place much before police broke in (around 2 hours). Well logic tells me that if that is the case she must have been shot when the police were outside talking to her on a megaphone (some add with no response). JB was with the police from the time they arrived, around 3.50am or so, can't remember the exact time.
Hi G, I'd like to ask Mertol a couple of questions. I agree with everything you say....You would have thought , that the food contents of Shelia would have been important at the original trial. Maybe it did have a mention?
I have just read Ann Eaton's statement made 1919......I can't believe the lengths she went to to make sure Jeremy was guilty...to the point of keeping card in her pocket and writing things down.
Her first ever thoughts, when she heard the sad news, was why wasn't Jeremy murdered, why has he survived?
Why did the family not tell June's mother till after the 28th August that her daughter and family had been killed?
And said nothing about Jeremy to her what so ever.....Yet how did the will get changed? If this was the case?
Who Is Mathew Hampton? Why did this man work on the farm for free after the murders? Why did he claim not to know Jeremy? The family claim he did know Jeremy and then went onto believe he was the Mathew that Julie mentions in her statement.....Yet they allowed him to work on all farms....
Question, questions questions.....I do hope one day Jeremy gets a re-trial.....I really do. :)