I do not believe that even if a silencer was fitted to the guns barrel during one or more of the shootings, that it proves Sheila did not kill herself, or indeed, if it makes Jeremy the killer. However, Ewen Smith, now a CCRC Commisioner seemed to think it does, and did...
Actually, while youre online, could you explain why, when you visited the farm to ask Peter and Ann to take photos of the house, when you looked into the kitchen window, you didn't take your camera with you? Where did you park your car? Because, if they'd been in then you'd have had to go back to get your camera? Surprised you didn't take a few shots anyway. Did you not think it disrespectful to just turn up without asking first?
Actually, while youre online, could you explain why, when you visited the farm to ask Peter and Ann to take photos of the house, when you looked into the kitchen window, you didn't take your camera with you? Where did you park your car? Because, if they'd been in then you'd have had to go back to get your camera? Surprised you didn't take a few shots anyway. Did you not think it disrespectful to just turn up without asking first?I wouldn't have said it was "disrespectful" to knock on their door. People knock on my door without asking first. How are they any more special. It "would have" been disrespectful however if he had done as you suggested and had taken pictures without permission. Which of course as far as we know he did the respectful thing and did not take any pictures.
I wouldn't have said it was "disrespectful" to knock on their door. People knock on my door without asking first. How are they any more special. It "would have" been disrespectful however if he had done as you suggested and had taken pictures without permission. Which of course as far as we know he did the respectful thing and did not take any pictures.
I will do what I want, you nor anybody else will tell me what to do...
I wouldn't have said it was "disrespectful" to knock on their door. People knock on my door without asking first. How are they any more special. It "would have" been disrespectful however if he had done as you suggested and had taken pictures without permission. Which of course as far as we know he did the respectful thing and did not take any pictures.Thankfully you've not had five family members murdered and not had the best mate of the murderer, turn up and ask to take pictures of your kitchen!!!!
Thankfully you've not had five family members murdered and not had the best mate of the murderer, turn up and ask to take pictures of your kitchen!!!!Why don't you shut him up once and for all and take said photograph showing the kitchen ?
Thankfully you've not had five family members murdered and not had the best mate of the murderer, turn up and ask to take pictures of your kitchen!!!!But he didn't take pictures. That's the point. Does the milkman phone every time he delivers the milk?
But he didn't take pictures. That's the point. Does the milkman phone every time he delivers the milk?
Come on Lugg, it's hardly the same. Does your milkman run a website campaigning for the release of the person convicted of murdering 5 members of your family?Well if my whole family were murdered there I certainly wouldn't be living there. I personally wouldn't go there and neither would I contact them. But the plain facts of the matter are that Vic accused Mike of being disrespectful by turning up to take pictures but did not do so without permission.
Well if my whole family were murdered there I certainly wouldn't be living there. I personally wouldn't go there and neither would I contact them. But the plain facts of the matter are that Vic accused Mike of being disrespectful by turning up to take pictures but did not do so without permission.
But then again I'm not really sure if he did? It would have taken a lot of nerve to do so.
Personally I have never even been down pages lane, let alone approach the house. People deserve their own privacy without old Lugg hammering on the door asking to take pictures of their kitchen, enquiring, "Was this where Ralph was found dead?".
I do not believe that even if a silencer was fitted to the guns barrel during one or more of the shootings, that it proves Sheila did not kill herself, or indeed, if it makes Jeremy the killer. However, Ewen Smith, now a CCRC Commisioner seemed to think it does, and did...
What's interesting is that Bamber's own solicitor must have believed him guilty then.
why would anybody be stupid enough to shoot themselves through the neck first if trying to kill themselves ?....
the question is how could she remove the silencer from the gun after killing herself.For what its worth my view a silencer was not used.
shiela could only be the killer if there was no silencer used.
well none becouse it would prove they planted it.
it wouldn't impact to well.
I'm just playing Devil's advocate here. If it's finally proven that the silencer wasn't used... how much respect are the family owed?Respect is something earned roch , not given away like cheap bubble gum, the reciepient has to be worthy and these relatives deserve none, one more thing not all but most murders its often the case the murder weapon is not at the crime scene but found later, who on earth is going to carry out such acts as those of that night and not take the murder weapon away .
not many family's have had as much input as this one did.
normally if you go to the police and say i think one of my relatives was murdered or i think such and such is very suspicious you will be listened to politely and then ignored.
but this case was very different.
The police nor the courts lookout should ever be guided by anything else but the truth and what we have here is start to finish a hanging party.
You're telling me,nugs. They were falling over themselves to be as " helpful " as they could. What.?
The police nor the courts lookout should ever be guided by anything else but the truth and what we have here is start to finish a hanging party.
Are you our resident expert, in trying to kill your self in an utterly desperate and horrific situation?
no expert having never had the need to try shoot myself. but i think i know enough to say that the first shot to SC's neck would be near impossilbe and would not be a 'death' shot.
if you wanted to DIY'yourself a pistol to the roof of mouth would be a greater prospect ... also there were known to be 12gauge and 4/10 shotguns in the house , either of these would have been far more effect if she wanted to kill herself
Believe it lookout ive tried to think jeremy is lying everything points to that from ever since the 1986 trial verdict,yet there is still a resonance of question , enough for me to think it was someone else.
It's all positively iffy,Mertol..no doubt about that. There are none worse than the police who use the class system when it comes to an arrest.
Believe it lookout ive tried to think jeremy is lying everything points to that from ever since the 1986 trial verdict,yet there is still a resonance of question , enough for me to think it was someone else.
I may make a post by the weekend to offer the forum a thought to ponder on .
Not necessarily? Some people may want to turn their head away or even bend their head backwards as far as they can so as not to see the weapon they were using against themselves? I know of a case were police were miseld into thinking that a case of a woman shot in the back of the head, just behind the ear was murder. Until it was proved that she had actually shot herself and had turned her head away from the gun. There are a multitude of possibilities I'm afraid and your view as well as mine unfortunately must remain just speculation.
no expert having never had the need to try shoot myself. but i think i know enough to say that the first shot to SC's neck would be near impossilbe and would not be a 'death' shot.
if you wanted to DIY'yourself a pistol to the roof of mouth would be a greater prospect ... also there were known to be 12gauge and 4/10 shotguns in the house , either of these would have been far more effect if she wanted to kill herself
Not necessarily? Some people may want to turn their head away or even bend their head backwards as far as they can so as not to see the weapon they were using against themselves? I know of a case were police were miseld into thinking that a case of a woman shot in the back of the head, just behind the ear was murder. Until it was proved that she had actually shot herself and had turned her head away from the gun. There are a multitude of possibilities I'm afraid and your view as well as mine unfortunately must remain just speculation.There is also reflex action when we involuntarily move away. By the time poor sheila shot herself she may have been in her sane mind. Poor girl.
Respect is something earned roch , not given away like cheap bubble gum, the reciepient has to be worthy and these relatives deserve none, one more thing not all but most murders its often the case the murder weapon is not at the crime scene but found later, who on earth is going to carry out such acts as those of that night and not take the murder weapon away .
Respect is something earned roch , not given away like cheap bubble gum, the reciepient has to be worthy and these relatives deserve none, one more thing not all but most murders its often the case the murder weapon is not at the crime scene but found later, who on earth is going to carry out such acts as those of that night and not take the murder weapon away .
Comments like this disgust me.I fail to see why you are on the forum surely by now you must see there are many who question the way JB was brought before a court, being male was just one.
I fail to see why you are on the forum surely by now you must see there are many who question the way JB was brought before a court, being male was just one.
Comments like this disgust me.
It's not the questioning that is objectionable. Speaking for myself, I believe you and others have as much right to your beliefs on the case as I do. It's when you use those beliefs, which are certainly unproven and IMO often baseless, as an excuse to berate the surviving family that I feel it crosses the line of decency.
Even you must agree that if you believe JB innocent , it then follows that his family were involved in what at best could be called ' noble cause corruption ' at worse an out and out ' set up ' .
I agree guys! I was saying the same to Lookout last night. Baseless slander spouted out time and time again with no evidence to back it up - talking about people who had 5 members of their family killed.
I don't know when it became okay or normal to try and tarnish people on a forum day and night when they haven't been charged with anything, it's disgusting and stinks of pure desperation.
Even you must agree that if you believe JB innocent , it then follows that his family were involved in what at best could be called ' noble cause corruption ' at worse an out and out ' set up ' .
You claim to have a legal background , in your time in the legal world , have you ever known a family so involved in the conviction of a relative ? Finding the silencer , after four police officer's failed to find it in a small cupboard , speaking to the girlfriend of the accused , who then goes on to change the time of a crucial phone call , suggesting the mode of transport used in the crimes ?
Do you believe the family would look a lot better to the people on the outside like us , if they called on EP to allow JB legal team access to all unused or withheld material used in the case ? , furthermore calling on the CCRC to go back to the gun expert's in the U.S and put to bed the argument once and for all whether a silencer was used in the crimes ?
I agree guys! I was saying the same to Lookout last night. Baseless slander spouted out time and time again with no evidence to back it up - talking about people who had 5 members of their family killed.
I don't know when it became okay or normal to try and tarnish people on a forum day and night when they haven't been charged with anything, it's disgusting and stinks of pure desperation.
No, not at all.
Of course! Families are involved in evidence giving all of the time. They know the houses/the deceased and the accused better than the police do - the family are a good starting point in gathering facts.
I don't think it's strange at all that the family spoke to Julie.....they knew her! I think your post is very misleading.
I don't think it matters how I believe the family would look. They answered the questions needed of them. It is disgusting and wrong to think that they should now pander to people. THEY know what THEY believe - why should THEY have to convince you?
They aren't on trial, they do not have to do anything.
Best post you've ever made mat. I couldn't put this any better than you have.Can i ask Vidvic , do you want to know once and for all , whether a silencer was fitted or not ?
Even you must agree that if you believe JB innocent , it then follows that his family were involved in what at best could be called ' noble cause corruption ' at worse an out and out ' set up ' .
You claim to have a legal background , in your time in the legal world , have you ever known a family so involved in the conviction of a relative ? Finding the silencer , after four police officer's failed to find it in a small cupboard , speaking to the girlfriend of the accused , who then goes on to change the time of a crucial phone call , suggesting the mode of transport used in the crimes ?
Do you then believe a member of the family was being anything but slippery when telling a court that he would not benefit from the will's of the deceased , but his wife went on too ?
Do you believe the family would look a lot better to the people on the outside like us , if they called on EP to allow JB legal team access to all unused or withheld material used in the case ? , furthermore calling on the CCRC to go back to the gun expert's in the U.S and put to bed the argument once and for all whether a silencer was used in the crimes ?
Can i ask Vidvic , do you want to know once and for all , whether a silencer was fitted or not ?
why would they think that how could inherit any part of the estate he was related to them.
he could only get anything while the twins were still alive.
and i cant believe the family dident know that.
why would they think that how could inherit any part of the estate he was related to them.
he could only get anything while the twins were still alive.
and i cant believe the family dident know that.
Hi vidvic am I correct in assuming had Jeremy Bamber not been convicted of murdering his entire family the whole of the Estate would have gone to him or would some of it gone to Colin.
if it was true how come colin dident get the money.
obviosly if the eatons thought this they never told colin.
Mertol, Greetings Can you tell us if Vidvic is from Tunbridge Wells?
Hi nugnug it is my belief once you give a child up for adoption you relinquish all legal claims on the child and they would never have been considered Jeremy's next of kin.
Hi nugnug maybe if Jeremy had died as well the terms of the wills would have been applied differently and maybe Colin would have had a share along with Jeremy's next of kin. Very complex matter I would have thought considering Jeremy is still alive. Wonder who Jeremy's next of kin would have been.
Hi april just had a thought. Jeremy was not allowed to inherit because he was sent to prison for murdering his family therefore his next of kin would be Ralph his would have been June and June's would have been her sister. Do you think I should study law :) :) :)
No nugs they would have traced distant relatives of Jeremy's on the side of his adopted parents.
i would of thought they might be able to if there was nobody else alive.
nugs that is right Colin was not entitled to inherit.
Best post you've ever made mat. I couldn't put this any better than you have.
but never let the facts get in the way of what you believe hey vidic.
but never let the facts get in the way of what you believe hey vidic.
I explained that Colin wasn't entitled to anything and if you actually read my posts you'd see that. I have no idea what point you've tried to make and I'm not sure you do either!!
Hello packagebuilder so nice to see you posting again :)
Hi packagebuilder don't think you have missed too much forum has been fairly quiet everyone shopping for Christmas but me. :) :) :)
Roch how clever you are I have been trying to decide what campion meant when he was referring to Mat as meddlesome from maidstone. How strange don't think he is from that area at all.
Roch how clever you are I have been trying to decide what campion meant when he was referring to Mat as meddlesome from maidstone. How strange don't think he is from that area at all.
Vic said he was disgusted. There is a saying 'disgusted of tonbridge wells' which is in fact a charicature of how some people used to write in to the letters page, for example Times or Daily Mail, to express their moral disdain about this or that.
The reference to you being 'meddlesome of maidstone' is presumably related to your canny knack of getting involved in conflict.
Hi Mat think Maidstone maybe in Kent but not sure don't really know where Kent is other than it is South of Yorkshire :) :) :) bet somebody will post up and tell us.
Kent is in the south east...
Where've you been?
Bridget I have been here all the time. Were you worrying about me :)
Hahahahahaha I knew you would come out....yes it is, my mistake. :o
I've been so so busy....and not stopping on for long because I am going out with some friends in the village for a drink, but wont be late back, so might come on late.....Ah! You have missed me eh? :) :) :) :)
Bridget think I will do huff now. Yes I knew you had not missed me :)
i read it very clearly and you said nothing of the sort.
i dont believe for one secound the eatons though that.
Dear Nugnug.......I understood you Vic. Because you related all this to me a while back. It is clear to me that, that is what happened. I am of the opinion that the relatives were NOT motivated by greed as is assumed by some.
" What you all fail to realise or ignore is that after the murders it was believed by the relatives that Colin would inherit most of the estate. NGB did explain to me why this wasn't so, but it was a suprise to the relatives at the time. After all the working out, effectively, everything went to Pam, who REFUSED it. "I will not benefit from the murder of my sister". Robert and Pam decided to hand down the heritance to Ann, David (from the speakman side) and Anthony, sister (on the bamber side). Each received around 80k."
Unless you have a problem with English this was my original post that you started questioning and should have been self explanatory.
I understood you Vic. Because you related all this to me a while back. It is clear to me that, that is what happened. I am of the opinion that the relatives were NOT motivated by greed as is assumed by some.
There may be difference in being not motivated by greed and there having been no financial concerns whatsoever in the dynamics involved. Also, I would say that a seeming lack of questioning regarding alarming anomalies (e.g. logs / no time of death and the abundance of other concerns relating to the raid and its' aftermath) belie certain reluctance to delve in to a truth not consistent with Jeremy having been responsible and/or deception on the part of EP.Good points Roch.
Dear Nugnug.......
" What you all fail to realise or ignore is that after the murders it was believed by the relatives that Colin would inherit most of the estate. NGB did explain to me why this wasn't so, but it was a suprise to the relatives at the time. After all the working out, effectively, everything went to Pam, who REFUSED it. "I will not benefit from the murder of my sister". Robert and Pam decided to hand down the heritance to Ann, David (from the speakman side) and Anthony, sister (on the bamber side). Each received around 80k."
Unless you have a problem with English this was my original post that you started questioning and should have been self explanatory.
Hi Mat think Maidstone maybe in Kent but not sure don't really know where Kent is other than it is South of Yorkshire :) :) :) bet somebody will post up and tell us.