-
Paranormal Evidence - Whose Bloodied right hand palm print was left on pages of bible?
-
Was it Sheila's right hand bloodied palm print:-
LOOK very carefully into the bloodied image
-
LOOK very carefully into the bloodied image
It's Sheila, image reproduced in blood...
-
Police said all finger prints found on bible had been identified, and eliminated, as either Junes, or childrens - so they must know to whom this bloodied right hand palm print on this page of the bible belongs to, or originated from?
-
Police said all finger prints found on bible had been identified, and eliminated, as either Junes, or childrens - so they must know to whom this bloodied right hand palm print on this page of the bible belongs to, or originated from?
(1) - Sheila
(2) - June
(3) - Ralph
-
First thing which needs to be done, is to make enquiries of the police, and at Lab', to see who's blood was found upon the bible?
We know some of Sheila's blood is on the bible because in the crime scene photograph of Sheila's restaged body on the bedroom floor, blood from her upper right hand has run onto the edge of the bible:-
-
(1) - Sheila
(2) - June
(3) - Ralph
It's not broad enough to be a mans' Mike.
-
It's not broad enough to be a mans' Mike.
I Agree, this boils it down to it being either Sheila's, or Junes, bloodied right hand that caused or produced this / that impression...
Police know the answer already, and the circumstances it was produced on the bible, my guess at the moment is that it belonged or was made by Sheila...
-
I Agree, this boils it down to it being either Sheila's, or Junes, bloodied right hand that caused or produced this / that impression...
Police know the answer already, and the circumstances it was produced on the bible, my guess at the moment is that it belonged or was made by Sheila...
Yes,,I would say it was Sheilas' too. I bet there were ructions that night between Sheila and her mother.
-
Yes,,I would say it was Sheilas' too. I bet there were ructions that night between Sheila and her mother.
I have an idea, a theorey about how and when the bloodied right hand palm print was produced on the bible, if anyone is remotely interested...
-
I have an idea, a theorey about how and when the bloodied right hand palm print was produced on the bible, if anyone is remotely interested...
yes mike, i"m interested in your theory , please tell :) :)
-
I have an idea, a theorey about how and when the bloodied right hand palm print was produced on the bible, if anyone is remotely interested...
Go on Mike.
-
Something has been puzzling me for a long time, and it wasn't until tonight when I was reading about Carolines observation and experiment concerning how the bloodied right hand palm print on the page of the bible was created and produced, and once I divulged her observations it suddenly dawned on me...
-
Something has been puzzling me for a long time, and it wasn't until tonight when I was reading about Carolines observation and experiment concerning how the bloodied right hand palm print on the page of the bible was created and produced, and once I divulged her observations it suddenly dawned on me...
-
Police know that Sheila had a bloodied right hand - which created and produced the bloodied right hand palm print on the pages of the bible. The bible was resting open paged (facing upwards) on the front lower right hand side of her blue nightdress, with her bloodied right hand palm resting upon the page of the bible producing that part of her bloodied right hand palm there. Her bloodied fingers produced the bloodied fingermarks as shown on the front lower part of her nightdress. This proves that police restaged Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, by claiming that her hands were spotlessly clean of blood, when the part bloodstain on the page of the bible, and the other corresponding bloody fingermarks from the same right hand were created on the nightdress...
-
Police know that Sheila had a bloodied right hand - which created and produced the bloodied right hand palm print on the pages of the bible. The bible was resting open paged (facing upwards) on the front lower right hand side of her blue nightdress, with her bloodied right hand palm resting upon the page of the bible producing that part of her bloodied right hand palm there. Her bloodied fingers produced the bloodied fingermarks as shown on the front lower part of her nightdress. This proves that police restaged Sheila's body on the bedroom floor, by claiming that her hands were spotlessly clean of blood, when the part bloodstain on the page of the bible, and the other corresponding bloody fingermarks from the same right hand were created on the nightdress...
If this turns out to be correct, it means that police cleaned Sheila's right hand to eliminate blood upon it, and then took hand swabs (DRH/33), which would explain why low levels of lead deposit were found when the swabs were eventually tested at the lab'...
Eureka...
-
Originally underneath her thumb joint. So it was moved.
-
Originally underneath her thumb joint. So it was moved.
Hand swab tests carried out on DRH/33 or DRH/44 were / are worthless because police say her hands were bloodfree, but her right hand could not have been blood free when the bloodied marks were made and produced on the page of the bible, and her nightdress - police would have known that the correct levels of lead deposit would have been present and detectable on the blood contaminated page of the bible, and the bloodstained nightdress where her bloodied fingers left thier mark...
-
Now that's as plain as a pikestaff and what can't speak,can't lie.
-
Now that's as plain as a pikestaff and what can't speak,can't lie.
Now we know how that bloodied right hand palm print got onto the edge of the bible page (thanks to Carolines good detective work) it opens up a whole new set of enquiries which can be carried out, and it gives everyone an opportunity to debate at what stage these events occurred, and what implications it has on the convictions?
You see, blood on Sheila's right hand which is transferred onto the page of a bible, and the front lower part of her nightdress tells a story of its own, since police say and have said that her hands were clean, so if that was true when they examined her hands it must mean they knew that some form of ritualistic cleansing of her hands had taken place before she ended up dead...
-
Well that's something worth going into.It's like a jig-saw with a once missing piece,,because what Caroline has found,,fits comfortably,without argument.
-
The rifle would NOT have been placed on top of the woman either.
-
Now we know how that bloodied right hand palm print got onto the edge of the bible page (thanks to Carolines good detective work) it opens up a whole new set of enquiries which can be carried out, and it gives everyone an opportunity to debate at what stage these events occurred, and what implications it has on the convictions?
You see, blood on Sheila's right hand which is transferred onto the page of a bible, and the front lower part of her nightdress tells a story of its own, since police say and have said that her hands were clean, so if that was true when they examined her hands it must mean they knew that some form of ritualistic cleansing of her hands had taken place before she ended up
dead...
Interesting thoughts Mike. I'm pretty certain Sheila's hands were not clean when she was found.
-
Judging by her position,,Sheila wasn't found where she was lying either. I think it's a great breakthrough.
-
The rifle would NOT have been placed on top of the woman either.
Not with the bible there in that / this position, of course...
-
Judging by her position,,Sheila wasn't found where she was lying either. I think it's a great breakthrough.
Potentially a breathtaking breakthrough, thanks to Carolines, ingenuity...
-
Potentially a breathtaking breakthrough, thanks to Carolines, ingenuity...
Indeed Mike. Caroline would run rings round some of the professionals.
-
I can also confirm that there are no bloodied fingermarks on the front lower part of Sheila's nightdress in the photograph police took of Sheila's body on the bed, before they moved her body to the floor - this indicates in the clearest possible terms that the bible was resting against the front lower part of her nightdress with her bloodied right hand palm upon its page, and her blooded fingers against her nightdress, without the gun being on her body at all, before PC Bird started taking pictures of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor with her right hand resting on top of the rifle which police had put there during the restaging of the scene, falsely making out that nobody moved or touched anything, and that Sheila's hands were bloodfree...
-
I can also confirm that there are no bloodied fingermarks on the front lower part of Sheila's nightdress in the photograph police took of Sheila's body on the bed, before they moved her body to the floor - this indicates in the clearest possible terms that the bible was resting against the front lower part of her nightdress with her bloodied right hand palm upon its page, and her blooded fingers against her nightdress, without the gun being on her body at all, before PC Bird started taking pictures of Sheila's body on the bedroom floor with her right hand resting on top of the rifle which police had put there during the restaging of the scene, falsely making out that nobody moved or touched anything, and that Sheila's hands were bloodfree...
What Carolines contribution on our forum has done, with regards to this matter, is it has opened up a can of worms that might yet lead to the quashing of these convictions, so many new enquiries are going to be made into this now, by everybody, and anybody, I doubt whether any stone will be left unturned in the pursuit for the truth and justice...
-
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4296.0;attach=31819;image)
Is it possible to isolate the 'palm' print as an image on its' own... and then slide it up to the finger-like stain on the nightdress, to see if it fits and appears more hand-like?
-
It can now be argued that Sheila had been moved,,along with the bible and the placement of the rifle,,on to where she's pictured on top of the carpet with the questionable blood-spotting.
Why plonk the rifle on top of her when it's been said that it was by her side.? For whose benefit was that picture taken.?
-
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4296.0;attach=31819;image)
Is it possible to isolate the 'palm' print as an image on its' own... and then slide it up to the finger-like stain on the nightdress, to see if it fits and appears more hand-like?
I guess so...
-
A question for Caroline. When you conducted this experiment, did you press your hand onto the paper, or did you just place it there in a gentle manner?
-
Alias,,it looks as though there's a certain amount of " weight " on the page,,to get that impression. Her hand has been resting on it before it was moved away from her.
-
I guess so...
I meant pair the images at the likely join, so that it's one image instead of two
-
I meant pair the images at the likely join, so that it's one image instead of two
Yes, I know what you meant, perhaps a forum member might like to have a go at doing it, if not I will see what I can do before the week-end is out - a good suggestion though Roch, this is the sort of action we can embark upon to make the experts and professionals do something constructive and positive to help Jeremy get these convictions quashed, keep up the good work...
-
Yes, I know what you meant, perhaps a forum member might like to have a go at doing it, if not I will see what I can do before the week-end is out - a good suggestion though Roch, this is the sort of action we can embark upon to make the experts and professionals do something constructive and positive to help Jeremy get these convictions quashed, keep up the good work...
I'm not on here enough to take such credit Mike. Another thing that is noticeable is the uniformity of the gap that lies underneath the upper finger-like marks. It's as if you could literally square them off with a ruler?
The edge of a hardback book can be used as a ruler
-
I'm not on here enough to take such credit Mike. Another thing that is noticeable is the uniformity of the gap that lies underneath the upper finger like marks. It's as if you could literally square them off with a ruler?
the edge of a hardback book can be used as a ruler
Edge of bible, laid against nightdress...
-
That lacy doyley pattern is also showing at the top of the page within the bloodstain. It obviously acted as a bookmark.
-
Initial attempt, not very good - will try again tomorrow...
-
A question for Caroline. When you conducted this experiment, did you press your hand onto the paper, or did you just place it there in a gentle manner?
Hi Alias, sorry, I've been busy, just got back. No, I didn't press my hand hard on the paper but I did have to apply a little pressure.
-
I like your theory Mike!! I have a photographer friend who might be able to match up the images. I'll ask!!
-
I like your theory Mike!! I have a photographer friend who might be able to match up the images. I'll ask!!
Thank you so very much, that would be very much appreciated, well done, again...
Off to bed, Scotland beckons in just a few wee hours...
-
Thank you so very much, that would be very much appreciated, well done, again...
Off to bed, Scotland beckons in just a few wee hours...
OK, Night Mike, I've just emailed him!! Enjoy Scotland :)
-
OK, Night Mike, I've just emailed him!! Enjoy Scotland :)
i don't wish to be a damp squib but can someone please explain the significance of it appearing to be the case that the blood pattern on the bible is a palm print ?
Jim
-
i don't wish to be a damp squib but can someone please explain the significance of it appearing to be the case that the blood pattern on the bible is a palm print ?
Jim
Because it isn't mentioned anywhere!! AND if it turns out that it's Sheila's it PROVES her hands weren't spotless!! Which then begs the question of why they were reported as such ..... and on, and on ......
-
Because it isn't mentioned anywhere!! AND if it turns out that it's Sheila's it PROVES her hands weren't spotless!! Which then begs the question of why they were reported as such ..... and on, and on ......
hi Caroline
How can it be established that its Sheila's bloody palm print ?
Jim
-
Because it isn't mentioned anywhere!! AND if it turns out that it's Sheila's it PROVES her hands weren't spotless!! Which then begs the question of why they were reported as such ..... and on, and on ......
And if not Sheila's - who's is it? But that still begs the question of why there is no mentiion of it - it can't Jeremy's or I'm sure we would have heard about it long ago.
-
And if not Sheila's - who's is it? But that still begs the question of why there is no mentiion of it - it can't Jeremy's or I'm sure we would have heard about it long ago.
where is this bible now ?
Jim
-
And if not Sheila's - who's is it? But that still begs the question of why there is no mentiion of it - it can't Jeremy's or I'm sure we would have heard about it long ago.
If no one has identified it as a palm print until now, what makes you think they've considered whether or not it is Jeremy's?
Plus, lets not forget that it hasn't actually been confirmed as being a palm print at all.
-
hi Caroline
How can it be established that its Sheila's bloody palm print ?
Jim
They took prints - obviously they had to in order to establish which prints were hers at the scene. Whether that extended to palm prints, I have no idea.
People go on about how the same things just keep being regurgitated - I don't know what all of the implications are - maybe it's nothing BUT maybe it's something. Lets just see shall we?
-
If no one has identified it as a palm print until now, what makes you think they've considered whether or not it is Jeremy's?
Plus, lets not forget that it hasn't actually been confirmed as being a palm print at all.
Who said it wasn't identified as a palm print? It's seems obvious to me and has done for some time. I'm not asking you or anyone else to buy into it (although I think you think there's a strong possibility that it is). If it looks like a palm print on a fairly bad reproduced picture, it must be obvious from the original.
-
where is this bible now ?
Jim
No idea.
-
Who said it wasn't identified as a palm print? It's seems obvious to me and has done for some time. I'm not asking you or anyone else to buy into it (although I think you think there's a strong possibility that it is). If it looks like a palm print on a fairly bad reproduced picture, it must be obvious from the original.
Or it could be obvious that it isn't.
I haven't seen it described as a palm print anywhere else, but it does certainly look like one. The CoA suggested (as I did wrongly) that it was a transfer from the carpet so certainly no one was suggesting it was a palm print in 2002.
-
Here is what I'm thinking..
If it is a palm print and it could be shown to be Sheila's, it damages the police evidence with regards the cleanliness of her hands and as a knock on effect, the hand swab evidence.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be JBs, he's toast.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.
If it is a palm print you'd better hope its Sheila's!
-
Or it could be obvious that it isn't.
I haven't seen it described as a palm print anywhere else, but it does certainly look like one. The CoA suggested (as I did wrongly) that it was a transfer from the carpet so certainly no one was suggesting it was a palm print in 2002.
Exactly Bridget, they made a mistake by not turning it over in their minds eye. It's easy done - but it looks like no one realised that the stain on the carpet is under the wrong page to transfer to that side of the book. I knew there was something wrong with the COA description and I mentioned about the stain being on the wrong side a short while after joining but no one seemed interested. I think there was a big argument about the picture on the bed at the time. However, it looks like a palm print, it's on the wrong side to be from the stain on the floor so I'm going with palm print and Mikes suggestion actually seems quite plausible. I have wondered before why there is only finger prints on Sheila's nightdress that seem to end abruptly.
-
Exactly Bridget, they made a mistake by not turning it over in their minds eye. It's easy done - but it looks like no one realised that the stain on the carpet is under the wrong page to transfer to that side of the book. I knew there was something wrong with the COA description and I mentioned about the stain being on the wrong side a short while after joining but no one seemed interested. I think there was a big argument about the picture on the bed at the time. However, it looks like a palm print, it's on the wrong side to be from the stain on the floor so I'm going with palm print and Mikes suggestion actually seems quite plausible. I have wondered before why there is only finger prints on Sheila's nightdress that seem to end abruptly.
Ok, I agree it looks like a palm print but see above ;)
-
Here is what I'm thinking..
If it is a palm print and it could be shown to be Sheila's, it damages the police evidence with regards the cleanliness of her hands and as a knock on effect, the hand swab evidence.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be JBs, he's toast.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.
If it is a palm print you'd better hope its Sheila's!
If it is JB's then he's be guilty beyond doubt!! I'd be happy with that, at least I would KNOW an innocent hasn't had the best years of his life stolen. However, it looks too small to be a man's hand!!
-
Ok, I agree it looks like a palm print but see above ;)
Wow!! You actually agree with me on something (about the case). I'm gobsmacked!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
If it is JB's then he's be guilty beyond doubt!! I'd be happy with that, at least I would KNOW an innocent hasn't had the best years of his life stolen. However, it looks too small to be a man's hand!!
So you're a palm print expert already? :)
Wow!! You actually agree with me on something (about the case). I'm gobsmacked!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
I often agree with you, I just don't tell you ;)
-
So you're a palm print expert already? :)
No, but I know how big those paperback bibles usually are and the stain only fills the top corner. I used a foolscap book and my hands are pretty small. I'd say the two (stains) were of a similar size unless the bible turns out to be humongous!! ;D
I often agree with you, I just don't tell you ;)
Good thing I don't tell you either!! :P ;)
-
No, but I know how big those paperback bibles usually are and the stain only fills the top corner. I used a foolscap book and my hands are pretty small. I'd say the two (stains) were of a similar size unless the bible turns out to be humongous!! ;D
The print could also be June's...
-
The print could also be June's...
It could indeed. I still find it almost unbelievable that no one has realised that the stain on the bible could not have come from the stain on the carpet because it's on the wrong side of the page when the bible is faced down. Anyone giving it serious consideration would surely see that? As such, I am forced to believe someone did realise, but didn't say anything because there it is, written in the COA findings.
-
If it turns out to be the case, that bloodied palm print impression on page of bible, and bloody fingermark impressions are from the same blooded right hand, it cannot possibly be from June or Ralph, or Jeremy, or any hired hitman, because in the photograph of Sheila on the bed there is no bloodied fingermarks on the front lower right hand side of her nightdress, no gun, no bible. Which means if both parts of the bloodied hand impression belong together, the bloodied hand responsible could only have been Sheila's, not Junes, or Ralphs - police knew who's bloodied hand caused these bloodied part hand impressions on bible page, and nightdress...
-
I have very recently been told by an informant, that it might be suggested that in the photo' of Sheila on the bed, it is not possible to see the bloodied fingermark impressions on the nightdress being worn by Sheila when her body was laid on the bed, because the hem of her nightdress had ridden up high and because of the position of her hand in those shots...
-
It should be possible for experts acting in Jeremys interests to be able to reproduce a similar bloodied impression on the page of a duplice bible, and linen nightdress, and for those representing him, to make a high court application (writ of habeas corpus) requesting that Essex police hand over all the withheld material related to this matter that is currently withheld under pii...
-
What needs to be done, as a matter of urgency, is to obtain expert opinion concerning the liklihood of these two bloodied hand impressions, one on the page of the bible, and the other on the nightdress, were bot made from the same blood soaked hand...
-
Lets make a start and list things which now need to be done:-
(1) - check for lab' records and any documentation which identifies blood type or group found on nightdress, in particular, blood group evidence pertaining to the bloodied fingermarks on the nightdress, and the bloodied part palm print on the page of the bible...
-
Lets make a start and list things which now need to be done:-
(1) - check for lab' records and any documentation which identifies blood type or group found on nightdress, in particular, blood group evidence pertaining to the bloodied fingermarks on the nightdress, and the bloodied part palm print on the page of the bible...
I believe I have read somewhere in the file, that only Sheila's blood was found on her nightdress - if this turns out to be true, then there can be no doubt at all that at one time or another at the scene during the incident Sheila had blood on her hand(s)...
-
I agree that this is indeed a significant find, and I cannot praise Caroline enough for finding!
I have a question however. The bible was lying on a stain or pool of blood on the carpet beside Sheila´s body. Mustn´t that stain have dried since there is no mark of it on the bible (or very little)?
On one hand that proves that the bible was placed there a good while after Sheila died by someone (police - they were the only ones there to do it), on the other, that Sheila had died a while back (hours) before she was found and the bible for some obscure reason was placed on top of that stain.
-
That is Sheilas' bloodied hand on the nightdress,,as it's pointing downwards as if wiping.
-
What sort of a person takes a swab of someones' hand/s after they've been cleaned.? D'oh.!
Of course it's going to wipe away evidence of blood and lead.
Vanezis statement was a classic in that he'd said that there was blood " on at least one of her hands ".How many hands did he think the girl had.?
-
I agree that this is indeed a significant find, and I cannot praise Caroline enough for finding!
I have a question however. The bible was lying on a stain or pool of blood on the carpet beside Sheila´s body. Mustn´t that stain have dried since there is no mark of it on the bible (or very little)?
On one hand that proves that the bible was placed there a good while after Sheila died by someone (police - they were the only ones there to do it), on the other, that Sheila had died a while back (hours) before she was found and the bible for some obscure reason was placed on top of that stain.
We don't know who's blood stain is on the carpet or even how big it is. Also, on some of the pictures the bible is resting against her arm and so would be lifted from the carpet stain and further, the note is also underneath and perhaps this helped to protect the page. I don't think anyone knows anything about the note that was found - does it still exist and if so, is there any staining?
-
Hello Caroline very well done you clever girl the things you turn up are amazing and you are a tremendous asset to this forum xx
-
Hello Caroline very well done you clever girl the things you turn up are amazing and you are a tremendous asset to this forum xx
Awwww!! Thanks Susan - as are you!! :) :) :-*
-
Hello Caroline very well done you clever girl the things you turn up are amazing and you are a tremendous asset to this forum xx
I agree Susie. The times I've looked at that blood stain and have never had the slightest idea it may have been a palm print. Great piece of deduction Caroline, think we will have to name you star of the week yet again. ... ;D ;D ;D
-
I agree Susie. The times I've looked at that blood stain and have never had the slightest idea it may have been a palm print. Great piece of deduction Caroline, think we will have to name you star of the week yet again. ... ;D ;D ;D
Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
I do understand Caroline, there always seems to be one of those in this case. Fingers crossed, for once there's no brick wall. ;)
-
Caroline you are far too kind ;D ;D ;D but I like you ;D
-
Thanks Maggie but ever the pessimist I'm waiting for the spanner!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
No spanner coming forthwith with this little gem,Caroline.
Saying that,,someone's bound to mention it not being DNA tested----------------well neither was the blood in the silencer. Yes,,the same grouping,,but not peculiar to one person.
-
Hello lookout well said. We shall await and see what is thrown at the posts ;D ;D ;D
-
hi Caroline
How can it be established that its Sheila's bloody palm print ?
Jim
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.
Just my take on things... but I cant envisage grabbing hold of a bible in such a manner with a bloodied palm, as being consistent with Nevill's suspected actions, regardless of which side of the fence we're on. I can envisage the possibility of June clutching a bible with a bloodied palm, if at some point she was left wounded before being killed.
However, I cannot see why a palm print from June would not be mentioned as part of the case? Surely it would inevitably form part of the police investigation? That is, if they genuinely attempted to reconstruct what had taken place during the incident.
-
Here is what I'm thinking..
If it is a palm print and it could be shown to be Sheila's, it damages the police evidence with regards the cleanliness of her hands and as a knock on effect, the hand swab evidence.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be JBs, he's toast.
If it is a palm print and it's shown to be June of Neville's, it means nothing.
If it is a palm print you'd better hope its Sheila's!
If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......
The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.
Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?
-
If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......
The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.
Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?
If her fingers were bloodied we don't know at what point they became that way!!
-
If an alleged right hand palm print is to be found on an overturned bible and alleged bloodied finger marks from a right hand are to be found on Sheila's nightdress......
The murder weapon was allegedly reloaded from bullets that had been spilled out from a box of ammunition. The box of ammunition was in the kitchen by the telephone. Jeremy admits to being responsible for the box of ammunition being in the kitchen. Mike has previously identified three bloodied finger marks located on the edge of the kitchen surfaces which are close to the spilled bullets and telephone.
Why are there no bloodied right hand palm or finger marks to be found on the spent cartridges or a murder weapon which Sheila had allegedly used to shoot five members of her own family?
Re cartidges... There probably was. And they were subsequently substituted, as part of the ballistics work carried out behind the scenes. Hunter's manuscript goes in to great detail about the ballistics, worth a read. As for the weapon, don't know. I've seen arguments that it's the wrong weapon but legally both sides have previously agreed it was the actual weapon that carried out the shootings.
-
If her fingers were bloodied we don't know at what point they became that way!!
Which is exactly what I was going to say before I saw your post Caroline. There is no reason to believe that the fingerprints on the worktop belonged to the same hand which caused the bloody palm print on the bible or on Sheila's nightdress. We are told by the police etc. that Sheila's hands were clean butthis surely raises a question mark over that assertion?
-
Which is exactly what I was going to say before I saw your post Caroline. There is no reason to believe that the fingerprints on the worktop belonged to the same hand which caused the bloody palm print on the bible or on Sheila's nightdress. We are told by the police etc. that Sheila's hands were clean butthis surely raises a question mark over that assertion?
I agree 100% Maggie. The finger prints on the nightdress alone must be Sheila's and as such, she must have had blood on at least one of her hands!!
-
I agree 100% Maggie. The finger prints on the nightdress alone must be Sheila's and as such, she must have had blood on at least one of her hands!!
The coroner had pointed out that Sheila had blood on " one of her hands ". Didn't say which one though.
-
The coroner had pointed out that Sheila had blood on " one of her hands ". Didn't say which one though.
If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.
-
If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.
In Scott Lomax's Trial and Error,,he states that Vanezis had said that there was blood on her hand/s,,to which the defence had only recently discovered,,so such information wasn't presented at the trial.
Therefore the blood on Sheilas' hand/s explains the finger-marks on the bible.
-
In Scott Lomax's Trial and Error,,he states that Vanezis had said that there was blood on her hand/s,,to which the defence had only recently discovered,,so such information wasn't presented at the trial.
Therefore the blood on Sheilas' hand/s explains the finger-marks on the bible.
Forget Scott Lomax and read Vanezis' own report.
-
Forget Scott Lomax and read Vanezis' own report.
Why are there so many conflicting reports.? That in itself proves the trial was a sham for starters. On the photo of Sheila,,on this thread,,you can see that there's blood on her right hand.
I was reading ealier about how the womans' hands were cleaned------------------then swabbed.! It beggars belief that this can happen,,then hey presto,the report said that no lead was detected. Am I missing something,,or was it that nobody knew their " aris " from their elbow.?
-
Why are there so many conflicting reports.? That in itself proves the trial was a sham for starters. On the photo of Sheila,,on this thread,,you can see that there's blood on her right hand.
I was reading ealier about how the womans' hands were cleaned------------------then swabbed.! It beggars belief that this can happen,,then hey presto,the report said that no lead was detected. Am I missing something,,or was it that nobody knew their " aris " from their elbow.?
Well I kind if share your frustration there, but I think it's because we are often working from snippets and incomplete documents or sets of documents so it's a bit like trying to reconstruct the Mona Lisa through a letterbox.
Firstly, the fact that he says the palms and fingers were free from blood does not mean that she didn't have blood on the back of her hand (we know she did, we can see it) although I agree that it would have been better if he'd clarified that.
Secondly, in the extract in the Lomax book he describes the mark on the nightie as a "bloodstained palm print" (according to Lomax), does it look like a palm print to you?
I think what Lomax has quoted is notes made during the PM, which he then used to compile his report dated 30th September. I'd like to see those notes in full.
-
If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.
Looking at Sheila's right hand, you can see blood on the ball part of her thumb and there is what looks like black marks on the back of her hand. This hand is anything but clean.
-
Looking at Sheila's right hand, you can see blood on the ball part of her thumb and there is what looks like black marks on the back of her hand. This hand is anything but clean.
What he said was that the palms and fingers were not contaminated with blood, he does not say that the hand (generally) was clean.
-
He also says that There was substantial blood staining to Neville's right hand, and that both of June's hands were bloodstained.
-
What he said was that the palms and fingers were not contaminated with blood, he does not say that the hand (generally) was clean.
Sheila had wiped her hand down her nightie because you can see the imprint of her fingers. Though I can't see the hand being thoroughly cleansed of blood with just a wipe,,so it would have been left stained
-
Sheila had wiped her hand down her nightie because you can see the imprint of her fingers. Though I can't see the hand being thoroughly cleansed of blood with just a wipe,,so it would have been left stained
Well exactly, and it wasn't so she didn't. Vanezis opinion was that the marks on the nightie had transferred from her wrist, presumably at least in part because that was where the blood was.
-
I get more and more angry that a man has spent 28 years of his life behind bars on the basis of this MESS of an investigation!
-
Alias it appears to be one heck of a mess so many conflicting reports etc he would not be convicted today on the evidence he was then. :'(
-
OK, this is the best I can do. The angles of the photographs are different, but if you can compensate for that in your mind, I think it is pretty obvious that this fits beautifully like a jig zaw puzzle.
-
OK, this is the best I can do. The angles of the photographs are different, but if you can compensate for that in your mind, I think it is pretty obvious that this fits beautifully like a jig zaw puzzle.
Startling. As for Vanezis... I wonder if he was made aware of the 'palm' print on the bible? Perhaps if he had been, his wrist transfer observation / theory might not exist?
-
He also says that There was substantial blood staining to Neville's right hand, and that both of June's hands were bloodstained.
Don't know what was on them when he saw Sheila's hands but in the picture you can see she has blood on the ball of her thumb.
-
OK, this is the best I can do. The angles of the photographs are different, but if you can compensate for that in your mind, I think it is pretty obvious that this fits beautifully like a jig zaw puzzle.
Well done Alias, that's good enough for me!!
-
Don't know what was on them when he saw Sheila's hands but in the picture you can see she has blood on the ball of her thumb.
That is hardly an area that could be called her palm though is it? In fact to me the ball of the thumb is the fleshy part inside the hand, a part of the palm, all we can see in these photos is the edge of her thumb at best.
-
Alias/Caroline :) MANY congratulations to both of you, and thanks too. AT LAST, the penny has dropped and I can now see exactly what you've been trying to say. An almost perfect hand print located in two places an fitting like a jigsaw.
-
That is hardly an area that could be called her palm though is it? In fact to me the ball of the thumb is the fleshy part inside the hand, a part of the palm, all we can see in these photos is the edge of her thumb at best.
And it has blood on it. The fact that it does (and you can see it does) makes it more (not less) likely that it extends to the inside of her palm.
-
That is hardly an area that could be called her palm though is it? In fact to me the ball of the thumb is the fleshy part inside the hand, a part of the palm, all we can see in these photos is the edge of her thumb at best.
Well no, Bridget, it isn't, but as the blood which can be seen on the edge of the ball of the thumb doesn't appear to have run downwards from the top of her hand, unless there is NO blood anywhere else, it must mean that there is more under her hand where it can't be seen.
-
Looking at Sheila's right hand, you can see blood on the ball part of her thumb and there is what looks like black marks on the back of her hand. This hand is anything but clean.
The black marks could have transferred to her hand when Jeremy put his hand in hers leading her into the master bedroom after his scuffle with Nevill near the Aga in the kitchen.
-
Well no, Bridget, it isn't, but as the blood which can be seen on the edge of the ball of the thumb doesn't appear to have run downwards from the top of her hand, unless there is NO blood anywhere else, it must mean that there is more under her hand where it can't be seen.
Thanks April, I thought I was going mad and glad you can now see the hand print - I think it's totes amazeballs!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
And it has blood on it. The fact that it does (and you can see it does) makes it more (not less) likely that it extends to the inside of her palm.
Ha ha! Maybe in your mind, certainly not in mine.
So we have what might be a palm print (from any one of 4 people including JB) which we match with what might be finger marks (but the pathologist disagrees), jump to the conclusion that they must both be Sheila's (even though according to at least one police officer and a pathologist there was no blood on either her palms or fingers, and no blood was on the cartridges, the cartridge box, or in a corresponding place on the murder weapon) et voila! everyone is wrong / lying and JB is innocent!
I think there's a very good reason why the defence avoided this issue like the plague.
-
Well no, Bridget, it isn't, but as the blood which can be seen on the edge of the ball of the thumb doesn't appear to have run downwards from the top of her hand, unless there is NO blood anywhere else, it must mean that there is more under her hand where it can't be seen.
How do you know there was enough blood there to run anywhere? I think it's quite likely that what we can see is pretty much what there is. You certainly can't tell otherwise from these photos.
-
Ha ha! Maybe in your mind, certainly not in mine.
So we have what might be a palm print (from any one of 4 people including JB) which we match with what might be finger marks (but the pathologist disagrees), jump to the conclusion that they must both be Sheila's (even though according to at least one police officer and a pathologist there was no blood on either her palms or fingers, and no blood was on the cartridges, the cartridge box, or in a corresponding place on the murder weapon) et voila! everyone is wrong / lying and JB is innocent!
I think there's a very good reason why the defence avoided this issue like the plague.
And you of course, are enitled to your opinion - like I said, you don't have to buy into it. But I can see blood on the ball of her thumb - I have pretty good eye sight, I'm not going mad - it's there. The print on the bible does fit with with the marks on the nighdress but again - you don't have to agree. But in my book seeing is believing!!
-
That print isn't big enogh for a male.They tend to have wider hands. That has got to be Sheilas' slender hand,,complete with three fingers.
-
How do you know there was enough blood there to run anywhere? I think it's quite likely that what we can see is pretty much what there is. You certainly can't tell otherwise from these photos.
I guess if the blood which had previously been on her hand became transferred to her nightdress and bible, there would have been no more than a stain left on her hand and it wouldn't have run.
-
The black marks could have transferred to her hand when Jeremy put his hand in hers leading her into the master bedroom after his scuffle with Nevill near the Aga in the kitchen.
The soot on the back of her hand would have been off the poker that she prodded her father with.
-
The soot on the back of her hand would have been off the poker that she prodded her father with.
OR it's gun oil? (maybe)
-
I have a theory about how this mark on bible and nightgown came about. Some will say it is far out, but so many things are - the crimescene in and of itself is far out and even more so the handling of it by police. So I take a deep breath and throw it out there.
I think that after the first shot, which obviously was not fatal, Sheila immediately and automatically moved her right hand up to her wound. Blood poured from it to her hand and down her lower arm.
Here I have some experience and have seen blood pool EXACTLY as the blood on Sheila´s lower arm (which some think are scratch-marks, I don´t). My husband had a sudden and violent nosebleed. He leaned forward and quick as lightning put his arm up to his nose. I saw, with my own two eyes, how the blood ran down his lower arm JUST LIKE THE STREAMS ON SHEILA´S ARM! To my amazement, the bloodstreams stopped and pooled half-way - yes, just like on Sheila´s arm. The blood dried very quickly, that was odd, but it did. Wish I had taken a picture, but that would have peed my husband off maybe a tad.... LOL, I just sat there staring at it as it was. Another detail: he didn´t get one single drop of blood on the front of his white shirt - drops on the floor though.
So, I think that POSSIBLY Sheila put her hand on the bible she had with her to gather strength after this, and then fired again, this time "successfully".
There should be blood traces on the rifle in the trigger area with this theory, there probably was. How couldn´t there have been in any case, whether Sheila did it or Jeremy. The handling of evidence leaves a lot of room for theories like this one of mine! ;D ;D 8)
-
I have a theory about how this mark on bible and nightgown came about. Some will say it is far out, but so many things are - the crimescene in and of itself is far out and even more so the handling of it by police. So I take a deep breath and throw it out there.
I think that after the first shot, which obviously was not fatal, Sheila immediately and automatically moved her right hand up to her wound. Blood poured from it to her hand and down her lower arm.
Here I have some experience and have seen blood pool EXACTLY as the blood on Sheila´s lower arm (which some think are scratch-marks, I don´t). My husband had a sudden and violent nosebleed. He leaned forward and quick as lightning put his arm up to his nose. I saw, with my own two eyes, how the blood ran down his lower arm JUST LIKE THE STREAMS ON SHEILA´S ARM! To my amazement, the bloodstreams stopped and pooled half-way - yes, just like on Sheila´s arm. The blood dried very quickly, that was odd, but it did. Wish I had taken a picture, but that would have peed my husband off maybe a tad.... LOL, I just sat there staring at it as it was. Another detail: he didn´t get one single drop of blood on the front of his white shirt - drops on the floor though.
So, I think that POSSIBLY Sheila put her hand on the bible she had with her to gather strength after this, and then fired again, this time "successfully".
There should be blood traces on the rifle in the trigger area with this theory, there probably was. How couldn´t there have been in any case, whether Sheila did it or Jeremy. The handling of evidence leaves a lot of room for theories like this one of mine! ;D ;D 8)
My thoughts have been on very similar lines, so similar infact that I wouldn't change a thing!!
-
My thoughts have been on very similar lines, so similar infact that I wouldn't change a thing!!
That is a relief!
-
That is a relief!
Ha, ha!! must have taken ages to type out - I wouldn't have had the heart to just say "Nah" ;D ;D
But it is more or less what I was thinking this afternoon. It would be natural to put your hand over a wound so (to me) having no blood on her hands would be unlikely.
-
I have a theory about how this mark on bible and nightgown came about. Some will say it is far out, but so many things are - the crimescene in and of itself is far out and even more so the handling of it by police. So I take a deep breath and throw it out there.
I think that after the first shot, which obviously was not fatal, Sheila immediately and automatically moved her right hand up to her wound. Blood poured from it to her hand and down her lower arm.
Here I have some experience and have seen blood pool EXACTLY as the blood on Sheila´s lower arm (which some think are scratch-marks, I don´t). My husband had a sudden and violent nosebleed. He leaned forward and quick as lightning put his arm up to his nose. I saw, with my own two eyes, how the blood ran down his lower arm JUST LIKE THE STREAMS ON SHEILA´S ARM! To my amazement, the bloodstreams stopped and pooled half-way - yes, just like on Sheila´s arm. The blood dried very quickly, that was odd, but it did. Wish I had taken a picture, but that would have peed my husband off maybe a tad.... LOL, I just sat there staring at it as it was. Another detail: he didn´t get one single drop of blood on the front of his white shirt - drops on the floor though.
So, I think that POSSIBLY Sheila put her hand on the bible she had with her to gather strength after this, and then fired again, this time "successfully".
There should be blood traces on the rifle in the trigger area with this theory, there probably was. How couldn´t there have been in any case, whether Sheila did it or Jeremy. The handling of evidence leaves a lot of room for theories like this one of mine! ;D ;D 8)
Far out. FAR OUT!!??? ALIAS, as theories go, it sure beats the hell out of some that have been put forward here. Females put their hands up the the place where they've picked a spot so it makes perfect sense that she would put her hand up to a bloody wound.
-
Far out. FAR OUT!!??? ALIAS, as theories go, it sure beats the hell out of some that have been put forward here. Females put their hands up the the place where they've picked a spot so it makes perfect sense that she would put her hand up to a bloody wound.
Some will think that it is far out.... ;)
-
Some will think that it is far out.... ;)
Yep, no doubt. I'm sure they are gathering their spanners as I type this ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Some will think that it is far out.... ;)
Alias, it would appear that your theory is SO together that you even have a thread named after you :D :D :D
-
And you of course, are enitled to your opinion - like I said, you don't have to buy into it. But I can see blood on the ball of her thumb - I have pretty good eye sight, I'm not going mad - it's there. The print on the bible does fit with with the marks on the nighdress but again - you don't have to agree. But in my book seeing is believing!!
The reason I don't buy into these theories is because almost invariably some part of every single one eventually relies on inventing something for which there is no evidence, or ignoring as an inconvenience contradictory evidence, or, as in this particular case, both.
There is no evidence that there is blood on the fingers and palms of Sheila's hands. There is expert witness evidence that in fact there was no blood on the palms or fingers of Sheila's hands. But in an effort to prove that the 'palm print' (if that is what it is) is Sheila's you start with the palm print and conclude that because it exists it is proof in itself that there was blood on Sheila's hands and therefore the palm print must be hers. Similar applies to the 'finger marks'. When you add that to the fact that someone obviously closed the bible and opened it again before it wound up on Sheila's body it's no wonder the defence didn't go there.
-
The reason I don't buy into these theories is because almost invariably some part of every single one eventually relies on inventing something for which there is no evidence, or ignoring as an inconvenience contradictory evidence, or, as in this particular case, both.
There is no evidence that there is blood on the fingers and palms of Sheila's hands. There is expert witness evidence that in fact there was no blood on the palms or fingers of Sheila's hands. But in an effort to prove that the 'palm print' (if that is what it is) is Sheila's you start with the palm print and conclude that because it exists it is proof in itself that there was blood on Sheila's hands and therefore the palm print must be hers. Similar applies to the 'finger marks'. When you add that to the fact that someone obviously closed the bible and opened it again before it wound up on Sheila's body it's no wonder the defence didn't go there.
Oh but they do ...... ;)
-
I guess if the blood which had previously been on her hand became transferred to her nightdress and bible, there would have been no more than a stain left on her hand and it wouldn't have run.
That seems quite logical to me. If it had been a man's hand then I suspect that much would have been made of that in court by the prosefution in order to further incriminate Bamber.
-
The reason I don't buy into these theories is because almost invariably some part of every single one eventually relies on inventing something for which there is no evidence, or ignoring as an inconvenience contradictory evidence, or, as in this particular case, both.
There is no evidence that there is blood on the fingers and palms of Sheila's hands. There is expert witness evidence that in fact there was no blood on the palms or fingers of Sheila's hands. But in an effort to prove that the 'palm print' (if that is what it is) is Sheila's you start with the palm print and conclude that because it exists it is proof in itself that there was blood on Sheila's hands and therefore the palm print must be hers. Similar applies to the 'finger marks'. When you add that to the fact that someone obviously closed the bible and opened it again before it wound up on Sheila's body it's no wonder the defence didn't go there.
In essence I do agree with you. I don´t fling around theories that often, but today I felt compelled.
I do see this bloodied hand print positioned in a way that it would have been natural for Sheila to have made it, and I do think the marks on her nightgown look like finger-imprints, not palm prints. I have always thought that.
April, have to check that thread out!
-
There was no blooming evidence at the trial either. ??? Certainly nothing like this,anyway.
-
Alias, it would appear that your theory is SO together that you even have a thread named after you :D :D :D
There is no thread. It must have been taken down FAST! LOL
-
In essence I do agree with you. I don´t fling around theories that often, but today I felt compelled.
I do see this bloodied hand print positioned in a way that it would have been natural for Sheila to have made it, and I do think the marks on her nightgown look like finger-imprints, not palm prints. I have always thought that.
April, have to check that thread out!
I also have to agree, I am often sceptical like Alias and others but I find this quite compelling. I can also see that Caroline's palm print in paint was extremely close in appearance to the blood stain and I agree the stain on her nightie looks very much like bloodied fingers. So they belonged to someone and as usual all has been destroyed so there is no chance of testing. :-\
-
In essence I do agree with you. I don´t fling around theories that often, but today I felt compelled.
I do see this bloodied hand print positioned in a way that it would have been natural for Sheila to have made it, and I do think the marks on her nightgown look like finger-imprints, not palm prints. I have always thought that.
April, have to check that thread out!
Alias I agree with your assessment of the blood trails, and I agree that the marks look like finger and palm prints, where I parted company with your theory was your conclusion that the blood was in her hand because you simply dismissed the witness evidence that there was none in her hand. How would you explain that? For me the simple explanation is that the palm print either isn't a palm print or it's from someone else's palm, and the finger marks are in fact blood transferred from her wrist as Vanezis (who had the advantage of actually seeing it in person) submitted.
-
Maybe we can lure Caroline into painting her hand yet again, lie down on the floor with a book about the same thickness of the opened bible, a old t-shirt or some other garment and place her hand the same way? Caroline, you would have to have someone take the picture.
Some other volunteers?
-
Maybe we can lure Caroline into painting her hand yet again, lie down on the floor with a book about the same thickness of the opened bible, a old t-shirt or some other garment and place her hand the same way? Caroline, you would have to have someone take the picture.
Some other volunteers?
I volunteer alias but it's a bit of a journey!!! ;D ;D
-
Alias I agree with your assessment of the blood trails, and I agree that the marks look like finger and palm prints, where I parted company with your theory was your conclusion that the blood was in her hand because you simply dismissed the witness evidence that there was none in her hand. How would you explain that? For me the simple explanation is that the palm print either isn't a palm print or it's from someone else's palm, and the finger marks are in fact blood transferred from her wrist as Vanezis (who had the advantage of actually seeing it in person) submitted.
'
Sorry, didn´t see your post. I did say at the end of my post that the sloppy handling of the crime-scene and the physical evidence left a lot of room for speculation.
That is the nature of this case. If it had been handled properly we wouldn´t even be here, we would KNOW who was behind the killings.
-
I volunteer alias but it's a bit of a journey!!! ;D ;D
It is, but it is doable. ;D I don´t have a camera that is good enough for this, just a cheap little digi camera.
-
Maybe we can lure Caroline into painting her hand yet again, lie down on the floor with a book about the same thickness of the opened bible, a old t-shirt or some other garment and place her hand the same way? Caroline, you would have to have someone take the picture.
Some other volunteers?
I'll give it a go, not tonight though - I'll do it sometime next week!! ;D ;D ;D
-
Will be very interesting, Maggie and Caroline. Maybe we will be proven wrong, but I still think it is a partial palm print on the bible, and I THINK (Bridget :P ) that the marks on the nightgown are finger marks.
-
It becomes clear to me why the police attempted to conceal access to the bible for Bambers defence solicitors and experts prior to the commencement of trial, and why the exhibit list was tampered with, by including the bible as an exhibit at trial (reference added in by different typewriter / typeface)...
-
Will be very interesting, Maggie and Caroline. Maybe we will be proven wrong, but I still think it is a partial palm print on the bible, and I THINK (Bridget :P ) that the marks on the nightgown are finger marks.
So do I.
-
Will be very interesting, Maggie and Caroline. Maybe we will be proven wrong, but I still think it is a partial palm print on the bible, and I THINK (Bridget :P ) that the marks on the nightgown are finger marks.
I agree Alias/Caroline....so we shall see.?? ;D ;D
-
In order for the crime scene photographs taken by PC Bird to be photographed after Sheila's body, with the gun upon it, and bible alongside, to be stage managed it is necessary to draw attention to evidence which demonstrates as clearly as possible, that there could not have been a gun on her body before Bird commenced to take pictures, in keeping with the currently unposted image of Sheila's body on the bed, with no gun, and no bible, in attendance...
-
Will be very interesting, Maggie and Caroline. Maybe we will be proven wrong, but I still think it is a partial palm print on the bible, and I THINK (Bridget :P ) that the marks on the nightgown are finger marks.
I have no objections to you thinking ;)
-
I have no objections to you thinking ;)
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I have no objections to you thinking ;)
As long as I don´t make it a habit!
Bye for now. :)
-
As long as I don´t make it a habit!
Bye for now. :)
bye Alias ;) ;)
-
Sounds like some good experiments have been going on! Unfortunately I cannot yet see them as am on my phone. In answer to somebody's question as to the whereabouts of the bible now,it was handed to the relatives. However,if measurements are needed just give me a shout,as I have the exact same bible.
-
Sounds like some good experiments have been going on! Unfortunately I cannot yet see them as am on my phone. In answer to somebody's question as to the whereabouts of the bible now,it was handed to the relatives. However,if measurements are needed just give me a shout,as I have the exact same bible.
I think you will be impressed Tyler ;)
-
Sounds like some good experiments have been going on! Unfortunately I cannot yet see them as am on my phone. In answer to somebody's question as to the whereabouts of the bible now,it was handed to the relatives. However,if measurements are needed just give me a shout,as I have the exact same bible.
Could you please post a clear copy of the page contents of the crucial pages upon which part of Sheila's bloodied hand were made, because I need to study/check something that has been bothering me for a while...
-
No problem Mike. What number pages?,as I cannot see until I am at my pc.
-
No problem Mike. What number pages?,as I cannot see until I am at my pc.
That is the problem, I am concerned about, I have something in mind which needs to be sorted out, and it concerns the contents of the page with what I believe to be part of Sheila's palm print from her right hand - what I need to know, is if the page contents and corresponding page numbers in the following image correspond exact to the same page contents, and page number in your copy version of your bible?
-
It becomes clear to me why the police attempted to conceal access to the bible for Bambers defence solicitors and experts prior to the commencement of trial, and why the exhibit list was tampered with, by including the bible as an exhibit at trial (reference added in by different typewriter / typeface)...
In answer to somebody's question as to the whereabouts of the bible now,it was handed to the relatives.
Does this therefore mean, that the victims' relatives were handed back a bible with a potential bloodied palm print upon it? Given that the relatives have theorised among themselves as to what took place that night, is it a pertinant question to ask where they see this piece of blood evidence fitting in to the sequence of events? I cant imagine somebody as sharp and keen eyed as Ann, not spotting a bloodied palm print on a bible handed back to the family?
And if the police attempted to conceal this from the defence as asserted by Mike, in what kind of situation would they they hand something evidential back to the relatives, that they had previously concealed from the defence?
-
Most likely the relative wouldn't have been interested in the bible for " something to read " or as a memento,,but because it could have thrown up something that nobody wanted to hear about. Anyone with that in mind would surely have taken it away---------------------wouldn't they.?
-
I have to agree Roch, I find it hard to believe that the blood stain with the appearance of a palm
print would have got past the sharp eyes of Ann Eaton. Strange it wasn't brought up at the trial or mentioned before or since....??
-
The silencer was returned quick enough.!
-
I have to agree Roch, I find it hard to believe that the blood stain with the appearance of a palm
print would have got past the sharp eyes of Ann Eaton. Strange it wasn't brought up at the trual or mentioned before??
Or since!
-
Or since!
Haha yes Caroline, just added that to my original post before I read yours ;D
-
Maybe if we asked Vic, he might be able to look in to the matter. he might not... but it's worth a try.
Vic are you able to help with the following:
Was the bloodstained bible returned to the relatives?
Have any relatives made the same connection as Caroline, regarding the nature/source of the stain, i.e. partial palm print?
If so, how do the relatives see this as fitting in to the sequence of events?
What is the opinion of the relatives in relation to how the partial palm print seems to knit with the finger-like marks on the nightdress?
-
I take my hat off to Rochs' diplomacy. A quality that I'm quite envious of.
-
I take my hat off to Rochs' diplomacy. A quality that I'm quite envious of.
Cheers... That's a kind compliment.
-
Maybe if we asked Vic, he might be able to look in to the matter. he might not... but it's worth a try.
Vic are you able to help with the following:
Was the bloodstained bible returned to the relatives?
Have any relatives made the same connection as Caroline, regarding the nature/source of the stain, i.e. partial palm print?
If so, how do the relatives see this as fitting in to the sequence of events?
What is the opinion of the relatives in relation to how the partial palm print seems to knit with the finger-like marks on the nightdress?
If it was returned, do they still have it?
-
Hey Caroline so sorry, am on my phone and I think I just deleted your post .....really sorryxx
Thought I was going mad there!! :P ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I pose the following question for consideration and debate:-
Which bible was returned to relatives, (a) blue coloured one shown in crime scene photographs, or (b) the missing black coloured bible, that nobody has been told anything about?
Answer is very important...
-
Thought I was going mad there!! :P ;D ;D ;D ;D
apologies my finger slipped ;D ;D
-
I pose the following question for consideration and debate:-
Which bible was returned to relatives, (a) blue coloured one shown in crime scene photographs, or (b) the missing black coloured bible, that nobody has been told anything about?
Answer is very important...
Which bible :-
(a) blue coloured one shown in crime scene photographs,
or
(b) the missing black coloured bible, that nobody has been told anything about?
-
If it was returned, do they still have it?
It would be interesting to properly examine that bible now - are there any other items the relatives got, which by safe keeping escaped the UNLAWFUL DESTRUCTION OF ALL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IN 1996?
-
I pose the following question for consideration and debate:-
Which bible was returned to relatives, (a) blue coloured one shown in crime scene photographs, or (b) the missing black coloured bible, that nobody has been told anything about?
Answer is very important...
I think it would be strange for a blood stained object to be given back to the relatives - unless they wanted it - I know I wouldn't.
-
It would be interesting to properly examine that bible now - are there any other items the relatives got, which by safe keeping escaped the UNLAWFUL DESTRUCTION OF ALL PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IN 1996?
It certainly would but wouldn't be surprised if that too, no longer existed!!
-
Which bible :-
(a) blue coloured one shown in crime scene photographs,
or
(b) the missing black coloured bible, that nobody has been told anything about?
Thought I have read AE claimed the black bible was burned, Mike?
-
It certainly would but wouldn't be surprised if that too, no longer existed!!
Something totally different - is it Alfred Hitchcock in your avatar picture?
-
Thought I have read AE claimed the black bible was burned, Mike?
How bizarre.
-
It certainly would but wouldn't be surprised if that too, no longer existed!!
It'll be well gone,Caroline,,particularly on opening the pages,,to which notes that were left and that nobody saw,,,referred to. More destruction of evidence.I would have thought it a crime in itself the same as the police carried out in 1996,,,against Home Office rules too.!
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2773.msg93033.html#msg93033
This is what mat said when we discussed it about a year ago but there are no more comments.
Hoe mat doesn't mind me borrowing it. ;D ;D
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2489.msg76621.html#msg76621
This is another interesting old thread about the bibles.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2489.msg76621.html#msg76621
This is another interesting old thread about the bibles.
Two bibles with bloodied handprints?? :o
-
Two bibles with bloodied handprints?? :o
Yes Alias and four altogether but it seems the black one Mike speaks of also had bloodied handprint? Confusing n'est pas?
-
I imagine the black one would have belonged to June. Perhaps an heirloom passed down,,,as the blue one was a modern version. Maybe Pam has the black one,,the old original one.
-
Right,here is the best I can do as camera is broken,so had to use my blackberry.
-
I imagine the black one would have belonged to June. Perhaps an heirloom passed down,,,as the blue one was a modern version. Maybe Pam has the black one,,the old original one.
Hi lookout of you look at the thread I put up you'll see the blue New Bible was June's and one black onel kept in spare room (where Sheila was staying?) one in the kitchen and one somewhere else.
-
Right,here is the best I can do as camera is broken,so had to use my blackberry.
Wow!! tyler ...well done, it's really clear ;D ;D
-
Thank you for the photos, Tyler. :) I hope that members will share their thoughts on the text.
-
Hi lookout of you look at the thread I put up you'll see the blue New Bible was June's and one black onel kept in spare room (where Sheila was staying?) one in the kitchen and one somewhere else.
Thanks for that Maggie. I'm quite surprised somehow,that June had the blue one.She could have thrown it at Sheila and that's how it landed,right in her lap. I wish I had some idea when June died,,though it was obviously before Sheila presumably.?
-
Wow, looks like this could potentially be a break-through moment.
Well done Caroline ((( :-*)))
-
Thank you for the photos, Tyler. :) I hope that members will share their thoughts on the text.
Tyler, you're a gem :) Alias, with the luxury of hindsight we could attach many of those words to Sheila's mixed up thoughts but IMO, those of Psalm 55 appear appropriate.
-
Thanks for that Maggie. I'm quite surprised somehow,that June had the blue one.She could have thrown it at Sheila and that's how it landed,right in her lap. I wish I had some idea when June died,,though it was obviously before Sheila presumably.?
I really can't go with Steve's suggestions of June and Sheila studying the bible together.
If there was a bloodied print in the black bible which was in the spare room and also where Sheila was saying well that's very interesting imo.
Wonder where that bible was found?
The blue bible was always on June's bedside table so would have been accessible to Sheila when in the main bedroom before she died......
If we knew for sure it was Sheila's handprint then we could to assume that Sheila was looking at the bible after she had shot everyone....maybe that is why she killed herself in that room?
If she had killed in a frenzy and state of psychosis would she be aware of the twins or anyone else? would she even remember?
Would she have felt any need to lie down with the twins if she had travelled that far in her head???
-
"Create in me a pure heart, O God."
Stands out to me. Among others.
-
Thank you for the photos, Tyler. :) I hope that members will share their thoughts on the text.
I also think Psalm 55 would be Sheila's plea.
Psalm 52 is very powerful and speaks of feelings of helplessness and powerlessness against a foe.???
-
If you mean Vanezis he didn't mention blood on either of her hands, in fact he says that neither the palms or the fingers were contaminated with blood. He stated that the blood on the nightie appeared to have transferred from her right wrist.
Hello Miss Bridget
How are you today? :)
The precise explanation is as follows:
"bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand."
-
" your tongue plots destruction ". Psalm 52 would have been what June was quoting from.
-
All this misguided religion does my head in!!!
I wonder how all this stuff between the pair would have manifested without religion? Pity they weren't atheists :)
-
All this misguided religion does my head in!!!
I wonder how all this stuff between the pair would have manifested without religion? Pity they weren't atheists :)
Certainly pity they weren't obsessives NN. ;D ;D
-
Hello Miss Bridget
How are you today? :)
The precise explanation is as follows:
"bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand."
I'm fine thank you Ms N, hope you are too.
Yes I have the Lomax book too, see my post #92.
-
Wow, looks like this could potentially be a break-through moment.
Well done Caroline ((( :-*)))
Thanks NN :). Of course I am aware that it might turn into a big fat zero but that's just my natural pessimism ;D ;D ;D ;D X
-
Certainly pity they weren't obsessives NN. ;D ;D
You don't think they were obsessives? :o
-
Thanks NN :). Of course I am aware that it might turn into a big fat zero but that's just my natural pessimism ;D ;D ;D ;D X
Never mind,Caroline,,,pessimism is a safety valve. :)
-
You don't think they were obsessives? :o
I definitely think they were extremely obsessive NN. I was being sarcastic. ;D ;D
-
Never mind,Caroline,,,pessimism is a safety valve. :)
It certainly is Lookout - especially here!! ;D ;D
-
I'm fine thank you Ms N, hope you are too.
Yes I have the Lomax book too, see my post #92.
Miss Bridget
I don't have the Lomax book as I've heard it's very biased towards JB. It's from the CoA doc:
517. Mr Turner's further ground for opposing the admission of this evidence was that it was not a matter that could be fully considered without placing it against many other aspects of the evidence called at trial, such as the pathologist's evidence and the evidence as to how the crime scene may have been altered between the moment when the farmhouse was entered and the taking of the photographs. He argued that unlike a distinct piece of evidence such as the DNA evidence in Hanratty, it was wholly impossible for the court to gauge the impact that this evidence might have had on the jury without the court being in a position to hear all these other aspects of the evidence that were before the jury. He pointed to a number of specific areas in which he argued that the evidence of Mr Ismail was capable of attack by reference to other evidence in the case. The most clear cut of which was that Mr Ismail had referred to a bloodstain on the upper right thigh of Sheila Caffell's nightdress that was clearly caused by a bloody hand print. He said that he understood that Dr Vanezis, the pathologist, had given evidence that there was no blood on the palm side of Sheila Caffell's hands. Therefore, he concluded, this staining must have been deposited by another individual. However, whilst Mr Ismail rightly recorded the evidence of Dr Vanezis, Mr Turner was able to point to a note made by Dr Vanezis at the time of the post-mortem examination that read:
"bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand. "
-
I definitely think they were extremely obsessive NN. I was being sarcastic. ;D ;D
Phew that's a relief ;D ;D ;D
-
Miss Bridget
I don't have the Lomax book as I've heard it's very biased towards JB. It's from the CoA doc:
517. Mr Turner's further ground for opposing the admission of this evidence was that it was not a matter that could be fully considered without placing it against many other aspects of the evidence called at trial, such as the pathologist's evidence and the evidence as to how the crime scene may have been altered between the moment when the farmhouse was entered and the taking of the photographs. He argued that unlike a distinct piece of evidence such as the DNA evidence in Hanratty, it was wholly impossible for the court to gauge the impact that this evidence might have had on the jury without the court being in a position to hear all these other aspects of the evidence that were before the jury. He pointed to a number of specific areas in which he argued that the evidence of Mr Ismail was capable of attack by reference to other evidence in the case. The most clear cut of which was that Mr Ismail had referred to a bloodstain on the upper right thigh of Sheila Caffell's nightdress that was clearly caused by a bloody hand print. He said that he understood that Dr Vanezis, the pathologist, had given evidence that there was no blood on the palm side of Sheila Caffell's hands. Therefore, he concluded, this staining must have been deposited by another individual. However, whilst Mr Ismail rightly recorded the evidence of Dr Vanezis, Mr Turner was able to point to a note made by Dr Vanezis at the time of the post-mortem examination that read:
"bloodstained palm prints on nightdress matches bloodstains appeared to have transferred from R hand. "
Yes, so if we assume that by "palm prints" he means what we are calling finger marks, it was a note which he later clarified in his final report as being a transfer from the right wrist. This is why I said it would be nice to see all of the notes - so that the remark can be seen in context.
Changing the subject slightly, one of the court exhibits is listed as "photos of Sheila Caffell's hands". It'd be good to see those wouldn't it?
-
Yes, so if we assume that by "palm prints" he means what we are calling finger marks, it was a note which he later clarified in his final report as being a transfer from the right wrist. This is why I said it would be nice to see all of the notes - so that the remark can be seen in context.
Changing the subject slightly, one of the court exhibits is listed as "photos of Sheila Caffell's hands". It'd be good to see those wouldn't it?
Yes it would but we wouldn't know if they have been swabbed prior to or after the pictures were taken!!
-
I really can't go with Steve's suggestions of June and Sheila studying the bible together.
If there was a bloodied print in the black bible which was in the spare room and also where Sheila was saying well that's very interesting imo.
Wonder where that bible was found?
The blue bible was always on June's bedside table so would have been accessible to Sheila when in the main bedroom before she died......
If we knew for sure it was Sheila's handprint then we could to assume that Sheila was looking at the bible after she had shot everyone....maybe that is why she killed herself in that room?
If she had killed in a frenzy and state of psychosis would she be aware of the twins or anyone else? would she even remember?
Would she have felt any need to lie down with the twins if she had travelled that far in her head???
I feel certain that not many of us can, Maggie ;) :D however, I have asked myself the same questions as you. Did she kill her children to prevent them from, in her disordered mind, being taken from her. Did she kill them because yet again, and possibly because her meds were out of balance, she was having thoughts about them attacking and raping her because they are the devil's children OR was she even aware that they were her children. She clearly can't be capable of psychotic and rational behaviours at the same time.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,2489.msg76621.html#msg76621
This is another interesting old thread about the bibles.
Hi Maggie, this MUST be the same one and Mike said he saw the picture of it and independently states that it is indeed a hand print!!
Mike? You say it's not the same bible - are you sure?
-
Yes, so if we assume that by "palm prints" he means what we are calling finger marks, it was a note which he later clarified in his final report as being a transfer from the right wrist. This is why I said it would be nice to see all of the notes - so that the remark can be seen in context.
Changing the subject slightly, one of the court exhibits is listed as "photos of Sheila Caffell's hands". It'd be good to see those wouldn't it?
Miss Bridget
How you love that word context ;D ;D ;D Context is obviously incredibly important but I can't help thinking when you make reference to it it's to skew the point to your view ;)
Any chance of access to the final report and photo, anyone?
-
Yes it would but we wouldn't know if they have been swabbed prior to or after the pictures were taken!!
Actually I think we'd stand a fair chance, swabbing would not remove all of the blood if there was enough to create a palm print like that, and if they were taken after the body was washed the blood on the wrist and base of thumb would be absent.
-
Miss Bridget
How you love that word context ;D ;D ;D Context is obviously incredibly important but I can't help thinking when you make reference to it it's to skew the point to your view ;)
Any chance of access to the final report and photo, anyone?
Well there's a reason for that Ms N, it's a tactic I see used here all the time to try to make things appear to be something which they are not (or are not necessarily). I prefer to see as much of the picture as possible before coming to a conclusion.
-
Hi Maggie, this MUST be the same one and Mike said he saw the picture of it and independently states that it is indeed a hand print!!
Mike? You say it's not the same bible - are you sure?
I was thinking the same. Two bibles with bloodied handprints is unlikely.
-
I remember vividly,the other bible,,because it was opened,showing a picture on the right hand side. Pity I can't remember what the picture is,,or where I saw it,,but it was about a year ago. What I didn't see were any blood prints on that particular page.
-
Hi Maggie, this MUST be the same one and Mike said he saw the picture of it and independently states that it is indeed a hand print!!
Mike? You say it's not the same bible - are you sure?
I have no idea Caroline, I just put the link up because it's all part of the same discussion.
It's hard to believe there were two but if the black one was the one from her bedroom it is interesting.
-
Well there's a reason for that Ms N, it's a tactic I see used here all the time to try to make things appear to be something which they are not (or are not necessarily). I prefer to see as much of the picture as possible before coming to a conclusion.
Miss Bridget
Oh I see. I new you would have a perfectly plausible explanation ;)
You're Miss Bridget as I find you very teacherish.
-
I feel certain that not many of us can, Maggie ;) :D however, I have asked myself the same questions as you. Did she kill her children to prevent them from, in her disordered mind, being taken from her. Did she kill them because yet again, and possibly because her meds were out of balance, she was having thoughts about them attacking and raping her because they are the devil's children OR was she even aware that they were her children. She clearly can't be capable of psychotic and rational behaviours at the same time.
I tend to believe she was totally lost April. Therefore she may have killed and then sat and read June's bible which would have been to hand in the main bedroom maybe on the bed where June had left it if Neville wasn't sleeping in there. She may have sat on the bed and read it and then shot herself on the bed twice sitting up the first time and failing and then maybe falling or lying back on the bed and shooting herself again. The angle of the first shot more likely to point to a sitting shot and she would have had to lie down for the second shot I would think. imo ??
-
Well there's a reason for that Ms N, it's a tactic I see used here all the time to try to make things appear to be something which they are not (or are not necessarily). I prefer to see as much of the picture as possible before coming to a conclusion.
No one has come to any conclusion we are simply following an idea, one which if you seem to be dismissing far too easily. I'd rather be wrong than allow an innocent man to stay incarcerated. I've been wrong many times and it not matter, it would be nice to be right and it make a difference!! (I just thought of that - it's almost profound!! ;D ;D ;D ;D)
-
Some stray thoughts. Jeremy wouldn´t have been clever or "deep" enough to think about arranging Sheila´s body with the bible opened at exactly that page. He just isn´t that smart.
Lugg once pointed out that the only room free of blood staining was Sheila´s room (of course some other rooms in that big house, but they are not relevant. Sheila´s bedroom was free of any kind of struggle.
Thank God I haven´t seen pictures of the twins in their beds, but Sheila´s appearance in death is vastly different from June and Neville. J and N look messy and give a distraught, desperate vibe, whereas Sheila looks clean, peaceful and you almost get a vibe of serenity.
-
Some stray thoughts. Jeremy wouldn´t have been clever or "deep" enough to think about arranging Sheila´s body with the bible opened at exactly that page. He just isn´t that smart.
Lugg once pointed out that the only room free of blood staining was Sheila´s room (of course some other rooms in that big house, but they are not relevant. Sheila´s bedroom was free of any kind of struggle.
Thank God I haven´t seen pictures of the twins in their beds, but Sheila´s appearance in death is vastly different from June and Neville. J and N look messy and give a distraught, desperate vibe, whereas Sheila looks clean, peaceful and you almost get a vibe of serenity.
Which presumably she wouldn't have done had she, too, been shot.
-
Some stray thoughts. Jeremy wouldn´t have been clever or "deep" enough to think about arranging Sheila´s body with the bible opened at exactly that page. He just isn´t that smart.
Lugg once pointed out that the only room free of blood staining was Sheila´s room (of course some other rooms in that big house, but they are not relevant. Sheila´s bedroom was free of any kind of struggle.
Thank God I haven´t seen pictures of the twins in their beds, but Sheila´s appearance in death is vastly different from June and Neville. J and N look messy and give a distraught, desperate vibe, whereas Sheila looks clean, peaceful and you almost get a vibe of serenity.
I agree Alias, the photos of June and Neville are dreadful and heartrending. They speak of fear and struggle but as you say Sheila looks unphased and calm. Cannot believe there was any struggle there and neither do I believe she just let JB shoot her, that is rubbish imo.
-
The blood on Sheila's wrist looks as though it is trailing down from her palm, If you were bleeding heavily from a wound in your neck and you put your hand to your throat (which would be a natural reaction), you would get those blood trails running down your arm - but NOT without getting blood on the palm of your hand!!
-
The blood on Sheila's wrist looks as though it is trailing down from her palm, If you were bleeding heavily from a wound in your neck and you put your hand to your throat (which would be a natural reaction), you would get those blood trails running down your arm - but NOT without getting blood on the palm of our hand!!
Exactly spot on - as I see it anyway.
-
I feel certain that not many of us can, Maggie ;) :D however, I have asked myself the same questions as you. Did she kill her children to prevent them from, in her disordered mind, being taken from her. Did she kill them because yet again, and possibly because her meds were out of balance, she was having thoughts about them attacking and raping her because they are the devil's children OR was she even aware that they were her children. She clearly can't be capable of psychotic and rational behaviours at the same time.
I'm pleased the Defence has finally acknowledged this.
-
No one has come to any conclusion we are simply following an idea, one which if you seem to be dismissing far too easily. I'd rather be wrong than allow an innocent man to stay incarcerated. I've been wrong many times and it not matter, it would be nice to be right and it make a difference!! (I just thought of that - it's almost profound!! ;D ;D ;D ;D)
Did I say anything about whether or not you or anyone else had reached a conclusion?
Much like NN you have a tendency to make assumptions about what I think. I haven't dismissed it, I just haven't accepted it for reasons I've already explained, there is a difference. It is currently in the wait and see box.
As it stands at the moment, because of the evidence of Hammersley and Vanezis, the least likely person to whom the palm print (if that's what it is) belongs is Sheila. Of the other 3 possibilities I actually favour June, but I'm getting ready to wholeheartedly congratulate you if it turns out to be JBs.
How come none of you have yet suggested that she made the palm print before she ritually washed herself?
-
april:
She clearly can't be capable of psychotic and rational behaviours at the same time.
I disagree with that somewhat. Actually there are many examples of mentally ill people planning and plotting to kill - mostly (in fact, almost always) their own relatives. The planning is rational, but the reasons for killing are psychotic.
People mostly assume that incidents like this happen in a rage or a frenzy, but it can very well be quite the opposite, it is all planned.
-
I'm pleased the Defence has finally acknowledged this.
Think we mainly accept she couldn't be rational and psychotic at the same time Steve, nothing has changed there.
No one has ever said she killed in cold blood. Deeply psychotic Sheila could kill as well as anyone else could. It has nothing to do with her character and everything to do with her illness.
However Alias someone who appears to be sane is often psychotic so planning can still be done in a psychotic state. Suicide is often a planned act but the person planning it can be in a state of psychosis if you see what I mean. ;D ;D
-
I agree Alias, the photos of June and Neville are dreadful and heartrending. They speak of fear and struggle but as you say Sheila looks unphased and calm. Cannot believe there was any struggle there and neither do I believe she just let JB shoot her, that is rubbish imo.
It doesn't have to be rubbish. It ties in with what we know of Sheila's personality;a rather infantile easily-led girl who appeared vacant and not with it to the Tiptree shopkeeper and who was tired that same night and didn't say goodnight on the telephone to Auntie Pam as she used to. It tallies with what Jeremy told Julie that Matthew told her to lie down,but before she could Jeremy shot her once and for his intentions failed to kill her outright. It was the only part of the plan he couldn't rehearse,and in desperation at seeing Sheila drop the bloodied bible as she involuntarily moved a hand to her neck he shot her again quickly,then pulled the legs of the dead corpse to make it look as if she had lain down and shot herself,which she could not have done with the silencer which left its mark and spoke from beyond the grave.
-
Think we mainly accept she couldn't be rational and psychotic at the same time Steve, nothing has changed there.
No one has ever said she killed in cold blood. Deeply psychotic Sheila could kill as well as anyone else could. It has nothing to do with her character and everything to do with her illness.
However Alias someone who appears to be sane is often psychotic so planning can still be done in a psychotic state. Suicide is often a planned act but the person planning it can be in a state of psychosis if you see what I mean. ;D ;D
I think that was what I was trying to say. :)
-
I think that was what I was trying to say. :)
I know ;) ;) ;D
-
It doesn't have to be rubbish. It ties in with what we know of Sheila's personality;a rather infantile easily-led girl who appeared vacant and not with it to the Tiptree shopkeeper and who was tired that same night and didn't say goodnight on the telephone to Auntie Pam as she used to. It tallies with what Jeremy told Julie that Matthew told her to lie down,but before she could Jeremy shot her once and for his intentions failed to kill her outright. It was the only part of the plan he couldn't rehearse,and in desperation at seeing Sheila drop the bloodied bible as she involuntarily moved a hand to her neck he shot her again quickly,then pulled the legs of the dead corpse to make it look as if she had lain down and shot herself,which she could not have done with the silencer which left its mark and spoke from beyond the grave.
I don´t accept that anybody is "easily led" to their own death.
-
Did I say anything about whether or not you or anyone else had reached a conclusion?
Much like NN you have a tendency to make assumptions about what I think. I haven't dismissed it, I just haven't accepted it for reasons I've already explained, there is a difference. It is currently in the wait and see box.
As it stands at the moment, because of the evidence of Hammersley and Vanezis, the least likely person to whom the palm print (if that's what it is) belongs is Sheila. Of the other 3 possibilities I actually favour June, but I'm getting ready to wholeheartedly congratulate you if it turns out to be JBs.
How come none of you have yet suggested that she made the palm print before she ritually washed herself?
I don't believe she did ritually wash herself. Isn't there a question over whether Hammersley was even there that morning? As for Vanezis, we don't know if her hands were swabbed before he saw them.
By the way, glad you haven't dismissed it - yet ;)
-
Think we mainly accept she couldn't be rational and psychotic at the same time Steve, nothing has changed there.
No one has ever said she killed in cold blood. Deeply psychotic Sheila could kill as well as anyone else could. It has nothing to do with her character and everything to do with her illness.
However Alias someone who appears to be sane is often psychotic so planning can still be done in a psychotic state. Suicide is often a planned act but the person planning it can be in a state of psychosis if you see what I mean. ;D ;D
april:
I disagree with that somewhat. Actually there are many examples of mentally ill people planning and plotting to kill - mostly (in fact, almost always) their own relatives. The planning is rational, but the reasons for killing are psychotic.
People mostly assume that incidents like this happen in a rage or a frenzy, but it can very well be quite the opposite, it is all planned.
Alias/Maggie, I see your reasoning. I'm happy to go with that because whilst the outcome appeared frenzied I always thought action had been taken by someone who was "elsewhere."
-
Alias/Maggie, I see your reasoning. I'm happy to go with that because whilst the outcome appeared frenzied I always thought action had been taken by someone who was "elsewhere."
Hi April I tend to go with frenzied but just saying you can appear sane but be psychotic.
-
I don't believe she did ritually wash herself. Isn't there a question over whether Hammersley was even there that morning? As for Vanezis, we don't know if her hands were swabbed before he saw them.
By the way, glad you haven't dismissed it - yet ;)
He made statements stating that he was there and hasn't been done for perjury yet so I'm guessing that he was. There was a discussion about this a little while ago, I think NGB commented on it so he may remember where it was.
-
I don't believe she did ritually wash herself. Isn't there a question over whether Hammersley was even there that morning? As for Vanezis, we don't know if her hands were swabbed before he saw them.
By the way, glad you haven't dismissed it - yet ;)
Personally I haven't been too convinced by the ritual cleansing tho I accept it does happen. I certainly do question whether her hands were washed at some point before swabbing??
-
He made statements stating that he was there and hasn't been done for perjury yet so I'm guessing that he was. There was a discussion about this a little while ago, I think NGB commented on it so he may remember where it was.
Not many police officers get done for perjury ;). You have such faith in the system Bridget which is quite commendable (no, I'm not being sarcastic). I did hear that he wasn't there, but I don't think it was here, it was before I joined but I don't remember where from - it may have been in a book but I will try and remember. However, I will ask NGB.
-
Not many police officers get done for perjury ;). You have such faith in the system Bridget which is quite commendable (no, I'm not being sarcastic). I did hear that he wasn't there, but I don't think it was here, it was before I joined but I don't remember where from - it may have been in a book but I will try and remember. However, I will ask NGB.
It was something to do with fiddling overtime or time sheets if that jogs his memory. It's one thing to claim a few extra hours, quite another to make a statement in a high profile murder case as to where you were and what you did if you weren't even there.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4088.msg168817.html#msg168817
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4088.msg168817.html#msg168817
Thanks Bridget I'm sure NGB will clarify but from what he said it sounds as though he wasn't there.
-
Thanks Bridget I'm sure NGB will clarify but from what he said it sounds as though he wasn't there.
It sounds to me like he was accused of fiddling time sheets which may have included time that he was supposedly there. Unless I see the outcome of the inquiry or some other action taken against him I'm not prepared to accept that the finding was that he wasnt there at all and he therefore falsified his statements, not least because anything NGB has the defence has and you know as well as I do they'd be shouting it from the rooftops.
-
It sounds to me like he was accused of fiddling time sheets which may have included time that he was supposedly there. Unless I see the outcome of the inquiry or some other action taken against him I'm not prepared to accept that the finding was that he wasnt there at all and he therefore falsified his statements, not least because anything NGB has the defence has and you know as well as I do they'd be shouting it from the rooftops.
That's up to you.
-
That's up to you.
Yep, and I believe you have the same doubts, you're far from stupid or gullible.
-
Yep, and I believe you have the same doubts, you're far from stupid or gullible.
Of course I do and yes, I would like to see 'proof'. However, not so long ago you were convinced that there was a panic button pre murders and told me I should simply take someone's word for it. I never do that - for obvious reasons!!
-
Of course I do and yes, I would like to see 'proof'. However, not so long ago you were convinced that there was a panic button pre murders and told me I should simply take someone's word for it. I never do that - for obvious reasons!!
Yes, based on what I believed Vic had been told by people who would know, but that's hardly the same thing, is it.
-
I'm not really falling into this whole debate too deeply because it seems a bit flawed to me, but even if it was Sheila's palm print (If it even is a palm print) - it proves nothing. What's to say Bamber didn't do it using Sheilas hand after the first shot, to show she moved after that first shot and was capable of firing the second.
But then again - for this to be Sheila's palm print you have to ignore and bend over evidence.
-
Yes, based on what I believed Vic had been told by people who would know, but that's hardly the same thing, is it.
It's exactly the same thing! NGB already confirmed that Hammersley wasn't there, I'm sure he was told that by people who would know - where's the difference? However, I am sure he will clarify if this is a misconception.
Well, I'm all Bambered out so will say goodnight!! :)
-
It's exactly the same thing! NGB already confirmed that Hammersley wasn't there, I'm sure he was told that by people who would know - where's the difference? However, I am sure he will clarify if this is a misconception.
Well, I'm all Bambered out so will say goodnight!! :)
The difference is that whilst the family were in a position to know about the panic alarm, NGB has not been told anything by anyone who was in a first hand position to say whether or not Hammersley was there. He may or may not be reading a COLP report which may or may not conclude that Hammersley was at the farm on 7th August. One thing is for sure, he's not reading anything that Bamber hasn't read, and if Bamber had had confirmation that Hammersley was not there on the 7th and had made statements asserting not only that he was, but also as to Sheila's hands and feet being 'clean' at the time, Bamber would have gone to very newspaper on the planet.
-
The difference is that whilst the family were in a position to know about the panic alarm, NGB has not been told anything by anyone who was in a first hand position to say whether or not Hammersley was there. He may or may not be reading a COLP report which may or may not conclude that Hammersley was at the farm on 7th August. One thing is for sure, he's not reading anything that Bamber hasn't read, and if Bamber had had confirmation that Hammersley was not there on the 7th and had made statements asserting not only that he was, but also as to Sheila's hands and feet being 'clean' at the time, Bamber would have gone to very newspaper on the planet.
Well, that's your opinion anyway. But you're right, the family were in a position to know about the PB and yet, didn't seem to - opps no, it was a mistake wasn't it. It's just there seem to be so many!
-
Well, that's your opinion anyway. But you're right, the family were in a position to know about the PB and yet, didn't seem to - opps no, it was a mistake wasn't it. It's just there seem to be so many!
It wasn't their mistake, as Vic has admitted.
-
It wasn't their mistake, as Vic has admitted.
yes!
-
Well, that's your opinion anyway. But you're right, the family were in a position to know about the PB and yet, didn't seem to - opps no, it was a mistake wasn't it. It's just there seem to be so many!
Where has vic said that it was the family who were mistaken? I don't remember seeing Vic explain how he got confused or where it came from.
-
yes!
Yes what?
-
Where has vic said that it was the family who were mistaken? I don't remember seeing Vic explain how he got confused or where it came from.
Exactly.
-
Yes what?
Night Bridget!!
-
Night Bridget!!
Night xx
-
Night xx
However (one last word ;D ;D ;D) I'd say this was quite specific and no Vic hasn't explained why something as specific as this turned out to be 'his' mistake!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4170.msg171609.html#msg171609
Night XX
-
However (one last word ;D ;D ;D) I'd say this was quite specific and no Vic hasn't explained why something as specific as this turned out to be 'his' mistake!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4170.msg171609.html#msg171609
Night XX
Vic won't explain it because to do so would betray a confidence. I don't think it would betray a confidence though, if I say that Vic conflated two issues. The relatives believe that Neville was trying to reach something (which I'm not going to mention), Vic conflated that with the panic button issue.
It was the relatives who pointed out his mistake.
-
Vic won't explain it because to do so would betray a confidence. I don't think it would betray a confidence though, if I say that Vic conflated two issues. The relatives believe that Neville was trying to reach something (which I'm not going to mention), Vic conflated that with the panic button issue.
It was the relatives who pointed out his mistake.
Yes!
-
Last night:-
When Batman came calling...
-
Morning Mat
you must have missed the post where Vic said a member of the family phoned him to tell him the information he was posting was incorrect with regard the panic button it was not in situ prior to the murders Anne and Peter thought Ralph was trying to reach the panic button on the night of the murders due to the area where the watch was found.Think Vic had read this somewhere and got mixed up as we all do as to where the information came from. We all thought it was very magnanimous of Vic to apologise to Caroline over this issue and proves just what an honest man he is. Jeremy was telling the truth on this occasion.
-
Morning Mat
you must have missed the post where Vic said a member of the family phoned him to tell him the information he was posting was incorrect with regard the panic button it was not in situ prior to the murders Anne and Peter thought Ralph was trying to reach the panic button on the night of the murders due to the area where the watch was found.Think Vic had read this somewhere and got mixed up as we all do as to where the information came from. We all thought it was very magnanimous of Vic to apologise to Caroline over this issue and proves just what an honest man he is. Jeremy was telling the truth on this occasion.
Hi susie I have to agree I was under the impression the subject of the panic button had
been discussed and accepted by all concerned. I would have thought what Caroline deserved was congratulations for seeking out the truth??
-
Hi susie I have to agree I was under the impression the subject of the panic button had
been discussed and accepted by all concerned. I would have thought what Caroline deserved was congratulations for seeking out the truth??
Maggie/Susan, ' morning girls :) I'd just like to add my own congratulations to Caroline along with yours. She has done really stirling work whether we agree/disagree with her findings but I guess there will always be some who find it hard to give praise where it's due.
-
Thanks ladies, if nothing else, it's something new to consider.
-
Hi susie I have to agree I was under the impression the subject of the panic button had
been discussed and accepted by all concerned. I would have thought what Caroline deserved was congratulations for seeking out the truth??
Morning Maggie
I have always been skeptical about this panic button as the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the forum. Certainly needs checking out to the nth degree though ;)
-
Vic won't explain it because to do so would betray a confidence. I don't think it would betray a confidence though, if I say that Vic conflated two issues. The relatives believe that Neville was trying to reach something (which I'm not going to mention), Vic conflated that with the panic button issue.
It was the relatives who pointed out his mistake.
I have no documents to say it was active (none of us have do) but I have read somewhere that it was mentioned at trial and is mentioned in at least one of the books. I have personally seen it and can tell you that Peter and Ann believe that Nevill was trying to get to it because of the positioning of his watch. I don't believe Peter and Ann would make up that story for the hell of it so that is why I firmly believe it was active before the murders.
I find it hard to believe Vidvic's version of event's , after he claimed this !!
-
Morning Maggie
I have always been skeptical about this panic button as the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the forum. Certainly needs checking out to the nth degree though ;)
I agree its only ever been mentioned on this forum ......originally it came from the family
via Vic who now has apologised, has said it was a misunderstanding by him and the button was fitted after the murders as stated by Jeremy....so he doesn't always lie ;D
As far as I'm concerned the riddle of the panic button is solved.
-
I have no documents to say it was active (none of us have do) but I have read somewhere that it was mentioned at trial and is mentioned in at least one of the books. I have personally seen it and can tell you that Peter and Ann believe that Nevill was trying to get to it because of the positioning of his watch. I don't believe Peter and Ann would make up that story for the hell of it so that is why I firmly believe it was active before the murders.
I find it hard to believe Vidvic's version of event's , after he claimed this !!
Or this
I have to say that I find it very frustrating when known facts, like the installation of the panic button, written about and accepted as fact for 28 years, installed because of the threats made against Nevill in his work as a magistrate are now suddenly NOT accepted. Even Mike has talked about it and claimed the button was in the bedroom, which it wasn't, and I've never even seen bamber claim it wasn't there!! It was. Accept it. Move on.... lol
-
Or this
I have to say that I find it very frustrating when known facts, like the installation of the panic button, written about and accepted as fact for 28 years, installed because of the threats made against Nevill in his work as a magistrate are now suddenly NOT accepted. Even Mike has talked about it and claimed the button was in the bedroom, which it wasn't, and I've never even seen bamber claim it wasn't there!! It was. Accept it. Move on.... lol
Curiouser and curiouser :) All these years we have been lead to believe that there was a panic button installed to protect Nevill from threats being carried out by Disgruntled Person. We have posters telling us how Jeremy triggered it to test police response time and to calculate the timings of the murders. We have a family member telling us it was there and Nevill was trying to reach it THEN we have that same family member telling us that another family member told him that there was NO alarm fitted intil AFTER the murders (although I must admit to wondering where the sense would be in fitting a panic alarm to protect someone already deceased) and then YOU come along, Jon and tell us it's all ballcocks!!! The panic alarm was installed PRIOR to the murders and we should therefore "MOVE ON"!!!! Well, before we can, it would be helpful to know WHOSE "truth" can we accept as being "THE" truth. lol :D
-
I'm not really falling into this whole debate too deeply because it seems a bit flawed to me, but even if it was Sheila's palm print (If it even is a palm print) - it proves nothing. What's to say Bamber didn't do it using Sheilas hand after the first shot, to show she moved after that first shot and was capable of firing the second.
But then again - for this to be Sheila's palm print you have to ignore and bend over evidence.
I was wondering how long it would take before somebody attributed the potential Sheila palm print as being the work of Jeremy Bamber.
-
I was wondering how long it would take before somebody attributed the potential Sheila palm print as being the work of Jeremy Bamber.
Roch, I think you'll find that Steve already did ;D
-
I was wondering how long it would take before somebody attributed the potential Sheila palm print as being the work of Jeremy Bamber.
Hahaha Roch, anyone know if Jeremy has hands like a girl? If he has he couldn't possibly have loaded the gun. ;D ;D
-
I was wondering how long it would take before somebody attributed the potential Sheila palm print as being the work of Jeremy Bamber.
I think the fact that so many different theories can surround a single bloodstain is an indication of the difficulty that either side would have in claiming it as evidence to support their position.
Out of interest, how convinced are people that it is a palm print? I'm probably about 70% that it is.
-
Hahaha Roch, anyone know if Jeremy has hands like a girl? If he has he couldn't possibly have loaded the gun. ;D ;D
And Sheila had huge feet so probably had huge hands ;)
That reminds me, Tyler if you're around, how wide is the bible? I think I found one on eBay and the width was given as 5 1/4 inches, when I scaled the photo up to that size the print was a pretty good match for mine.
-
And Sheila had huge feet so probably had huge hands ;)
That reminds me, Tyler if you're around, how wide is the bible? I think I found one on eBay and the width was given as 5 1/4 inches, when I scaled the photo up to that size the print was a pretty good match for mine.
I've got big hands,,,but on the scale of things,,,the imprint is smaller than my hand. ( size 7 gloves-me )
-
Curiouser and curiouser :) All these years we have been lead to believe that there was a panic button installed to protect Nevill from threats being carried out by Disgruntled Person. We have posters telling us how Jeremy triggered it to test police response time and to calculate the timings of the murders. We have a family member telling us it was there and Nevill was trying to reach it THEN we have that same family member telling us that another family member told him that there was NO alarm fitted intil AFTER the murders (although I must admit to wondering where the sense would be in fitting a panic alarm to protect someone already deceased) and then YOU come along, Jon and tell us it's all ballcocks!!! The panic alarm was installed PRIOR to the murders and we should therefore "MOVE ON"!!!! Well, before we can, it would be helpful to know WHOSE "truth" can we accept as being "THE" truth. lol :D
Hi April, Jon isn't saying there was a PB, the quote you quotes was a copy and paste from one of Vic's posts. :)
-
I think the fact that so many different theories can surround a single bloodstain is an indication of the difficulty that either side would have in claiming it as evidence to support their position.
Out of interest, how convinced are people that it is a palm print? I'm probably about 70% that it is.
99.9% sure and the same for Hammersley not being at the scene! :)
-
Hello Caroline thank you for explaining Jon's post I was somewhat perplexed by it to say the least ;D
-
I think the fact that so many different theories can surround a single bloodstain is an indication of the difficulty that either side would have in claiming it as evidence to support their position.
Out of interest, how convinced are people that it is a palm print? I'm probably about 70% that it is.
Why,,Bridget,,,what other part of the anatomy do you think it is,,apart from the hand,,or possibly the heel,,where there's enough " lightish " pressure to raise an imprint.? :-\
-
[/size]212 date=1368358173]
Hi April, Jon isn't saying there was a PB, the quote you quotes was a copy and paste from one of Vic's posts. :)
OMG!!! What can I say!!! JON, HUMBLE AND ABJECT APOLOGIES.
-
Hello Caroline thank you for explaining Jon's post I was somewhat perplexed by it to say the least ;D
Susan, might that mean that my brain hasn't gone AWHOL? ;D
-
Why,,Bridget,,,what other part of the anatomy do you think it is,,apart from the hand,,or possibly the heel,,where there's enough " lightish " pressure to raise an imprint.? :-\
I wasnt thinking it was another part of anyone's anatomy specifically, just that it could be a smudge that looks like a palm print but isn't.
-
99.9% sure and the same for Hammersley not being at the scene! :)
Fair enough, but if there is such strong evidence that he wasn't there why has this not formed a ground for appeal? For a start, if he wasn't there he did not bag Sheila's hands and he did not take possession of the 25 odd other exhibits found that day, which includes most of the bullet cases. It would also damage the evidence of other officers at the scene that day who stated he was there, one of whom I think was Bird who took the pictures.
-
Fair enough, but if there is such strong evidence that he wasn't there why has this not formed a ground for appeal? For a start, if he wasn't there he did not bag Sheila's hands and he did not take possession of the 25 odd other exhibits found that day, which includes most of the bullet cases. It would also damage the evidence of other officers at the scene that day who stated he was there, one of whom I think was Bird who took the pictures.
It was not discovered until after the final submissions to the CCRC had been made. It may well form part of further submissions.
-
I think the fact that so many different theories can surround a single bloodstain is an indication of the difficulty that either side would have in claiming it as evidence to support their position.
Out of interest, how convinced are people that it is a palm print? I'm probably about 70% that it is.
95%. I find it very likely. I also find it very likely to belong to Sheila.
-
Hello april don't worry your brain is fine as is mine which is quite a surprise ;D ;D ;D
-
Susan, might that mean that my brain hasn't gone AWHOL? ;D
Hi April/Susie, I was thrown into confusion too. I wondered what on earth jon was saying...he had seen the panic alarm.......??? All is explained now, sorry jon, thanks Caroline ;D ;D ;D
-
Out of interest, how convinced are people that it is a palm print? I'm probably about 70% that it is.
I would say 97% ish as I have to allow for the idiosyncrasies and manipulation of this case but the comparison with Caroline's paint print is startling in it's similarity imo. Sheila had slim bones so even if her hands and fingers were long like her toes they would be slim imo.
-
It was not discovered until after the final submissions to the CCRC had been made. It may well form part of further submissions.
It may? If there were proof that Hammersley's statements are complete fiction and Bird, Davison and (I think) Cook had lied in theirs surely that would be a definite.
-
It was not discovered until after the final submissions to the CCRC had been made. It may well form part of further submissions.
Hi ngb
JB is, of course, entitled to make as many "further submissions" as he sees fit but is it seriously to be contended as an additional /new ground of appeal that one police officer whose unchallenged (and presumably corroborated) evidence was that he was present at the scene wasn't in fact at the scene?
This is a complete non-starter and smacks of complete and utter desperation on JB's part and I cannot believe that it will be even raised before the CCRC!!
jim
-
It may? If there were proof that Hammersley's statements are complete fiction and Bird, Davison and (I think) Cook had lied in theirs surely that would be a definite.
I was simply being accurate. It is not my decision what is included in the next submissions so I am unable to be definite.
-
I was simply being accurate. It is not my decision what is included in the next submissions so I am unable to be definite.
Ok, I'll put it another way, as a lawyer, can you think of any reason why you would not use strong evidence that a police officer giving evidence on what was an important part of the case against your client, had completely fabricated it with the support of other officers including his superiors?
-
Ok, I'll put it another way, as a lawyer, can you think of any reason why you would not use strong evidence that a police officer giving evidence on what was an important part of the case against your client, had completely fabricated it with the support of other officers including his superiors?
Hi ngb
can you please (with the particularity with which the crown will be met at trial) set out the evidence in support of the contention that hammersley was not present at whf?
jim
-
Ok, I'll put it another way, as a lawyer, can you think of any reason why you would not use strong evidence that a police officer giving evidence on what was an important part of the case against your client, had completely fabricated it with the support of other officers including his superiors?
This is a difficult question to answer. You have to remember that the evidence given about what was found at the scene was not challenged by the defence at trial. The fact that a police officer was involved in an overtime fiddle and lied in connection with that is potentially very serious for the police officer concerned, but it does not go directly to any key issue in the case. It damages the credibilty of the police officer concerned and any others involved, but since their evidence was not challenged their credibility was not in fact an issue at trial. This is something I would try to include in grounds of appeal if I could find a way to do it as it is generally indicative of a lack of honesty on the part of some prosecution witnesses, but I doubt whether the Court of Appeal would regard it as a genuine ground of appeal in itself.
-
Hi ngb
can you please (with the particularity with which the crown will be met at trial) set out the evidence in support of the contention that hammersley was not present at whf?
jim
I am not saying he was never at WHF but he was not there at a time when he claimed he had been. He admitted it to COLP.
-
I am not saying he was never at WHF but he was not there at a time when he claimed he had been. He admitted it to COLP.
Maybe this is where my confusion has arisen, are you saying that he was at WHF on the 7th of August, but not necessarily for all of the time he claimed to be?
-
Maybe this is where my confusion has arisen, are you saying that he was at WHF on the 7th of August, but not necessarily for all of the time he claimed to be?
I am saying that he may have been at WHF at some stage on 7th August (although I am not entirely sure about that) but he was certainly not there for all the time he claimed to be and he did not take all of the actions he claimed to have taken in his witness statement.
-
I am saying that he may have been at WHF at some stage on 7th August (although I am not entirely sure about that) but he was certainly not there for all the time he claimed to be and he did not take all of the actions he claimed to have taken in his witness statement.
Did he bag Sheila's hands?
-
Did he bag Sheila's hands?
I do not know.
-
I do not know.
Fair enough. What does he say he did that he didn't do then?
-
It may? If there were proof that Hammersley's statements are complete fiction and Bird, Davison and (I think) Cook had lied in theirs surely that would be a definite.
I would think it will be but also appreciate that 'definitives' cannot be bandied about willy nilly on an internet forum.
-
Fair enough. What does he say he did that he didn't do then?
Perhaps you should just wait and see.
-
Anyone else would be charged with obstruction and thrown into prison,,for falsifying notes during a trial such at it was. Good grief.
-
Perhaps you should just wait and see.
Well I would, except that..
This is a difficult question to answer. You have to remember that the evidence given about what was found at the scene was not challenged by the defence at trial. The fact that a police officer was involved in an overtime fiddle and lied in connection with that is potentially very serious for the police officer concerned, but it does not go directly to any key issue in the case. It damages the credibilty of the police officer concerned and any others involved, but since their evidence was not challenged their credibility was not in fact an issue at trial. This is something I would try to include in grounds of appeal if I could find a way to do it as it is generally indicative of a lack of honesty on the part of some prosecution witnesses, but I doubt whether the Court of Appeal would regard it as a genuine ground of appeal in itself.
..the part in red appears to indicate that the only dishonesty involved was in relation to fiddling his overtime, and that the evidence Hammersley gave otherwise is not in issue, so I think it's a legitimate question to ask.
-
Fair enough. What does he say he did that he didn't do then?
I understand that you want me to post all I know about this but I have gone as far as I feel able to go at this stage. Frankly I would be inclined to publish everything because I do not believe it would do any harm to the prospects of securing a further appeal. However, others take a different view.
-
Well I would, except that..
..the part in red appears to indicate that the only dishonesty involved was in relation to fiddling his overtime, and that the evidence Hammersley gave otherwise is not in issue, so I think it's a legitimate question to ask.
It went beyond this. It was not just timings, but also actions.
-
Well I would, except that..
..the part in red appears to indicate that the only dishonesty involved was in relation to fiddling his overtime, and that the evidence Hammersley gave otherwise is not in issue, so I think it's a legitimate question to ask.
It seems like you're pushing NGB to answer a different question or to simply agree with your take on events and dampen down the significance. He has stated that he is not able to give the full details and as you were happy to accept that from Vic - so, you should (IMO) give NGB the same consideration.
-
I understand that you want me to post all I know about this but I have gone as far as I feel able to go at this stage. Frankly I would be inclined to publish everything because I do not believe it would do any harm to the prospects of securing a further appeal. However, others take a different view.
I do understand your position, but don't ask don't get!
It went beyond this. It was not just timings, but also actions.
Well whatever those actions were or weren't, unless the new information shows he wasn't there at all he would have been in a position to see and give evidence about the state of Sheila's hands.
-
It seems like you're pushing NGB to answer a different question or to simply agree with your take on events and dampen down the significance. He has stated that he is not able to give the full details and as you were happy to accept that from Vic - so, you should (IMO) give NGB the same consideration.
If he wants me to do one, he's more than able to tell me himself.
-
If he wants me to do one, he's more than able to tell me himself.
I think he kinda did!! ;)
-
I think he kinda did!! ;)
Well here's a prediction for you. If whatever is behind this ever sees the light of day I reckon that all it will show is that Hammersley fiddled his overtime. What the 'actions' are I have no idea but it won't relate to the bagging of Sheila's hands.
-
And Sheila had huge feet so probably had huge hands ;)
That reminds me, Tyler if you're around, how wide is the bible? I think I found one on eBay and the width was given as 5 1/4 inches, when I scaled the photo up to that size the print was a pretty good match for mine.
Hiya Bridget.Bible is 22cm long,well 21 and a half to be totally exact. It is 13cm wide and3cm thick.
Regarding Hammersley,don't forget that he was investigated by COLP over something that he "didnt discover". Maybe he "didnt discover" this something as he wasnt there at that time but his name has been attributed to it? Whoever bagged Sheilas hands had never done it before and I am sure I read somewhere that it was not done correctly. How long had Hammersley been a detective? If he had been for many years,its likely that he had done it before?
-
Hiya Bridget.Bible is 22cm long,well 21 and a half to be totally exact. It is 13cm wide and3cm thick.
Regarding Hammersley,don't forget that he was investigated by COLP over something that he "didnt discover". Maybe he "didnt discover" this something as he wasnt there at that time but his name has been attributed to it? Whoever bagged Sheilas hands had never done it before and I am sure I read somewhere that it was not done correctly. How long had Hammersley been a detective? If he had been for many years,its likely that he had done it before?
Does anybody know , when Hammersley retired ?, i think Campion posted a piece in the EP newspaper given details , can somebody post it ?
-
OMG!!! What can I say!!! JON, HUMBLE AND ABJECT APOLOGIES.
My fault April , tried to do it in different color's , could not quite carry it off !!
-
Does anybody know , when Hammersley retired ?, i think Campion posted a piece in the EP newspaper given details , can somebody post it ?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3503.msg138644.html#msg138644
This is all I can find jon. :)
-
No, but I know how big those paperback bibles usually are and the stain only fills the top corner. I used a foolscap book and my hands are pretty small. I'd say the two (stains) were of a similar size unless the bible turns out to be humongous!! ;D
Good thing I don't tell you either!! :P ;)
Hi Caroline :)
Could you upload the images from the foolscap book? It would be interesting to see it... :) :) :) :)
-
Hi Caroline :)
Could you upload the images from the foolscap book? It would be interesting to see it... :) :) :) :)
It's here Patti http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4295.msg175756.html#msg175756
:) :)
-
It's here Patti http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4295.msg175756.html#msg175756
:) :)
Blinkin Heck! Hey it really does look very similar....I think the relatives have the bible. I'm sure AE tells you this in the 1991 COLP statement. Can't somebody in the campaign team or his defence team request it? I do know that Fletcher said when he tried looking for prints from Jeremy on the rifle his indents/ridges were very deep, so would have been easy to identify, but he never found any...Good experiment Caroline...Brilliant! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Blinkin Heck! Hey it really does look very similar....I think the relatives have the bible. I'm sure AE tells you this in the 1991 COLP statement. Can't somebody in the campaign team or his defence team request it? I do know that Fletcher said when he tried looking for prints from Jeremy on the rifle his indents/ridges were very deep, so would have been easy to identify, but he never found any...Good experiment Caroline...Brilliant! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Thanks Patti :). Yes, it was given back to the family. I'm sure they could request it and may have done - hopefully, it still exists or there are higher res pictures f it. :)
-
Blinkin Heck! Hey it really does look very similar....I think the relatives have the bible. I'm sure AE tells you this in the 1991 COLP statement. Can't somebody in the campaign team or his defence team request it? I do know that Fletcher said when he tried looking for prints from Jeremy on the rifle his indents/ridges were very deep, so would have been easy to identify, but he never found any...Good experiment Caroline...Brilliant! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
It s brilliant, isn't it Patti? It's a really convincing likeness imo. ;D ;D
-
Thanks Patti :). Yes, it was given back to the family. I'm sure they could request it and may have done - hopefully, it still exists or there are higher res pictures f it. :)
How could forensics have overlooked it???????? Such a lot does not make any sense! If it is Sheila's hand, then that would confirm there was blood on her hand and the swabs that were taken and prjected in court fails...because they said the swabs were clean and if this palmprint is Sheila's then that argument flies out of the window....and proves that facts that were produced as facts in court were incorrect. :-\ :) :) :) :)
-
How could forensics have overlooked it???????? Such a lost does not make any sense! If it Sheila's hand, then that would confirm there was blood on her hand and the swabs that were taken and produced in court fails...because they said the swabs were clean and if this palmprint is Sheila's then that argument flies out of the window....and proves that facts that were produced as facts in court were incorrect. :-\ :) :) :) :)
I member you arguing that they washed Sheila's hands before they swabbed Patti...d'you remember? I would agree with you on that. I forgot to get my Scott Lomax book back again today :'( :'(
-
I member you arguing that they washed Sheila's hands before they swabbed Patti...d'you remember? I would agree with you on that.
Maggie it is feasible that the swabs were taken after washing. The mere fact that no ones can verify this one way or another means that the evidence itself fails in my opinion, because facts can't be fully established. What I mean is that the first swabs were rejected and no one can establish whether or not more swabs were taken or were they taken after washing down...or were they the same swabs re-submitted....There is no evidence to support they were the same swabs that were rejected....the mind boggles...lol :) :) :) :)
-
Maggie it is feasible that the swabs were taken after washing. The mere fact that no ones can verify this one way or another means that the evidence itself fails in my opinion, because facts can't be fully established. What I mean is that the first swabs were rejected and no one can establish whether or not more swabs were taken or were they taken after washing down...or were they the same swabs re-submitted....There is no evidence to support they were the same swabs that were rejected....the mind boggles...lol :) :) :) :)
I know, I agree and I do think Scott Lomax made a good point about the swabbing of the hands but I still haven't got my book back!!!
-
I know, I agree and I do think Scott Lomax made a good point about the swabbing of the hands but I still haven't got my book back!!!
Maggie I haven't found mine either. I know it is here somewhere, but its not on the bookcase. :( I meant to look for it for you. Sorry! :( :) :) :)
-
Maggie I haven't found mine either. I know it is here somewhere, but its not on the bookcase. :( I meant to look for it for you. Sorry! :( :) :) :)
It's my own fault Patti, keep forgetting to pick it up. ;D
-
Looks identical, in my opinion...
-
Looks identical, in my opinion...
It's uncanny Mike, never would have expected it to be so similar. ;D ;D
-
It's uncanny Mike, never would have expected it to be so similar. ;D ;D
I'll be getting the paints out when my granddaughter comes over..... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
ive always held the view the most likely cause fits, on the one hand mike raises a fair question but given the methods of events on that morning i do feel this among other incidents sadly may fall into simple investigative errors .
-
Have the police test the palm print to see who it is??? blood on sheila's dress... yes her hands were bloodstained!! before the police cleaned them.
-
I am not yet convinced that the part bloodied hand print on the page of the bible, was made on the page of the blue covered bible, photographed alongside Sheila's body, by PC Bird after 10 O'clock that morning - there were four bibles kept at, and in use at whf, but only three have been accounted for...
For almost 28 years, June Bambers, black covered bible, the black has remained withheld, and unaccounted for, leading to a suspicion that the crucial bloodied palm print was actually found on a page of the black covered bible, belonginmg to June Bamber...
-
its possible mike juns and sheila were reading the bible that night the times may have varied .
-
its possible mike juns and sheila were reading the bible that night the times may have varied .
Yes, in his COLP interview, PS Adams mentions that he and other officers were talking after the raid, and they thought at some stage before the shootings had started, that June and Sheila had been laid on the bed reading bibles...
-
I am not yet convinced that the part bloodied hand print on the page of the bible, was made on the page of the blue covered bible, photographed alongside Sheila's body, by PC Bird after 10 O'clock that morning - there were four bibles kept at, and in use at whf, but only three have been accounted for...
For almost 28 years, June Bambers, black covered bible, the black has remained withheld, and unaccounted for, leading to a suspicion that the crucial bloodied palm print was actually found on a page of the black covered bible, belonginmg to June Bamber...
Hi Mike, I thought the New English Blue bible was June's particular bible although all the bibles were no doubt Junes. You have said in the past there was a black bible kept in the spare room which was Sheila's room during her visit and the other two black bibles were kept downstairs. Could the black bible with the palm print be the one from the spare room?
-
Hi Mike, I thought the New English Blue bible was June's particular bible although all the bibles were no doubt Junes. You have said in the past there was a black bible kept in the spare room which was Sheila's room during her visit and the other two black bibles were kept downstairs. Could the black bible with the palm print be the one from the spare room?
Hi Maggie,
Yes, the missing black covered bible handed back to relatives could be the one which has - imagine the consequences if Sheila's bloodied part palm print upon its pages, which are linked to the bloodied fingermarks on Sheila's nightdress - imagine the consequences and implications, if it turns out that relatives have the missing black bible, contaminated with Sheila's bloodied palm print upon it, when the defence have not seen head nor tail of it?
We need to idenyify the contents and layout of the page containing this bloodied palm print, and link it to a particilar bible...
Blue or black?
-
Hi Maggie,
Yes, the missing black covered bible handed back to relatives could be the one which has - imagine the consequences if Sheila's bloodied part palm print upon its pages, which are linked to the bloodied fingermarks on Sheila's nightdress - imagine the consequences and implications, if it turns out that relatives have the missing black bible, contaminated with Sheila's bloodied palm print upon it, when the defence have not seen head nor tail of it?
We need to idenyify the contents and layout of the page containing this bloodied palm print, and link it to a particilar bible...
Blue or black?
Mike, I'm slightly concerned that said bible, should it be requested, will have mysteriously disappeared/been destroyed years ago because of painful memories. Too much information, perhaps?
-
When was photograph of bloodied palm print on page taken, and who by...
-
When was photograph of bloodied palm print on page taken, and who by...
That's an interesting question Mike, do you have any idea?
Do we know which black bible we are speaking of or is that impossible to know?
-
Hi Mike, I thought the New English Blue bible was June's particular bible although all the bibles were no doubt Junes. You have said in the past there was a black bible kept in the spare room which was Sheila's room during her visit and the other two black bibles were kept downstairs. Could the black bible with the palm print be the one from the spare room?
Hi Maggie
Wow didn't realise they had so many bibles at WHF! Thanks for the info as I've often wondered if Sheila went to her parents' room to get the bible hence the location of her body but perhaps not if other bibles were available. Do you think Sheila knew about the one in her room or even the others elsewhere? Were all these bibles the same in terms of text and just different publishers?
I wonder when/if Sheila discovered that her maternal Grandfather was a Prof of Theology and a former canon at Canterbury and if so how this played out? Also wonder if June started preaching Sheila may have brought this up and used it in many ways which June may have taken offence to ie could have sparked something? Perhaps Sheila only found out about her Grandfather when she met her birth mother a few weeks before the murders? Also think Sheila's birth father was a curate but not sure as in theologian sense or looking after a museum?
-
That's an interesting question Mike, do you have any idea?
Do we know which black bible we are speaking of or is that impossible to know?
House cleaner identifies missing black covered bible...
-
Hi NN I believe the blue bible was the New English Translation which is translated into modern prose but would imagine the other 3 were King James translaion......one was very old I think.
As for Sheila I would agree she probably didnt know about her ancestry including her dad who would prob have been connected to the church...think curators are the museum guys. Would think her natural motber must have told her. Considering her problems with religion who knows how this affected Sheila's troubled mind? :D
-
Maggie, I've read here somewhere that Sheila's biological uncle/great uncle was vicar of St Luke's in Tiptree, within spitting distance of D'Arcy.
-
Maggie, I've read here somewhere that Sheila's biological uncle/great uncle was vicar of St Luke's in Tiptree, within spitting distance of D'Arcy.
yes you're right April. There were connections with D'Arcy and the church. Possibly why she went to June and Neville? Wonder if Sheila was always naturally attracted to religion which became compounded by June's later obsession and her own illness? Although many schizophrenics seem to see devils and demons and other unworldly stuff?
-
Maggie, I've read here somewhere that Sheila's biological uncle/great uncle was vicar of St Luke's in Tiptree, within spitting distance of D'Arcy.
April, I recall HMEssex, a local poster, posting up about SC having an uncle living in Tiptree but I didn't realise he was a vicar.
-
I am not yet convinced that the part bloodied hand print on the page of the bible, was made on the page of the blue covered bible, photographed alongside Sheila's body, by PC Bird after 10 O'clock that morning - there were four bibles kept at, and in use at whf, but only three have been accounted for...
For almost 28 years, June Bambers, black covered bible, the black has remained withheld, and unaccounted for, leading to a suspicion that the crucial bloodied palm print was actually found on a page of the black covered bible, belonginmg to June Bamber...
Hi Mike, Tyler has the same bible and the pages correspond exactly, that being the case, I am convinced that the stain is from the blue bible.
-
House cleaner identifies missing black covered bible...
That's interesting,as the black covered bibke would have been June's King James' version. Now I wonder if Jeremy threw it into the Aga..
-
That's interesting,as the black covered bibke would have been June's King James' version. Now I wonder if Jeremy threw it into the Aga..
Errrr for what reason?
-
Yes, in his COLP interview, PS Adams mentions that he and other officers were talking after the raid, and they thought at some stage before the shootings had started, that June and Sheila had been laid on the bed reading bibles...
If Sheila was the shooter, this scenario could indicate a potential catalyst to the incident?
-
Paranormal image of bloodied part hand print provides a clue to who was responsible for making this mark upon the open page of this particular bible...
-
Image in bloodied print resembles Sheila 'Bambi' Caffell, not Ralph Bamber, not June Bamber, not Jeremy Bamber, not any as yet unidentified hitman or assassin - study the image, make your own minds up...
Similar paranormal activity photographed at PDL of Maddie (derelict building across road from church)
-
When the photograph of myself was taken (above) outside the roadside door of apartment 5A (McCanns, at time of MM's disappearence) there was no one else present, either on the footpath to and from the door, or on the carpark. Yet you can clearly see a reflection in one on the lenses of my singlasses a mysterious figure which manifested itself in the captured image on that occassion...
-
What is of concern to me, is the fact that June Bambers black covered bible is missing, or is being withheld under pii - if the account given to COLP by PS Adams is correct, about being in conversation with other firearms officers at the scene regarding Sheila and June sat up in bed reading bibles...
If both bibles were found open in the bedroom, the contents of both would be vital towards establishing what could have triggered the shootings..
-
When the photograph of myself was taken (above) outside the roadside door of apartment 5A (McCanns, at time of MM's disappearence) there was no one else present, either on the footpath to and from the door, or on the carpark. Yet you can clearly see a reflection in one on the lenses of my singlasses a mysterious figure which manifested itself in the captured image on that occassion...
I can't see any mysterious figures. I can see the reflection of your arm holding the camera / phone.
-
What is of concern to me, is the fact that June Bambers black covered bible is missing, or is being withheld under pii - if the account given to COLP by PS Adams is correct, about being in conversation with other firearms officers at the scene regarding Sheila and June sat up in bed reading bibles...
If both bibles were found open in the bedroom, the contents of both would be vital towards establishing what could have triggered the shootings..
Steve says Jeremy threw the black one into the Aga ;D
-
Steve says Jeremy threw the black one into the Aga ;D
Well he must have done then!! Steve was there!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I can't see any mysterious figures. I can see the reflection of your arm holding the camera / phone.
I'm not talking about the reflection of me holding the camera, look again very carefully...
-
Steve says Jeremy threw the black one into the Aga ;D
It's easy to blame Jeremy for everything, ain't it...
Well, what needs to be established is what bible was given back to the relatives, and when? Blue or black covered bible, and which bible had the part bloodied palm print on its page? If the bloodied mark was on a page in the blue covered bible, and the blue covered bible was the one given to relatives, why would the relatives want a bible with a bloodied hand impression of one of the dead relatives to keep...
-
What I have been contemplating for a long time concerns the source from which the blood which was eventually attributed as being blood of Sheila Caffell, originated from, and got into the silencer?
Lets start by looking at what DC Hammersley said to the COLP investigators in 1991, "I didn't find it", was what he blurted out, "I didn't find it". But what was he actually refferring to? What exactly worried Hammersley so much to cause he to yell, "I didn't find it...
Over the week-end I have received some information which sheds some light on what Hammersleys remarks, "I didn't find it", refers to...
-
What I have been contemplating for a long time concerns the source from which the blood which was eventually attributed as being blood of Sheila Caffell, originated from, and got into the silencer?
Lets start by looking at what DC Hammersley said to the COLP investigators in 1991, "I didn't find it", was what he blurted out, "I didn't find it". But what was he actually refferring to? What exactly worried Hammersley so much to cause he to yell, "I didn't find it...
Over the week-end I have received some information which sheds some light on what Hammersleys remarks, "I didn't find it", refers to...
It transpires that DC Hammersley did not find one of the bibles - the bible bearing exhibit DRH/44...
-
Relatives took the second bible home with them from the scene on 10th August 1985 - a bloodstained bible, with Sheila's blood on it...
-
Relatives took the second bible home with them from the scene on 10th August 1985 - a bloodstained bible, with Sheila's blood on it...
The second bloodstained bible, was carried from the scene in the boot of the car along with the silencer...
-
Detective Chief Supt. Ainsley, who led the 2nd part of the investigation (SC/786/85), KNEW the danger of having to admit to the fact that relatives had possession and access to the silencer and blood of Sheila's on the bible, between 10th and 12th August 1985, and that if such facts were admitted to, no jury in the land could resist having concerns about the possibility of contanination of the silencer whilst relatives had a source of Sheila's blood from which to contaminate the silencer before they handed the silencer over to police...
Hence, why DC Hammersley lied about seizing the second bible, exhibit DRH/44, from the scene on 8th August 1985, even though he wasn't on duty at the scene, that date...
-
The second bible, (DRH/44), originally had one of Ann Eatons exhibit (AE/?) references...
-
The quickness of the hand deceives the eye,Mike. It's happened a lot in this case.
-
Bloodstains can definately be attributed to the blue bible. I have always been led to believe that what Hammersley "didn't discover" was a suicide note. Perhaps this was "discovered" in the black bible that was in Sheila's room?
-
Bloodstains can definately be attributed to the blue bible. I have always been led to believe that what Hammersley "didn't discover" was a suicide note. Perhaps this was "discovered" in the black bible that was in Sheila's room?
Well, they are certainly on the same pages as your bible - think we have that pretty much sewn up!! I agree and am in no doubt that the stains are on the blue bible.
-
Bloodstains can definately be attributed to the blue bible. I have always been led to believe that what Hammersley "didn't discover" was a suicide note. Perhaps this was "discovered" in the black bible that was in Sheila's room?
Where can I find an image of your bible page on the forum please...
-
I'm not talking about the reflection of me holding the camera, look again very carefully...
-
Bloodstains can definately be attributed to the blue bible. I have always been led to believe that what Hammersley "didn't discover" was a suicide note. Perhaps this was "discovered" in the black bible that was in Sheila's room?
Hammersley claims to have found the blue covered bible (DRH/33) with a hand written note visible inside its pages, including words, "Love one another" - the full contents of this hand written note have thus far never yet been disclosed:-
-
Now, the other hand written note found in Sheila's room, (DRH/42) was found on her bedside table, I think, so that note, and the one shown in the pages of the bible resting partially against Sheila's arm in the main bedroom, cannot be the same hand written note, unless the police recovered the hand written note (DRH/42) from her bedside cabinet in her bedroom, and brought it into the master bedroom, and plonked it inside the blue covered bible during the restaging of her body after Sheila was shot for the second time - the fatal shot under the chin...
Perhaps this is why a copy of the hand written note, (DRH/42) found on the bedside cabinet inside Sheila's bedroom has never been disclosed - because it has been photographed inside the pages of the blue bible, (DRH/33) next to Sheila's body, on the floor of the main bedroom...
-
Well, they are certainly on the same pages as your bible - think we have that pretty much sewn up!! I agree and am in no doubt that the stains are on the blue bible.
I pose the following questions - (1) look at the corners of the up turned blue bible in this crime scene photograph, and note the worn turned up corners of the cover. (2) - then look at the bible containing the partial bloodied palm print of Sheila, I don't think its the same bible...
-
I do not see any one of the four corners of the cover of the bible containing the bloodied palm print, turned up and worn, like is visible on the corners on the cover of the blue bible, so it is reasonable to assume, both bibles cannot possibly be one, and the same bible...
-
Now, what is also important, is the presence of the croheted praying mantilla in the pages of the upturned blue bible, which would be resting against and upon the bloodied palm print on the page of the bible - so what happened to that crocheted item which would almost certainly have got blood transference from the bloodied palm print, upon it...
That crocheted praying mantilla was not even made an exhibit, yet there it is, in the pages of the bible next to the body, resting against the very page where the bloodied palm print is situated (if it is the same bible)...
Why not make the page containing the bloodied palm print, and the corresponding crocheted praying mantilla, available to the defence, and why not have both examined to establish whose bloodied palm made this / these marks?
I do not see any sign of the handwritten note, or the crocheted cloth praying mantilla in the bible containing the bloodied palm print - so, why are these missing?
-
Paranormal image of Sheila "Bambi" Caffell, produced on page of bible found at the scene, manifested in a bloodied part palm print on page of bible:-
-
I don´t see a paranormal picture of anything. That you see it, Mike, is another thing, but how does that help prove anything?
-
It's only the cover that is bent at the corners and you wouldn't see that when it was turned over with the weight of the pages. We'll just have to agree to disagree on whether it's the same bible but another version would not have the same text on the same number page and I don't see what benefit there would be in switching bibles. It's the same one as far as I'm concerned but I will post pics of Tyler's bible for you when I can get on my lap top.
-
That " pattern " in the bloodstain is where that crocheted cloth was,so wherever the cloth went,,there'd have been blood on it,as the bible had been closed on the cloth. Much as we'd like to have thought it was a palm print,,I'm thinking it wasn't.
-
I do not see any one of the four corners of the cover of the bible containing the bloodied palm print, turned up and worn, like is visible on the corners on the cover of the blue bible, so it is reasonable to assume, both bibles cannot possibly be one, and the same bible...
Wow, how come nobody has noticed that before? :o
-
It's only the cover that is bent at the corners and you wouldn't see that when it was turned over with the weight of the pages. We'll just have to agree to disagree on whether it's the same bible but another version would not have the same text on the same number page and I don't see what benefit there would be in switching bibles. It's the same one as far as I'm concerned but I will post pics of Tyler's bible for you when I can get on my lap top.
If you look closely at the cornering of the pages above the Y, they seem rounded as in a well worn book. The open page on the bloodstained bible for the corresponding corner appears pointed, as if the bible was less well worn?
-
If you look closely at the cornering of the pages above the Y, they seem rounded as in a well worn book. The open page on the bloodstained bible for the corresponding corner appears pointed, as if the bible was less well worn?
Not to me, the cover and the first few pages look worn but the weight of the outer pages on the inner would keep the pages inside more uniform. Most books that are read often begin to deteriorate at the outer pages. However, 'generally in a book with so many pages (such as a bible) tend to be less damaged. Besides all that, Tyler posted the following pictures of her bible which is the same version as the blue bible found next to Sheila. I find it incredible that a different bible would have the same passage and wording as another version? Also, I can't think of one single reason why they would be switched?
-
.
-
.
-
Hi Caroline, I totally agree with you, the cover of the bible and the first few pages are worn at the corners but most of the inner pages are and would be pretty much pristine. That is as you say what happens with a well used soft backed book.
The two bibles are the same edition and would therefore have the same psalms etc on the same pages. A different edition would not have the same psalms on the corresponding page numbers or a King James's bible and a New English Translation woud be totally different in style and language imo.
-
Not to me, the cover and the first few pages look worn but the weight of the outer pages on the inner would keep the pages inside more uniform. Most books that are read often begin to deteriorate at the outer pages. However, 'generally in a book with so many pages (such as a bible) tend to be less damaged. Besides all that, Tyler posted the following pictures of her bible which is the same version as the blue bible found next to Sheila. I find it incredible that a different bible would have the same passage and wording as another version? Also, I can't think of one single reason why they would be switched?
I have to agree with that. You can even see the worn cover-corners on this photo. Bottom left corner (in picture) is worn, and notice how the Bible´s upper right corner (in the picture) is elevated, indicating that it is not resting flat on the surface.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4296.0;attach=32287;image)
-
So collectively what you are saying is that there is no difference in apparent wearing between the two bibles (or same bible)... because the bible laid out flat on its' back as an open book is bearing more weight down upon the worn cover and outer pages?
To me, the blue crime scene bible just looks far more worn than the 'palm' stained bible flat on its' back. Even given the weight bearing theory, it doesn't look right to me.
What's the chance that it was possible to obtain the same bible in a different coloured cover? For example... black?
-
I am getting confused. Why do people want there to be two blood-stained bibles? :o
-
I am getting confused. Why do people want there to be two blood-stained bibles? :o
Me me Alias :)
-
So collectively what you are saying is that there is no difference in apparent wearing between the two bibles (or same bible)... because the bible laid out flat on its' back as an open book is bearing more weight down upon the worn cover and outer pages?
To me, the blue crime scene bible just looks far more worn than the 'palm' stained bible flat on its' back. Even given the weight bearing theory, it doesn't look right to me.
What's the chance that it was possible to obtain the same bible in a different coloured cover? For example... black?
What would be the point of such a deception?
-
What would be the point of such a deception?
I really don't know. I just cant reconcile the battered blue crime scene bible with the bloodstained bible which looks less battered. You're probably right, it's the same bible. But the difference in condition (as I see it) is niggling at me.
-
I really don't know. I just cant reconcile the battered blue crime scene bible with the bloodstained bible which looks less battered. You're probably right, it's the same bible. But the difference in condition (as I see it) is niggling at me.
Hi Roch but it's the outside of the bible which shows wear and tear, while the inside pages would surely be more as they were when the bible was new.....don't you think??? ;D
-
I really don't know. I just cant reconcile the battered blue crime scene bible with the bloodstained bible which looks less battered. You're probably right, it's the same bible. But the difference in condition (as I see it) is niggling at me.
Not at me, it looks worn to me. Funny how people see the same things very differently!
-
Hi Roch but it's the outside of the bible which shows wear and tear, while the inside pages would surely be more as they were when the bible was new.....don't you think??? ;D
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4296.0;attach=32292;image)
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4296.0;attach=32291;image)
Honestly, I understand what you're saying but there's something not right with the comparison for me. I could very well be wrong. But I cant reconcile them.
-
Have just checked my husband´s bible - he reads it, not me! ;D It is SUPER worn on the outside, more than the blue bible. The pages inside are not that worn - not at all.
-
Have just checked my husband´s bible - he reads it, not me! ;D It is SUPER worn on the outside, more than the blue bible. The pages inside are not that worn - not at all.
What I'm saying is that I cant reconcile the way that the stained bible sits straight looking, with the condition of the blue bible. It's as if it has been pressed back in to shape by weights. I cant see the weight of the book itself as doing that.
-
What I'm saying is that I cant reconcile the way that the stained bible sits straight looking, with the condition of the blue bible. It's as if it has been pressed back in to shape by weights. I cant see the weight of the book itself as doing that.
Just tried opening my husband´s bible (also a paper back), then first placing it face up - then face down - same as on the photos. Exactly. The pages do weigh it down.
People here think I am nuts, I might add.... 8) LOL
-
I am getting confused. Why do people want there to be two blood-stained bibles? :o
There is a shelf full of bibles in the bedroom. The only one which is of concern is the blue bible which had blood stain on it. Sorry, only just come in on this. :D :D :D
-
Just tried opening my husband´s bible (also a paper back), then first placing it face up - then face down - same as on the photos. Exactly. The pages do weigh it down.
People here think I am nuts, I might add.... 8) LOL
Look at how thick the wedge is in the stained bible. The wedge on the corresponding side of the blue bible is visibly thinner. Now if it's the same bible, that suggests it was face down at a different page than the palm stain. In particular, look at the difference in size of the wedges at the top corner above 'Y'
-
Look at how thick the wedge is in the stained bible. The wedge on the corresponding side of the blue bible is visibly thinner. Now if it's the same bible, that suggests it was face down at a different page than the palm stain. In particular, look at the difference in size of the wedges at the top corner above 'Y'
That, in my opinion, is due to the angle of the photograph. (And BTW, you can´t really see the wedge properly in the picture of the open bible.
My only suggestion now is that you find a worn bible and try to do what I described about my husband´s bible.
-
That, in my opinion, is due to the angle of the photograph. (And BTW, you can´t really see the wedge properly in the picture of the open bible.
I've considered that. I think I'm gonna have to plough a lone furrow on this one...
-
For Caroline... http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/the-bloodied-bible
-
Who moved the bible.? First it was said it was by Sheilas' side,along with the rifle,,then the next you read,the bible is on her chest with the fifle lengthways on top of her body. The police deny moving anything,,so who did.?
-
The bible didn't have a place at the trial,did it.? Nor did the prints that were taken from it.Why.? Were they Sheilas';,and that was covered up too.?
-
The bible didn't have a place at the trial,did it.? Nor did the prints that were taken from it.Why.? Were they Sheilas';,and that was covered up too.?
I always thought that the bible was handed back to the family. I'm not sure where I got this from. I would have thought that the fingerprints were insufficient and that if there was any evidence of a palm print then it should be recorded....But, Its like anything else with this case....its been destroyed....gross misconduct!!!!
-
Hi Patti
I too read the bible was handed back to the family.
-
Hi Patti
I too read the bible was handed back to the family.
Susan, and I. I must have read it here as the only books I've read have been CC's YEARS ago and Wilkes' more recently.
-
Hi Patti
I too read the bible was handed back to the family.
Hi Susan :)
I'm so glad you said that....Can you remember where you read it? I'm sure it was in AE's statement 1991...to the COLP.... :-\ ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Susan, and I. I must have read it here as the only books I've read have been CC's YEARS ago and Wilkes' more recently.
You too lovely April....I'm so pleased I am not alone with this thought. So if they have the bible then why don't Jeremy's defence team request it? :-\ :) :) :)
-
So many lies, and twists and turns,. It's like the " trick of light " which left fingerprints and blood trails.!
Why was Myall so certain it was the outline of a male that he saw,,,and even logged.?
It just gets worse the deeper you read into it.
Even Mr Rivlin worked extra hours on the case, without pay,because he believed Jeremy to be innocent.
-
You too lovely April....I'm so pleased I am not alone with this thought. So if they have the bible then why don't Jeremy's defence team request it? :-\ :) :) :)
Patti, didn't the Family also make a lot of noise about a panic alarm which turned out to be nonexistent.
-
Hello Patti/april it must have been on here as I have not YET read any of the books but that will change shortly ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi april the family had us all convinced the panic button existed prior to the murders they even convinced Vidvic but later said it had been a misunderstanding and Vidvic apologised or something to that effect. Think steve still believes it existed prior to the murders ;D ;D ;D
-
You too lovely April....I'm so pleased I am not alone with this thought. So if they have the bible then why don't Jeremy's defence team request it? :-\ :) :) :)
Or better still hand it in to be examined. :-\ :-\ :-\
-
Hi april the family had us all convinced the panic button existed prior to the murders they even convinced Vidvic but later said it had been a misunderstanding and Vidvic apologised or something to that effect. Think steve still believes it existed prior to the murders ;D ;D ;D
Susan, I think many of us were fooled, but then I guess we were supposed to be.
-
Girls ;D ;D ;D ;D
I think its a shame that we were lead to believe the story that NB was trying to reach the panic button for many years... :(
I am sure Vic never intended to lead us all on and it shows him as a real gentleman for telling us the truth and for that I have to admire him, because he had no need to tell us....we could have gone on forever thinking this was the case.
So why did NB make his way downstairs? :-\ :-\ :) :) :) :)
-
Patti I agree about Vidvic. Ralph was making his way downstairs to get to the phone.
-
april exactly because the panic button was installed after the murders and the family would be aware of that especially as some of them live at WHF :'(
-
Girls ;D ;D ;D ;D
I think its a shame that we were lead to believe the story that NB was trying to reach the panic button for many years... :(
I am sure Vic never intended to lead us all on and it shows him as a real gentleman for telling us the truth and for that I have to admire him, because he had no need to tell us....we could have gone on forever thinking this was the case.
So why did NB make his way downstairs? :-\ :-\ :) :) :) :)
Patti, not for a moment do I think Vic did ANYTHING to deliberately mislead. He wasn't there and only knows what he's been told. I, too, admire him for admitting his error.
I think Nevill was going downstairs to deflect fire away from June. I can't say he was thinking beyond that.
-
Ah,but in all fairness it was Jeremy himself that told someone in a letter that the panic alarm was installed along with the burglar alarm POST murders! And THEN this was verified from the relatives via Vidvic. I guess Jeremy could easily have proved it.
-
Ah,but in all fairness it was Jeremy himself that told someone in a letter that the panic alarm was installed along with the burglar alarm POST murders! And THEN this was verified from the relatives via Vidvic. I guess Jeremy could easily have proved it.
Yes,,it stands to sense that that was the way it was because if the panic alarm was already in situ,,it would definitely have been used on that fateful night.
-
Always knew the bible was important!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Ah,but in all fairness it was Jeremy himself that told someone in a letter that the panic alarm was installed along with the burglar alarm POST murders! And THEN this was verified from the relatives via Vidvic. I guess Jeremy could easily have proved it.
Hi Tyler, but there were not burglar alarm fitted till after the murders....did not the police have this done???? Or was Jeremy to believe in what we believed and that there were one fitted prior to the murders? I have even read where someone had said that it was fitted but not connected....and it was all a myth...??????? :) :) :) :) :)
-
Ah,but in all fairness it was Jeremy himself that told someone in a letter that the panic alarm was installed along with the burglar alarm POST murders! And THEN this was verified from the relatives via Vidvic. I guess Jeremy could easily have proved it.
There is something to be said for 'not letting it lie' ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Tyler, but there were not burglar alarm fitted till after the murders....did not the police have this done???? Or was Jeremy to believe in what we believed and that there were one fitted prior to the murders? I have even read where someone had said that it was fitted but not connected....and it was all a myth...??????? :) :) :) :) :)
They were both fitted 'post' murders Patti and Jeremy verified this to someone in a letter.
-
Yes,,it stands to sense that that was the way it was because if the panic alarm was already in situ,,it would definitely have been used on that fateful night.
I had a long conversation with the friend who had panic buttons, Yes, buttonS, installed at the same time that the Bambers SUPPOSEDLY had theirs installed. They were placed ALL over the house, upstairs and downstairs, which actually makes sense. If a situation requires this sort of action, what good would ONE panic button be if you were nowhere near it or couldn't reach it.
-
Patti I agree about Vidvic. Ralph was making his way downstairs to get to the phone.
I agree Susan.....but why did he not go into the upstairs office and use the blue phone? This niggles me....the upstairs phone... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
I agree Susan.....but why did he not go into the upstairs office and use the blue phone? This niggles me....the upstairs phone... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I still think he was attempting to draw fire away from June.
-
Hi april Was the upstairs phone active or not thought it had been moved or was that from the bedroom. Ralph was diverting away from June me thinks.
-
Hi april Was the upstairs phone active or not thought it had been moved or was that from the bedroom. Ralph was diverting away from June me thinks.
Susan I think there was a blue phone in the office upstairs. It was connected because one of the raid team rang headquarters from it....and there is no phone photographed in the office downstairs. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi april Was the upstairs phone active or not thought it had been moved or was that from the bedroom. Ralph was diverting away from June me thinks.
I believe Steve insists that Jeremy crept into his parents room to remove said phone so they couldn't call for help when he arrived on a bike, in a wetsuit, complete with Marigolds, to shoot them. OH YES, silly me, nearly forgot the fake tan so they wouldn't recognize him.
-
april what about the dyed hair ;D you forgot that keep up my girl ;D ;D ;D
-
april what about the dyed hair ;D you forgot that keep up my girl ;D ;D ;D
I am SO slow tonight, Susan. :D :D :D :D
-
I still think he was attempting to draw fire away from June.
You could be correct april. Nevill might have phoned Jeremy from the office at which point Sheila may have been in a state of psychosis and have the gun but before he really believed she would use it..
He may have dropped theoffice phone and left it off the hook as he heard noises from the bedroom which told him the situation had deteriorated and then acted as a decoy encouraging Sheila to follow him and maybe take a shot at him. He would have had no idea she was capable of the carnage that ensued.
He may have not rung from the kitchen, the bloodied hand mark may have been a coincidence as he tried to steady himself after Sheila's lucky shots totally incapacitated him before collapsing into the chair.
Of course this would mean Neville was probably the first to die and that would make sense, with him dead Sheila would have had free rein. The o
The original phone off the hook could have been the office phone because how could an operator listening in to an open line hear Crispy the dog in the bedroom when the phone off the hook was supposed to be in the kitchen. Surely the walls of that old house were far too thick to hear a whimpering dog from such a distance.
It's possible that the police replaced the office phone. We are told that one of the police team phoned a police officer at the station from the downstairs phone (can't remember who phoned who at the moment) and he very possibly may have left the receiver lying on the work top which was totally misleading???
-
I believe Steve insists that Jeremy crept into his parents room to remove said phone so they couldn't call for help when he arrived on a bike, in a wetsuit, complete with Marigolds, to shoot them. OH YES, silly me, nearly forgot the fake tan so they wouldn't recognize him.
fake tan????? Who has a fake tan Steve...lol ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
april wonder what poor Crispy the doggie thought when Jeremy arrived looking ridiculous clambering through the window bet Crispy did not realize it was Jeremy ;D and would have barked like crazy.
-
You could be correct april. Nevill might have phoned Jeremy from the office at which point Sheila may have been in a state of psychosis and have the gun but before he really believed she would use it..
He may have returned to the bedroom where the situation had deteriorated and then acted as a decoy encouraging Sheila to follow him and maybe take a shot at him. He would have had no idea she was capable of the carnage that ensued.
He may have not rung from the kitchen, the bloodied hand mark may have been a coincidence as he tried to steady himself after Sheila's lucky shots totally incapacitated him before collapsing into the chair.
Of course this would mean Neville was probably the first to die and that would make sense, with him dead Sheila would have had free rein. The o
The original phone off the hook could have been the office phone because how could an operator listening in to an open line hear Crispy the dog in the bedroom when the phone off the hook was supposed to be in the kitchen. Surely the walls of that old house were far too thick to hear a whimpering dog from such a distance.
It's possible that the police replaced the office phone. We are told that one of the police team phoned a police officer at the station from the downstairs phone can't remember who phoned who at the moment) and he very possibly may have left the receiver lying on the work top which was totally misleading???
Maggie you are on perfect form and this is a very argument to put forward.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hello Maggie good points perhaps Ralph did phone Jeremy from upstairs it is so confusing and I am not sure anymore what I think about the phones :'(
-
Hello Maggie good points perhaps Ralph did phone Jeremy from upstairs it is so confusing and I am not sure anymore what I think about the phones :'(
I have just put those suggestions out Susie, as I was writing I did question how Crispy could be heard by the operator from the downstairs phone when he was hiding under the bed in the main bedroom? I know sound travels strangely in these old houses but it seems at least questionable??
-
I have just put those suggestions out Susie, as I was writing I did question how Crispy could be heard by the operator from the downstairs phone when he was hiding under the bed in the main bedroom? I know sound travels strangely in these old houses but it seems at least questionable??
Hi Maggie, he may not have been hiding under the bed the whole time??
-
You could be correct april. Nevill might have phoned Jeremy from the office at which point Sheila may have been in a state of psychosis and have the gun but before he really believed she would use it..
He may have dropped theoffice phone and left it off the hook as he heard noises from the bedroom which told him the situation had deteriorated and then acted as a decoy encouraging Sheila to follow him and maybe take a shot at him. He would have had no idea she was capable of the carnage that ensued.
He may have not rung from the kitchen, the bloodied hand mark may have been a coincidence as he tried to steady himself after Sheila's lucky shots totally incapacitated him before collapsing into the chair.
Of course this would mean Neville was probably the first to die and that would make sense, with him dead Sheila would have had free rein. The o
The original phone off the hook could have been the office phone because how could an operator listening in to an open line hear Crispy the dog in the bedroom when the phone off the hook was supposed to be in the kitchen. Surely the walls of that old house were far too thick to hear a whimpering dog from such a distance.
It's possible that the police replaced the office phone. We are told that one of the police team phoned a police officer at the station from the downstairs phone (can't remember who phoned who at the moment) and he very possibly may have left the receiver lying on the work top which was totally misleading???
WOW Maggie!!!! That's BRILLIANT!!! You're really sharp tonight....................Just wait till Killjoy UK tries to demolish it ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Maggie, he may not have been hiding under the bed the whole time??
That's true but he was upstairs, is the main bedroom above the kitchen? I'm not a dog person like yourself Caroline, how loud would a dog like Crispy whimper, bark?
-
WOW Maggie!!!! That's BRILLIANT!!! You're really sharp tonight....................Just wait till Killjoy UK tries to demolish it ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Love the name april ;D ;D
Definitely not sharp april am half asleep, would crispy be heard from an upstairs bedroom, also as Caroline said he may have only hidden under the bed when they battered the door down??
-
Hi Maggie had Ralph been killed first June would have got further than she did in the bedroom because had she still been alive she would have heard the shots in the stairs and kitchen whereas it appears she was still in bed when she was shot. Think Ralph was last to die :'( If Ralph went downstairs on hearing Sheila could she have got upstairs via another stairs.
-
Ha Ha april Killjoy uk I love it wonder if he will be amused I think not. ;D ;D ;D
-
Love the name april ;D ;D
Definitely not sharp april am half asleep, would crispy be heard from an upstairs bedroom, also as Caroline said he may have only hidden under the bed when they battered the door down??
Maggie, I'm not a dog person either so I can't be certain WHAT a dog would do under those terrible circumstances. I have a friend who puts her dogs in the large cages in which they sleep when she has to leave them, which isn't often. If she doesn't they bite the furniture. When a neighbour's daughter bought her puppy over, she would leave it in the house while she and her mother shopped. It HOWLED the whole time. They couldn't have known because they weren't there!!! so I thought it best to mention it and they made other arrangements............but it was only a puppy and it was lonely.
-
That's true but he was upstairs, is the main bedroom above the kitchen? I'm not a dog person like yourself Caroline, how loud would a dog like Crispy whimper, bark?
I'd imagine it would be a pretty high pitched yap - Alfie is more of a baritone ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
april the poor doggie would be terrified and would bark I suspect very loudly. Maybe the doggie was still in the kitchen and it would be heard barking over the phone left off the hook on the work surface then when the raid team started battering the door down it would have shot upstairs and hid under the bed poor little thing.
-
april the poor doggie would be terrified and would bark I suspect very loudly. Maybe the doggie was still in the kitchen and it would be heard barking over the phone left off the hook on the work surface then when the raid team started battering the door down it would have shot upstairs and hid under the bed poor little thing.
Susan, I think I should stick to human psychology ;D
-
I believe Steve insists that Jeremy crept into his parents room to remove said phone so they couldn't call for help when he arrived on a bike, in a wetsuit, complete with Marigolds, to shoot them. OH YES, silly me, nearly forgot the fake tan so they wouldn't recognize him.
But there wasn't a telephone in the master bedroom,which is suspicious. As for the bible,it proves nothing if Sheila's bloodied palm print was on it. It could have got there in a number of ways,including Sheila coming into the bedroom at Jeremy's behest not knowing what was going on,lying down in the corner with it and blood deposited there between the first and second shots as she raised her hand to her neck to stop the blood flow.
-
But there wasn't a telephone in the master bedroom,which is suspicious. As for the bible,it proves nothing if Sheila's bloodied palm print was on it. It could have got there in a number of ways,including Sheila coming into the bedroom at Jeremy's behest not knowing what was going on,lying down in the corner with it and blood deposited there between the first and second shots as she raised her had to her neck to stop the blood flow.
And why, pray tell, would she lay on the floor, reading a Bible, when there was a bed she could have laid on..................and why would she follow a man wearing a wetsuit, Marigolds and orange fake tan? She was mentally ill. not STUPID.
-
And why, pray tell, would she lay on the floor, reading a Bible, when there was a bed she could have laid on..................and why would she follow a man wearing a wetsuit, Marigolds and orange fake tan? She was mentally ill. not STUPID.
But Sheila wasn't fully aware of her environment those last few days. It's why Jeremy told Julie he had committed a foolproof crime,and why he hasn't confessed after 28 years,because there's not one definitive piece of evidence which can tie him to it,though a huge weight of circumstantial evidence.
-
But Sheila wasn't fully aware of her environment those last few days. It's why Jeremy told Julie he had committed a foolproof crime,and why he hasn't confessed after 28 years,because there's not one definitive piece of evidence which can tie him to it,though a huge weight of circumstantial evidence.
Since when did you arrive at the conclusion that "Sheila wasn't fully aware of her environment.............." As she had but recently been sitting at table with her parents and MAY at some point have been laying on/in a bed, we must assume that she was still capable of telling the difference between a bed and a hard place............and where is it stated, and by whom, that Jeremy told Julie that he'd committed a foolproof crime?
-
As for the bible,it proves nothing if Sheila's bloodied palm print was on it. It could have got there in a number of ways...
Steve. You are conceding that the print is not from Jeremy and is from Sheila - just thought I would point that out. Steve, regarding the number of ways you suggest how Sheila's print (or whoever's print it actually is) could have gotten on to the bible...
Don't you think it should have been for a jury to decide? Why should it be you 28 years after the fact, who casually decides that the print got there via some kind of innocent transferance?
-
Steve. You are conceding that the print is not from Jeremy and is from Sheila - just thought I would point that out. Steve, regarding the number of ways you suggest how Sheila's print (or whoever's print it actuallly is) could have gotten on to the bible...
Don't you think it should have been for a jury to decide? Why should it be you 28 years after the fact, who casually decides that the print got there via some kind of innocent transferance?
Hi Roch :)
You are so right why should anyone decide who's bloodied prints they are...this should have been decided in 1986......as you say by a jury.
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Since when did you arrive at the conclusion that "Sheila wasn't fully aware of her environment.............." As she had but recently been sitting at table with her parents and MAY at some point have been laying on/in a bed, we must assume that she was still capable of telling the difference between a bed and a hard place............and where is it stated, and by whom, that Jeremy told Julie that he'd committed a foolproof crime?
It's in Julie's statement. As for Jeremy and Sheila,remember the Christmases past where Sheila would wake her brother and they would both proceed downstairs to eat chocolate under the tree..well this was just a similar scheme but an evil one as Jeremy may have told Sheila that there were intruders in the house and to lie down quietly,all done quickly before Sheila had any time to assess,as her appearance in death suggests she had the look of no physical exertion that morning as would have been the case were the Defence's argument to be a correct one.
-
Hi Roch :)
You are so right why should anyone decide who's bloodied prints they are...this should have been decided in 1986......as you say by a jury.
;D ;D ;D ;D
Hi Patti, forensics would decide who's print/s they were. Jury would decide how they got there - innocent transferance or (if jury been properly informed) by way of tragic act of murder / suicide. It seems to me that what has happened is that the ability to decide either way has been removed, for the purposes of preventing such a decision from taking place (due to the high risk that the jury would be completely at odds with Steve UK). Do you agree?
-
Steve. You are conceding that the print is not from Jeremy and is from Sheila - just thought I would point that out. Steve, regarding the number of ways you suggest how Sheila's print (or whoever's print it actually is) could have gotten on to the bible...
Don't you think it should have been for a jury to decide? Why should it be you 28 years after the fact, who casually decides that the print got there via some kind of innocent transferance?
But I don't see it matters Roch on what pretext Jeremy led Sheila into the master bedroom and got her to lie down,ostensibly because there were intruders or her parents wanted a word with her. Of far more significance is that the Defence can't tie Sheila to shooting any weapon that morning,however hard in the past Jeremy had tried to interest her in the sport.
-
Hi Patti, forensics would decide who's print/s they were. Jury would decide how they got there - innocent transferance or (if jury been properly informed) by way of tragic act of murder / suicide. It seems to me that what has happened is that the ability to decide either way has been removed, for the purposes of preventing such a decision from taking place (due to the high risk that the jury would be completely at odds with Steve UK). Do you agree?
You have it in a nutshell Roch and I totally agree. The jury was totally mislead...I wish wish wish there could be a re-trial......let them slog it out. I know who would win. ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
But I don't see it matters Roch on what pretext Jeremy led Sheila into the master bedroom and got her to lie down,ostensibly because there were intruders or her parents wanted a word with her. Of far more significance is that the Defence can't tie Sheila to shooting any weapon that morning,however hard in the past Jeremy had tried to interest her in the sport.
So who was the person the police undoubtedly DID see when Jeremy was standing beside them?
-
But I don't see it matters Roch on what pretext Jeremy led Sheila into the master bedroom and got her to lie down,ostensibly because there were intruders or her parents wanted a word with her. Of far more significance is that the Defence can't tie Sheila to shooting any weapon that morning,however hard in the past Jeremy had tried to interest her in the sport.
A jury would not believe that and nor would any reasonably minded person...It too far fetched and ridiculous Steve, come on man.... :) :) :) :)
-
So who was the person the police undoubtedly DID see when Jeremy was standing beside them?
But they didn't see anyone. It was a trick of the light,which makes far more sense if all the lights were on.
-
But I don't see it matters Roch on what pretext Jeremy led Sheila into the master bedroom and got her to lie down,ostensibly because there were intruders or her parents wanted a word with her. Of far more significance is that the Defence can't tie Sheila to shooting any weapon that morning,however hard in the past Jeremy had tried to interest her in the sport.
You're missing something Steve, if that IS Sheila's print (and can't be Jeremy's), why was it reported that her hands were clean? Clearly, they couldn't have been!! Why the deception?? Oh and Jeremy can't be tied to shooting any weapon either!!
-
But they didn't see anyone. It was a trick of the light,which makes far more sense if all the lights were on.
Steve, science is NOT my strong point but I dearly love to know how light can play tricks when ALL lights are on.
-
Unidentified Male "White House Farm " was what was logged as having been seen up at the window,,entered by Myall
-
You're missing something Steve, if that IS Sheila's print (and can't be Jeremy's), why was it reported that her hands were clean? Clearly, they couldn't have been!! Why the deception?? Oh and Jeremy can't be tied to shooting any weapon either!!
I don't know whether dogs can sniff beneath wetsuits. Sheila's hands were described as if they had been manicured. Jeremy had specks of blood on some his garments,but I don't know whether there were any pictures of the underside of Sheila's hands.
-
I don't know whether dogs can sniff beneath wetsuits. Sheila's hands were described as if they had been manicured. Jeremy had specks of blood on some his garments,but I don't know whether there were any pictures of the underside of Sheila's hands.
Eh? What dogs?? Are you suggesting he was still wearing the wetsuit when he was outside WHF awaiting for the raid team to make their move?? ;D ;D ;D. AND if that is Sheila' hand print (and it can't be Jeremy's) she would most definitely have had blood on at least one of her hands!! You can see blood on the ball of her hand for goodness sake!!
-
Haha Caroline,your response to Steve made me roar with laughter. My daughter is giving me very strange looks! And Loookout,Myall spotted unident male in Pages Lane and not in the farmhouse (according to his log)
-
Sheila's hands were described as if they had been manicured... I don't know whether there were any pictures of the underside of Sheila's hands.
Steve, I think we have come to an impasse. It's clear the there are no bloodied fingerprints belonging to Jeremy Bamber and no bloodied palm print belonging to Jeremy Bamber upon the bible that was found / placed / deposited by sweeping door on Sheila's arm.
You yourself are posting as if you are of the opinion that the palm print is Sheila's palm print. If the prosecution's case is that Sheila's' palms were blood free, do you not think it an uncanny coincidence, that she is now heavily in the frame for a bloodied palm print that was hidden from the defence / jury, yet there are also no photographs available of her palms?
You could of course choose to argue that this is June's palm print on a bible that was then placed upon Sheila?
-
Eh? What dogs?? Are you suggesting he was still wearing the wetsuit when he was outside WHF awaiting for the raid team to make their move?? ;D ;D ;D. AND if that is Sheila' hand print (and it can't be Jeremy's) she would most definitely have had blood on at least one of her hands!! You can see blood on the ball of her hand for goodness sake!!
You are speculating which is your right,but Jeremy could have left the crime scene any way he wanted it which puts an air of doubt into your arguments. As far as I know the wetsuit was never tested for gun residue,and I don't know whether a good scrubbing in the shower would remove traces of it once the wetsuit was removed and several layers of new clothing worn.
-
Haha Caroline,your response to Steve made me roar with laughter. My daughter is giving me very strange looks! And Loookout,Myall spotted unident male in Pages Lane and not in the farmhouse (according to his log)
It just beggars belief sometimes. With a wetsuit and the two jumpers - he's have fainted never mind just throwing up. I also laughed when I read Steve's answer but sometimes, that's par for the course ;D ;D ;D
-
You are speculating which is your right,but Jeremy could have left the crime scene any way he wanted it which puts an air of doubt into your arguments. As far as I know the wetsuit was never tested for gun residue,and I don't know whether a good scrubbing in the shower would remove traces of it once the wetsuit was removed and several layers of new clothing worn.
Speculating on what? I can see blood on her hand and I KNOW that is a hand print on the bible (whether you think so or not). It can't be Jeremy's because it WOULD have been used against him - where is the speculation? Or are you saying you can't see the blood on the ball of her thumb?
-
Speculating on what? I can see blood on her hand and I KNOW that is a hand print on the bible (whether you think so or not). It can't be Jeremy's because it WOULD have been used against him - where is the speculation? Or are you saying you can't see the blood on the ball of her thumb?
Hear Hear!
-
Same with the bloodied hand print mark on Sheila's nightdress. WHERE was her hand resting when she was found? It couldn't have been on the rifle as depicted in the photographs as two members of the raid team CANNOT recall seeing a rifle on her body when they first saw her and yet another stated that the rifle was by her SIDE!
-
Same with the bloodied hand print mark on Sheila's nightdress. WHERE was her hand resting when she was found? It couldn't have been on the rifle as depicted in the photographs as two members of the raid team CANNOT recall seeing a rifle on her body when they first saw her and yet another stated that the rifle was by her SIDE!
Personally I don't think the pathologists statement told the entire truth. Why do I say that? Because this photo tells me so. He said her hands were not bloodied. But this photo shows otherwise. Those streaks of blood on her arm come from somewhere. They don't just begin and end where they are.
-
Because this is an MOJ,,isn't Jeremy at liberty to get an interview with the press/media,,or would the relatives kick up a stink again. ? Everyone else had their say,,so wouldn't it be better " straight from the horses' mouth " to the world, hearing Jeremys' side,instead of the whole thing having been based on speculation.? He's not even allowed a voice,,it's disgusting.
What better to see a live interview by the man himself,to give the public more of an insight,rather than the one-sided reporting that has existed.?
-
Because this is an MOJ,,isn't Jeremy at liberty to get an interview with the press/media,,or would the relatives kick up a stink again. ? Everyone else had their say,,so wouldn't it be better " straight from the horses' mouth " to the world, hearing Jeremys' side,instead of the whole thing having been based on speculation.? He's not even allowed a voice,,it's disgusting.
What better to see a live interview by the man himself,to give the public more of an insight,rather than the one-sided reporting that has existed.?
Hi tyler, isn't Jeremy trying to get permission for such an interview? Seem to remember hearing that about a year ago but haven't heard any more. Can't imagine him getting permission unless they find a loophole to force the issue. Imagine the interest that would generate with the public.
-
Hi tyler, isn't Jeremy trying to get permission for such an interview? Seem to remember hearing that about a year ago but haven't heard any more. Can't imagine him getting permission unless they find a loophole to force the issue. Imagine the interest that would generate with the public.
Hi Maggie,,come to think of it,,I too remember Jeremy preparing himself for an interview,,silly me.
However,,if the relatives got wind of it,they'd put the blockers on it,,and because there hasn't been any more mention of it,,that's probably what's happened. What's it got to do with them anyway.? They've more than had their say,,let Jeremy give his side and let the public decide. Can't be fairer than that.
-
Hi Maggie,,come to think of it,,I too remember Jeremy preparing himself for an interview,,silly me.
However,,if the relatives got wind of it,they'd put the blockers on it,,and because there hasn't been any more mention of it,,that's probably what's happened. What's it got to do with them anyway.? They've more than had their say,,let Jeremy give his side and let the public decide. Can't be fairer than that.
Think its a bit like the lie detector lookout, it took years to get permission for that, cant imagine them ever allowing an interview but its worth a try I suppose. ;)
-
Hi, personally I cannot agree with Lugg's opinion that the Pathologist told the ENTIRE truth. Not only him, but the ENTIRE motley crew of the officers present at the CONTRIVED Crime Scene, in the Master Bedroom, at WHF uwere lying. I do feel there is significance that The Pathologist was NOT 'invited to the Crime Scene'.
Whose idea was it to contrive the situation which required the placing of the bloodied Bible adjacent to Sheila's arm?Presumably this scenario was set to create a photographic record that Sheila was not of sound mind.
So, whose bloodied palm print was made on the Opened Bible?
So, why were there no records of type of blood, or hand print marks?
It begs the question as to whether one of those present, when Sheila was accidentally, and actually shot dead by the bullet in the breech of the rifle (which hadn't been checked out), was responsible for their blood being on the open pages of the Bible.
Who might that officer have been? I fear Steve was not privy to this contrived evidence.
-
Another 12 months on from the tragedy would have seen the breakthrough of DNA testing,which would have had it solved overnight.
I often wonder if it had been Jeremy who " found " that silencer in the cupboard,that people would have accused him of having a vested interest,,,but look who did " find " it. Did they have a vested interest also.??? You bet. Did the court know.? Questionable.
-
Hi, personally I cannot agree with Lugg's opinion that the Pathologist told the ENTIRE truth. Not only him, but the ENTIRE motley crew of the officers present at the CONTRIVED Crime Scene, in the Master Bedroom, at WHF uwere lying. I do feel there is significance that The Pathologist was NOT 'invited to the Crime Scene'.
Whose idea was it to contrive the situation which required the placing of the bloodied Bible adjacent to Sheila's arm?Presumably this scenario was set to create a photographic record that Sheila was not of sound mind.
So, whose bloodied palm print was made on the Opened Bible?
So, why were there no records of type of blood, or hand print marks?
It begs the question as to whether one of those present, when Sheila was accidentally, and actually shot dead by the bullet in the breech of the rifle (which hadn't been checked out), was responsible for their blood being on the open pages of the Bible.
Who might that officer have been? I fear Steve was not privy to this contrived evidence.
I said that the pathologist DIDN'T tell the whole truth campion.
-
Another 12 months on from the tragedy would have seen the breakthrough of DNA testing,which would have had it solved overnight.
I often wonder if it had been Jeremy who " found " that silencer in the cupboard,that people would have accused him of having a vested interest,,,but look who did " find " it. Did they have a vested interest also.??? You bet. Did the court know.? Questionable.
Not sure about that Lookout, I thought the DNA breakthrough came in the 90's not long after the gross misconduct of destroying the evidence in 1996. Although I do believe DNA was around and some tests which were being done prior to that, but no idea what....Webster left his position just after 1985/6 to work with DNA...so it was around, but I don't think the breakthrough of DNA profiling came till later...or the LCN DNA....I'll have a google lol ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Will you please refer back to you Post #468.
-
Will you please refer back to you Post #468.
This is what I said Personally I don't think the pathologists statement told the entire truth.
-
That first shot that Sheila had in the neck,,,from what distance does anyone think it occurred.? Is it recorded at all.?
-
Lookout,IIRC the first shot was deemed close contact but not quite contact.
-
Lookout,IIRC the first shot was deemed close contact but not quite contact.
So how the HELL could Jeremy possibly have shot her in the neck from a standing position if she was where Steve SAID she was. However, and THANKYOU Steve for it, when I imagine Jeremy getting close enough to a living person to AMOST touch them with the rifle before pulling the trigger, and witnessing the fear in their eyes, I'm UTTERLY convinced he didn't do it.
-
Lookout,IIRC the first shot was deemed close contact but not quite contact.
How the HELL could Jeremy have shot her in the neck from a standing position if she was where Steve SAYS she was? However, and THANKYOU Steve, when I'm forced to think of Jeremy being close enough to ALMOST touch her with the rifle and see the pleading in her eyes, I'm utterly convinced he didn't do it.
-
Lookout,IIRC the first shot was deemed close contact but not quite contact.
Thanks,tyler,,just a thought.I wondered if you realised what I'm edging toward.?
Sort of from one corner of the kitchen to the " target ".
-
Thanks,tyler,,just a thought.I wondered if you realised what I'm edging toward.?
Sort of from one corner of the kitchen to the " target ".
Because there's every possibility that Neville made that first shot.
-
So that first shot on Sheilas' neck was about 3 or 4 inches away. Easily done if the shooter is in a seated position with the perpetrator standing over him,,but not easy with a rifle to inflict oneself. My guess is that Neville had hold of the rifle at this point after having been badly injured himself.
Fingerprints of an unknown origin and also blood was found on the rifle butt.To my knowledge,Nevilles' hand/s weren't forensically tested for lead,,unless Essex police know differently in their " hidden files " which they won't release.?
That second shot to Sheila wasn't done by herself. I would say it happened about 7.30/8.45am. Jeremy was outside,shivering in the cold.
-
Hi, personally I cannot agree with Lugg's opinion that the Pathologist told the ENTIRE truth. Not only him, but the ENTIRE motley crew of the officers present at the CONTRIVED Crime Scene, in the Master Bedroom, at WHF uwere lying. I do feel there is significance that The Pathologist was NOT 'invited to the Crime Scene'.
Whose idea was it to contrive the situation which required the placing of the bloodied Bible adjacent to Sheila's arm?Presumably this scenario was set to create a photographic record that Sheila was not of sound mind.
So, whose bloodied palm print was made on the Opened Bible?
So, why were there no records of type of blood, or hand print marks?
It begs the question as to whether one of those present, when Sheila was accidentally, and actually shot dead by the bullet in the breech of the rifle (which hadn't been checked out), was responsible for their blood being on the open pages of the Bible.
Who might that officer have been? I fear Steve was not privy to this contrived evidence.
Hi Campion, the dimensions of the bible make it VERY unlikely that a man was responsible for the print - it had to be someone with 'slender' hands.
-
How the HELL could Jeremy have shot her in the neck from a standing position if she was where Steve SAYS she was? However, and THANKYOU Steve, when I'm forced to think of Jeremy being close enough to ALMOST touch her with the rifle and see the pleading in her eyes, I'm utterly convinced he didn't do it.
But she wasn't in a normal frame of mind,which is how Jeremy left her on the Tuesday evening and telephoned Julie to say "tonight's the night..it's now or never.." We have been told Sheila was vacant,she was staring into space,not fully cognizant of what was going on. Under those circumstances it would be easy to spin a lie to her about intruders,to just sit in the corner whilst Jeremy would sort it out..
-
But she wasn't in a normal frame of mind,which is how Jeremy left her on the Tuesday evening and telephoned Julie to say "tonight's the night..it's now or never.." We been told Sheila was vacant,she was staring into space,not fully cognizant of what was going on. Under those circumstances t would be easy to spin a lie to her about intruders,to just sit in the corner whilst Jeremy would sort it out..
Steve,,Sheila had been vacant from the time she was dropped off at WHF for the last time. Even round the shops she wasn't " with it ".Then the final straw was the poor electric man who she frightened to death.
-
But she wasn't in a normal frame of mind,which is how Jeremy left her on the Tuesday evening and telephoned Julie to say "tonight's the night..it's now or never.." We been told Sheila was vacant,she was staring into space,not fully cognizant of what was going on. Under those circumstances t would be easy to spin a lie to her about intruders,to just sit in the corner whilst Jeremy would sort it out..
Do you EVER answer a question that is asked of you? It may amuse you to be obtuse, but I find it both irritating and discourteous to be replied to with an answer which has absolutely NO relationship to the point I made. Please refer to Post 481.
-
Steve,,Sheila had been vacant from the time she was dropped off at WHF for the last time. Even round the shops she wasn't " with it ".Then the final straw was the poor electric man who she frightened to death.
But he was an intruder. Far be it from me to give a detailed diagnosis of another person's schizophrenia but it was strangers whom Sheila didn't like. When she recognized Nevill at the Maida Vale flat during one of the bouts of psychoses she was miraculously transformed according to witnesses.
-
But he was an intruder. Far be it from me to give a detailed diagnosis of another person's schizophrenia but it was strangers whom Sheila didn't like. When she recognized Nevill at the Maida Vale flat during one of the bouts of psychoses she was miraculously transformed according to witnesses.
That's exactly how schizophrenics are,Steve. Until her father " let her down " over his agreement of the twins future.! Then the tables turned.He wasn't any longer the person she felt safe with,,he was on " their side " and not hers.
-
That's exactly how schizophrenics are,Steve. Until her father " let her down " over his agreement of the twins future.! Then the tables turned.He wasn't any longer the person she felt safe with,,he was on " their side " and not hers.
It would be out of character for someone who talked to Sheila for hours on the telephone in an attempt to reassure her suddenly on Tuesday night became high-handed about his daughter's parenting skills,when a few hours later all were dead meaning we only have Jeremy's word for what pertained on that fateful evening.
-
So how the HELL could Jeremy possibly have shot her in the neck from a standing position if she was where Steve SAID she was. However, and THANKYOU Steve for it, when I imagine Jeremy getting close enough to a living person to AMOST touch them with the rifle before pulling the trigger, and witnessing the fear in their eyes, I'm UTTERLY convinced he didn't do it.
Jeremy could have led her by the hand from her bedroom with a story that there were intruders in the house and then shot her as she lay down in the master bedroom. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
-
It would be out of character for someone who talked to Sheila for hours on the telephone in an attempt to reassure her suddenly on Tuesday night became high-handed about his daughter's parenting skills,when a few hours later all were dead meaning we only have Jeremy's word for what pertained on that fateful evening.
Have you taken a look at WHY Nevill may have changed tack? A few days of Sheila taking little/NO responsibility for the twins, taking no interest in helping June in the house, MAY have had some bearing on it.
-
It would be out of character for someone who talked to Sheila for hours on the telephone in an attempt to reassure her suddenly on Tuesday night became high-handed about his daughter's parenting skills,when a few hours later all were dead meaning we only have Jeremy's word for what pertained on that fateful evening.
No it wouldn't, I would guess that Neville was tired out from harvesting, and irritated beyond belief by his daughters withdrawal and lack of connection while they tried to sort out the dreadful mess her life had become.
He wouldn't realise any more than you do that her apathy and withdrawal was signalling she was in a psychotic state and could have a full blown aggressive psychotic episode at any moment.
I would think he just wanted some sort of agreement before he could take the dogs out and then climb into bed ready for the next long day in the fields.
It was possibly this irritation which BW sensed when she telephoned him.
-
Jeremy could have led her by the hand from her bedroom with a story that there were intruders in the house and then shot her as she lay down in the master bedroom. I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Steve, I'm truly not surprised that you're "not sure what" I'm "getting at." It's part of what I see as your inability to "feel" a situation. THINK, STEVE, PLEASE. There is this mentally fragile girl whose world is falling apart and she finds herself confronted by an intruder wearing a wetsuit, Marigold gloves, and a fake tan, and she takes his hand, follows him to another bedroom, lays down and allows him to shoot her. I DON'T THINK SO.........................however, please humour me. YOU take the gun. YOU direct this girl you've grown up with to lay down on the floor. YOU place it so close to her skin it's all but touching. She looks at you, her eyes are pleading, she's terrified. She is your SISTER, she has always been a part of your life even before YOU were a part of hers. You played/argued together as children. You enjoyed the company of her and her London friends when you were older. She may have irritated the life out of you from time to time but you shared such WONDERFUL Christmas's together. What has she EVER done to you that she deserves to die for. Can YOU pull that trigger? All those memories with ALL those people, not just once, Steve, 5 TIMES!!!!!!!!!!! If ANY part of this makes sense I can recommend the therapist I used. I don't consider MY mental health to be in question because I needed their services.
-
Steve, I'm truly not surprised that you're "not sure what" I'm "getting at." It's part of what I see as your inability to "feel" a situation. THINK, STEVE, PLEASE. There is this mentally fragile girl whose world is falling apart and she finds herself confronted by an intruder wearing a wetsuit, Marigold gloves, and a fake tan, and she takes his hand, follows him to another bedroom, lays down and allows him to shoot her. I DON'T THINK SO.........................however, please humour me. YOU take the gun. YOU direct this girl you've grown up with to lay down on the floor. YOU place it so close to her skin it's all but touching. She looks at you, her eyes are pleading, she's terrified. She is your SISTER, she has always been a part of your life even before YOU were a part of hers. You played/argued together as children. You enjoyed the company of her and her London friends when you were older. She may have irritated the life out of you from time to time but you shared such WONDERFUL Christmas's together. What has she EVER done to you that she deserves to die for. Can YOU pull that trigger? All those memories with ALL those people, not just once, Steve, 5 TIMES!!!!!!!!!!! If ANY part of this makes sense I can recommend the therapist I used. I don't consider MY mental health to be in question because I needed their services.
Well Jeremy had doubts as to his ability to commit the crimes but he did practise on rats first. It didn't help that his sexuality was questioned in certain quarters and in this sense he was overcompensating for the perceived loss of his manhood by the slayings.
-
steve why would Sheila lie down in the bedroom on Jeremy's command more nonsense me thinks :'(
-
Well Jeremy had doubts as to his ability to commit the crimes but he did practise on rats first. It didn't help that his sexuality was questioned in certain quarters and in this sense he was overcompensating for the perceived loss of his manlihood by the slayings.
The WORD according to Julie again. As for the rest you're following your usual pattern. When unable to respond with sense, you resort to BOLLOX.
-
Well Jeremy had doubts as to his ability to commit the crimes but he did practise on rats first. It didn't help that his sexuality was questioned in certain quarters and in this sense he was overcompensating for the perceived loss of his manlihood by the slayings.
Sorry but this is complete and utter rubbish
-
Sorry but this is complete and utter rubbish
Bash head against a wall, do a twirl and pass out....Strewth! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Sorry but this is complete and utter rubbish
And I think that one of Steve's favoured putdowns can be used to describe it. PSYCHOBABBLE ;D
-
Sorry but this is complete and utter rubbish
What is Steve ON????!!!!!
-
What is Steve ON????!!!!!
Something pretty thought distorting, Maggie. Perhaps it's a picture of Julie ;D
-
It was all a bit of a joke to Jeremy,which is why such a nonentity had the temerity to carry it out in the first place. He was a relentless tease at Gresham's,he rode a bicycle round in circles at Ann Eaton,he played practical jokes on friends for a giggle,anything to relieve the monotony of working life on the Farm. Nobody read the signals,the parents did care but they didn't act as if they did care,they were not tactile and as Jeremy moved from one closed institution to another and witnessed the failing health of those around him he must have sought a way out of it,though even he himself baulked at the ultimate solution,one of actively killing them all by gunfire and not passively standing by as the Farm burned down with his parents inside.
-
It was all a bit of a joke to Jeremy,which is why such a nonentity had the temerity to carry it out in the first place. He was a relentless tease at Gresham's,he rode a bicycle round in circles at Ann Eaton,he played practical jokes on friends for a giggle,anything to relieve the monotony of working life on the Farm. Nobody read the signals,the parents did care but they didn't act as if they did care,they were not tactile and as Jeremy moved from one closed institution to another and witnessed the failing health of those around him he must have sought a way out of it,though even he himself baulked at the ultimate solution,one of actively killing them all by gunfire and not passively standing by as the Farm burned down with his parents inside.
I'm wondering why you refer constantly to Jeremy as a "Nonentity" and if it's a feeling you've experienced. Since when did a boy being a tease become a hanging offence. A little levity hurts no one, Steve. I wonder also, to which "signals" you refer. Had it been a question of Jeremy being the "good" child to Sheila's "naughty" child, there wouldn't have been any signals from Jeremy. That's the way it is in the "good/"naughty" child scenario. I believe that Jeremy's prep school was a day school. To my knowledge he only ever attended ONE boarding school. You resort to "Juliespeak" which could be entered in the NED as a new word for LIAR, IMO.
-
Has anyone listened to the 4 audio extracts of Jeremy that were recorded courtesy of the Daily Mirror Jan. 2011.? If not,,they're worth listening to. They're only short extracts,but he gives more of an insight into the " non-use " of a silencer,,and also the difference between a silencer and a moderator.
-
April,you have forgotten the mask that Jeremy told Julie he would wear! So according to Steve,JB led Sheila from her bed telling her there were intruders at the farm,whilst wearing wetsuit,marigolds and a MASK and she obediently went with him with no reaction whilst stepping over June's bloodied deceased body and sat/laid down whilst he shot her? I would have thought someone entering Sheila's bedroom in the middle of the night wearing a mask would be enough to give the poor girl a heart attack!
-
april we forgot the mask the old grandma at the window would never have been able to identify this strange man in wetsuit marigold glove and a mask on a ladies bike steve was right to say it would have been a waste of time bringing her forward as a witness for the prosecution but then again maybe not it would be in keeping with the other evidence ;D ;D ;D
-
April,you have forgotten the mask that Jeremy told Julie he would wear! So according to Steve,JB led Sheila from her bed telling her there were intruders at the farm,whilst wearing wetsuit,marigolds and a MASK and she obediently went with him with no reaction whilst stepping over June's bloodied deceased body and sat/laid down whilst he shot her? I would have thought someone entering Sheila's bedroom in the middle of the night wearing a mask would be enough to give the poor girl a heart attack!
Hi Tyler....I wont answer for April.. ;D ;D ;D
I am answering you regarding something that was discussed last night....
Jeremy stated in his statement that " About 3 years ago my mother had a bout of depression after my grandmother had died and she was admitted to a nursing home. My mother felt guilty about that and turned to religion. She was doing too much and exhausted herself and was admitted to St Andrew's clinic and was still receiving medical treatment up to the 6th Aug 1985 which helped to remain a stable person."
Thought it might help.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
April,you have forgotten the mask that Jeremy told Julie he would wear! So according to Steve,JB led Sheila from her bed telling her there were intruders at the farm,whilst wearing wetsuit,marigolds and a MASK and she obediently went with him with no reaction whilst stepping over June's bloodied deceased body and sat/laid down whilst he shot her? I would have thought someone entering Sheila's bedroom in the middle of the night wearing a mask would be enough to give the poor girl a heart attack!
Tyler, I HAD forgotten the mask, more to the point, I rather think Steve may have, too. We must remember though that we don't know that Jeremy told Julie, but we DO know that Julie SAID Jeremy told her. Why do you think he went to the trouble of covering himself with fake tan if he wore a mask. Perhaps he thought the tan was unflattering ;D ;D ;D
-
Tyler, I HAD forgotten the mask, more to the point, I rather think Steve may have, too. We must remember though that we don't know that Jeremy told Julie, but we DO know that Julie SAID Jeremy told her. Why do you think he went to the trouble of covering himself with fake tan if he wore a mask. Perhaps he thought the tan was unflattering ;D ;D ;D
What sort of a mask.? A Halloween one.?
-
Hi Tyler....I wont answer for April.. ;D ;D ;D
I am answering you regarding something that was discussed last night....
Jeremy stated in his statement that " About 3 years ago my mother had a bout of depression after my grandmother had died and she was admitted to a nursing home. My mother felt guilty about that and turned to religion. She was doing too much and exhausted herself and was admitted to St Andrew's clinic and was still receiving medical treatment up to the 6th Aug 1985 which helped to remain a stable person."
Thought it might help.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
Patti, was Jeremy saying that June was receiving psych treatment until DAYS before the tragedy?
-
Hi Tyler....I wont answer for April.. ;D ;D ;D
I am answering you regarding something that was discussed last night....
Jeremy stated in his statement that " About 3 years ago my mother had a bout of depression after my grandmother had died and she was admitted to a nursing home. My mother felt guilty about that and turned to religion. She was doing too much and exhausted herself and was admitted to St Andrew's clinic and was still receiving medical treatment up to the 6th Aug 1985 which helped to remain a stable person."
Thought it might help.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
Hi Patti, when I read that before I took it as meaning she was still on medication??
-
What sort of a mask.? A Halloween one.?
One of Julie's face pack masks.? ;D
-
Hi Patti, when I read that before I took it as meaning she was still on medication??
I think that's how I interpretate it Maggie... :) :) :) :)
-
he rode a bicycle round in circles at Ann Eaton... He played practical jokes on friends...
"WE are NOT amused"
-
I know June was receiving treatment a couple of years before Jeremy was adopted. I wonder if Jeremys' birth parents were aware of this.?
-
Patti, was Jeremy saying that June was receiving psych treatment until DAYS before the tragedy?
Sorry April did not see your post....I am very naughty for doing that...I do hope folk don't think I am ignoring them...but I do get side tracked... :(
I think it must mean medication April... ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Tyler....I wont answer for April.. ;D ;D ;D
I am answering you regarding something that was discussed last night....
Jeremy stated in his statement that " About 3 years ago my mother had a bout of depression after my grandmother had died and she was admitted to a nursing home. My mother felt guilty about that and turned to religion. She was doing too much and exhausted herself and was admitted to St Andrew's clinic and was still receiving medical treatment up to the 6th Aug 1985 which helped to remain a stable person."
Thought it might help.... ;D ;D ;D ;D
So this would be the paternal grandmother?
What was June feeling guilty about? Being depressed or the death of the grandmother?!
Does that mean she wasn't heavily religious before that?!
June was on medication too perhaps?!!
Interesting.
-
I know June was receiving treatment a couple of years before Jeremy was adopted. I wonder if Jeremys' birth parents were aware of this.?
I doubt it Lookout..in fact they were never interested. Sadly in their eyes he does not exist...... :(
-
"WE are NOT amused"
Apologies, Your Majesty ;D
-
I think that's how I interpretate it Maggie... :) :) :) :)
Hi Patti, when I read that before I took it as meaning she was still on medication??
Maggie/Patti, but it seems she was ill enough to be taken back to St Andrews again.
-
So this would be the paternal grandmother?
What was June feeling guilty about? Being depressed or the death of the grandmother?!
Does that mean she wasn't heavily religious before that?!
June was on medication too perhaps?!!
Interesting.
Yes
Difficult to say but parallel to this were Sheila's ongoing problems which must have contributed.
June was "into" religion well before that, it may have been linked to her depression.
There is every possibility that June had been on some long term meds. Who would have known?
-
Poor June was really slaughtered.There's a thread from 13th of October 2011 which is headed " Crime scene around June Bamber ",,and as Roch had pointed out,it was strange,,given the amount of blood around,,that no mans' footprint was to be seen on the carpet anywhere. Also,,another strange thing that both June and Sheila were pretty close together in the same room.
-
Maggie/Patti, but it seems she was ill enough to be taken back to St Andrews again.
According to Jeremy his mother was admitted to St Andrews following the death of his grandmother...She died in December 1981, so this would be in 1982...
Not sure what you mean April about she was ill enough to be taken back to St Andrew's....Jeremy goes on to say that his mother was still having medical treatment (meds we think) up to the day she died....
Are you saying that if she had not died there would be a chance that she could have been admitted again? Its been a long and I am about done in....so I apologise if I am not grasping it.....sowwy! :) :) :) :)
-
So this would be the paternal grandmother?
What was June feeling guilty about? Being depressed or the death of the grandmother?!
Does that mean she wasn't heavily religious before that?!
June was on medication too perhaps?!!
Interesting.
Yes Nevill's mother. Reading between the lines I think Jeremy was trying to say that his mother felt guilty that she was placed in a nursing home and that she was unable to look after her herself...
I'm unsure of when June took an interest in religion, but Jeremy says that after this June turned to religion.... :-\ :-\ :) :)
-
Poor June was really slaughtered.There's a thread from 13th of October 2011 which is headed " Crime scene around June Bamber ",,and as Roch had pointed out,it was strange,,given the amount of blood around,,that no mans' footprint was to be seen on the carpet anywhere. Also,,another strange thing that both June and Sheila were pretty close together in the same room.
Don't forget the blue socks.
She (Sheila) could have been wearing them - hence no footprints.
The whole photographed scene was tampered with and set by EP.
So, they could quite easily have removed the socks from her and placed them 'just so', just how they did with the rifle and everything else.
-
Thanks for that Patti. x
-
Don't forget the blue socks.
She (Sheila) could have been wearing them - hence no footprints.
The whole photographed scene was tampered with and set by EP.
So, they could quite easily have removed the socks from her and placed them 'just so', just how they did with the rifle and everything else.
Yes,HME,,I thought of that with the socks,as they're in the room. Of course everything was tampered with. I even read that one or two officers didn't even see any rifle around.!
-
That doesn't make sense does it? Why would EP "stage" the socks when in the beginning they believed Sheila was the murderer? They wasn't trying to frame JB at that stage.
-
That doesn't make sense does it? Why would EP "stage" the socks when in the beginning they believed Sheila was the murderer? They wasn't trying to frame JB at that stage.
Nothing makes sense it you think about it.
It wasn't just the socks, but the bible, rifle and Sheila's hands too.
They weren't trying to frame JB at that stage, it was four murders and suicide. So what were they doing?
-
Imo they were covering up something that went badly wrong during the raid.
-
Imo they were covering up something that went badly wrong during the raid.
Which is what Mike claims, When you look at the complete picture it does seem to make sense that there could have been some sort of cover up.
-
This is old news,from 2011,but it quotes Professor Macdonell saying that he could have been wrong when he concluded in his report that Sheila was murdered. An interesting piece and well worth a read.
http://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-will-set-me-free
-
Tyler,,nearly everyone but Stan Jones and the relatives realised that there was something wrong. It's no wonder that none of the cowards will come forward after all these years.
Lord knows, there's been enough publicity over the years about police corruption
How can anyone charge a man for such a massacre within 19 days.? There was no background taken on each individual in which to build any sort of a case,,they had Jeremy pinned right from the start,,24hrs after the murders,in fact. It's something that had to be studied closely,and that was NEVER done.
-
I think Macdonell's report is actually more damning toward EP than it is Jeremy!
-
This is old news,from 2011,but it quotes Professor Macdonell saying that he could have been wrong when he concluded in his report that Sheila was murdered. An interesting piece and well worth a read.
http://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-will-set-me-free
Thank for that Tyler....I think Wilkes might have to re-write his book. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Haha Patti. I think that someone is doing/done that for him!
-
Haha Patti. I think that someone is doing/done that for him!
LOL....Our lovely Stevie Baby.. ;) ;) ;)
Well if you look at the Mcdonnell report he sends the report to Robinson Publishers....You know I am a bugger for research so I found out the publisher published Wilkes's book...I wrote to N. Robinson and he was quite happy to tell me that they had paid Mcdonnell to do the research and Jeremy provided the photographs....The deal was that Robinson paid for it and took sole ownership of the report and its findings were published in Wilkes book.....Jeremy had agreed to this in hope that it might help his case....and at this time Jeremy had little or no money.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Hi Patti. Yes,I was aware of the details. Btw, I wasn't referring to Steve, I had meant Mason Doyle,but never mind lol
-
Hi Patti. Yes,I was aware of the details. Btw, I wasn't referring to Steve, I had meant Mason Doyle,but never mind lol
Two great minds here Tyler...I do tend to stray where you always stay on track....Wonder when this book is going to be published? Is there anyway we could find out about books that are in the pipeline????? He/she did say sometime in the autumn :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ x
-
He did say Autumn didn't he. I am hoping it will be this year as have been excited all summer! It will be so nice to have something fresh to read,thanks to Steve I know Wilkes' book off by heart! Wonder what conclusion MD has come to,if any?
Hi tyler, yes he did say this Autumn, am looking forward to it too. :) :)
-
Hi tyler yes Mason Doyle did say the book would be published in Autumn. So excited must buy some reading glasses ;D
-
I must just point out how meticulous AE was. During one of her " searches " whilst at WHF,,she came upon a cobweb ( I kid you not ) with a bloodstain on it,,so it was immediately reported to COLP.!
The said cobweb was above the hinges inside a cupboard which she was clearing.
DCI O'Connor thought it would be helpful,so proceeded to record the finding. This was in 1991,so he said it would be analysed to see if it had any bearing on the 1985 murders.
However,,DI Harper was brought in to attend to the findings of the cobweb and decided that a visit to WHF would be in order to examine the cobweb.! The sample would then be retained for analysis. ;D ;D
-
BTW,,this was " new evidence " that was uncovered. An urgent request.! 1991. An effing cobweb.! ::) ::)
-
I think that was in the gun ccupboard. Funnily enough we didn't get to hear what the results of the tests were!
-
I think that was in the gun ccupboard. Funnily enough we didn't get to hear what the results of the tests were!
Not another thing about this " new evidence ",tyler.
-
I think that was in the gun ccupboard. Funnily enough we didn't get to hear what the results of the tests were!
I can think of only one reason why!!
-
Hi lookout you are cracking me up cobweb indeed ;D heard it all now ;D
-
According to Jeremy his mother was admitted to St Andrews following the death of his grandmother...She died in December 1981, so this would be in 1982...
Not sure what you mean April about she was ill enough to be taken back to St Andrew's....Jeremy goes on to say that his mother was still having medical treatment (meds we think) up to the day she died....
Are you saying that if she had not died there would be a chance that she could have been admitted again? Its been a long and I am about done in....so I apologise if I am not grasping it.....sowwy! :) :) :) :)
Yes and in Claire Powell's book it suggests that these tranquillizers of June's were going to be crushed into Nevill's gin and tonic by Jeremy so there goes ngb1066's indictment of Julie for a burton. As for lack of footprints June was shot in bed whilst Jeremy was in the doorway,but he realized he had missed out on the fun and made the last shot right between the forehead so he could take one last look at her. He wasn't going to see any of them again,he was in full control as all his actions pointed to from then on forward.
-
BTW,,this was " new evidence " that was uncovered. An urgent request.! 1991. An effing cobweb.! ::) ::)
Wouldn't you have thought she'd have had cleaners in by then. She could certainly have afforded them.
-
april could she not do any cleaning herself I would be ashamed to talk about my cobwebs ;D ;D ;D
-
Yes and in Claire Powell's book it suggests that these tranquillizers of June's were going to be crushed into Nevill's gin and tonic by Jeremy so there goes ngb1066's indictment of Julie for a burton. As for lack of footprints June was shot in bed whilst Jeremy was in the doorway,but he realized he had missed out on the fun and made the last shot right between the forehead so he could take one last look at her. He wasn't going to see any of them again,he was in full control as all his actions pointed to from then on forward.
Apart from the obvious question of HOW THE HELL DID CLAIRE POWELL KNOW, it occurs to me that June may have been on trancs for a VERY long time. I know there was one of that generation of trancs, Librium/Valium I think, that were addictive.
-
april could she not do any cleaning herself I would be ashamed to talk about my cobwebs ;D ;D ;D
I guess not, Susan but I'm afraid I don't buy into the same bloodied cobweb being in situ for 5/6 years.
-
steve I am sorry but I think you are well out of order by using the word "fun" in any post to do with the deaths of the Bamber family whoever shot June was not doing it for fun. :'(
-
Hello april the cobweb is just a load of nonsense :'( totally ridiculous to say the least. What next I ask myself.
-
steve I am sorry but I think you are well out of order by using the word "fun" in any post to do with the deaths of the Bamber family whoever shot June was not doing it for fun. :'(
Susan, I imagine that he's getting revenge for what is said here about Julie, but when all is said and done, which ever way you look at it, Julie had herself ENORMOUS fun at Jeremy's expence and, IMO, would have carried on doing so had she received a proposal of marrriage.
-
Well I withdraw "fun" if it causes offence,but I still think the murders were all rather a game to Jeremy:the dropping of clues to Ann Eaton that they would soon both be in charge of the caravan park,the remark to Uncle Bobby that he could "easily kill his parents",the tense atmosphere in the household with June moping around and an apprehensive Nevill speculating about the shooting season coming up,Jeremy telling Julie the "old man put up a good fight" as if he were witnessing second hand two boxers on the television instead of being the instigator himself,the situation he found himself in of being the sole beneficiary of the will and the sense of power he felt over the relatives who were at a loss at knowing what to do;the nudge nudge wink wink atmosphere typical of Jeremy asserted itself in this time of dreadful torment and anguish for all save Jeremy.
-
Well I withdraw "fun" if it causes offence,but I still think the murders were all rather a game to Jeremy:the dropping clues to Ann Eaton that they would soon both be in charge of the caravan park,the remark to Uncle Bobby that he could "easily kill his parents",the tense atmosphere in the household with June moping around and an apprehensive Nevill speculating about the shooting season coming up,Jeremy telling Julie the "old man put up a good fight" as if he were witnessing second hand two boxers on the television instead of being the instigator himself,the situation he found himself in of being the sole beneficiary of the will and the sense of power he felt over the relatives who were at a loss at knowing what to do;the nudge nudge wink wink atmosphere typical of Jeremy asserted itself in this time of dreadful torment and anguish for all save Jeremy.
Steve, if we look a little deeper than YOU generally look, I think you'll find that in the course of time, other than Sheila being provided for and possibly atrust fund for the children, Jeremy would STILL have ended up with the lion's share to do with AS HE PLEASED. I think he can be forgiven feeling a sense of power over those people who had never seen him as one of "them", an uncle who had long dropped poison in his father's ear, possibly HOPING to get him disinherited, cousins who may have grown up being told that if it wasn't for "those two" the bulk of what June and Nevill left would ultimately be theirs.
-
Steve, if we look a little deeper than YOU generally look, I think you'll find that in the course of time, other than Sheila being provided for and possibly atrust fund for the children, Jeremy would STILL have ended up with the lion's share to do with AS HE PLEASED. I think he can be forgiven feeling a sense of power over those people who had never seen him as one of "them", an uncle who had long dropped poison in his father's ear, possibly HOPING to get him disinherited, cousins who may have grown up being told that if it wasn't for "those two" the bulk of what June and Nevill left would ultimately be theirs.
Yes but Jeremy lived for the moment,that was his character and after eight stuffy years at Gresham's he wasn't going to do what his parents told him any more. Of course there was tension in his inner reasoning because he knew if he pushed too far June might well disinherit him in favour of the twins(as recounted by Mary Mugford) or the Church. Nevill's will already tied Jeremy to the Farm which is why he had to give the outward appearance of settling down that past year,but his real feelings were expressed to Liz Rimington when he told her:"It's important to have money whilst you're young".
-
steve you using the word fun in describing the death of June Bamber does not offend me as it is very difficult for anyone to offend me I would not allow it. I think it is disrespectful to the dead. Everything you are saying is either hearsay from relatives who did stand to benefit from Jeremy being convicted or snippets from books written. How can anyone find it a game killing 5 members of the same family in such a frenzied manner two of them being small children I fail to see how you can say what was going on in the head of the person who carried out this horrendous crime. Mason's Doyle's book will be published shortly and it will be based on fact not hearsay so we are all interested in the contents and if favourable to Jeremy Bamber how you will react to it.
-
steve what one persons perception of having money is can be very different from another. Let us say a person has £1 then they inherit £100 they have money but by the same token if a person has £100.000 and inherits £100 it is nothing.
-
Yes but Jeremy lived for the moment,that was his character and after eight stuffy years at Gresham's he wasn't going to do what his parents told him any more. Of course there was tension in his inner reasoning because he knew if he pushed too far June might well disinherit him in favour of the twins(as recounted by Mary Mugford) or the Church. Nevill's will already tied Jeremy to the Farm which is why he had to give the outward appearance of settling down that past year,but his real feelings were expressed to Liz Rimington when he told her:"It's important to have money whilst you're young".
I don't know Steve, I don't think I have ever seen anyone manipulate information quite as blatantly as you do. Are you quite sure you don't write for the SUN?
-
Yes but Jeremy lived for the moment,that was his character and after eight stuffy years at Gresham's he wasn't going to do what his parents told him any more. Of course there was tension in his inner reasoning because he knew if he pushed too far June might well disinherit him in favour of the twins(as recounted by Mary Mugford) or the Church. Nevill's will already tied Jeremy to the Farm which is why he had to give the outward appearance of settling down that past year,but his real feelings were expressed to Liz Rimington when he told her:"It's important to have money whilst you're young".
Steve, STEVE!!!! "Jeremy lived for the moment, that was his character.............." You must have done a 1 hour course on character analysis. I really don't believe it was EVER on the cards that June and Nevill's money would have gone ANYWHERE other than their children. As for Nevill tying Jeremy to the farm, I believe that his last will was written whilst Jeremy was still at school. His thoughts about the importance of having money whilst still young is probably one that is echoed by young everywhere. He MAY actually have been telling her that he HAD money. If Mary was as money oriented as her daughter, I wouldn't have put it past her to ask him about his finances.
Finally Steve, there's an old adage that says that in order to successfully pull wool over someone's eyes, DO IT WITH CONVICTION. Steve, judging by the way you twist and manipulate certain facts, you have honed the art to perfection.
-
Well I withdraw "fun" if it causes offence,but I still think the murders were all rather a game to Jeremy:the dropping of clues to Ann Eaton that they would soon both be in charge of the caravan park,the remark to Uncle Bobby that he could "easily kill his parents",the tense atmosphere in the household with June moping around and an apprehensive Nevill speculating about the shooting season coming up,Jeremy telling Julie the "old man put up a good fight" as if he were witnessing second hand two boxers on the television instead of being the instigator himself,the situation he found himself in of being the sole beneficiary of the will and the sense of power he felt over the relatives who were at a loss at knowing what to do;the nudge nudge wink wink atmosphere typical of Jeremy asserted itself in this time of dreadful torment and anguish for all save Jeremy.
Steve,,the murders certainly weren't a game,especially to Jeremy.He wasn't the one with hang-ups about his adoptive parents being unable to conceive. These murders were out of humiliation towards a couple who couldn't have children,,and the shooter could,,as she made it perfectly clear to show them up right until they drew their last breath,by exposing both parents private areas.Nevilles pyjamas were down by his knees,and Junes underwear had been removed and was left soaking in the bucket containing the rest of the soiled clothes.
This is the most disturbing aspect of these murders,,as well as the fact that Sheila had also mentioned about her sons having sex with her.
-
Yes but Jeremy lived for the moment,that was his character and after eight stuffy years at Gresham's he wasn't going to do what his parents told him any more.
He was doing what they told him!! So that's cobblers (not to be confused with 'cobwebs' but which is also cobblers!! ;D ;D ;D ;D).
Of course there was tension in his inner reasoning because he knew if he pushed too far June might well disinherit him in favour of the twins(as recounted by Mary Mugford) or the Church
And yet there was never ANY mention of this to Basil - Perhaps you should be asking why mother Mugford's first statement was withheld from the defence!!
Nevill's will already tied Jeremy to the Farm which is why he had to give the outward appearance of settling down that past year,but his real feelings were expressed to Liz Rimington when he told her:"It's important to have money whilst you're young".
So what?? He did have money, he had 2 grand in the bank, his own house (newly decorated), a car and plenty of money to STILL enjoy himself and pay for his hangers-on. Liz clung as tightly as the rest - and on one occasion, a little too tightly!! ;D ;D
-
Liz clung as tightly as the rest - and on one occasion, a little too tightly!! ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D!! How very true Caroline ;D ;D ;D
-
He was doing what they told him!! So that's cobblers (not to be confused with 'cobwebs' but which is also cobblers!! ;D ;D ;D ;D).
And yet there was never ANY mention of this to Basil - Perhaps you should be asking why mother Mugford's first statement was withheld from the defence!!
So what?? He did have money, he had 2 grand in the bank, his own house (newly decorated), a car and plenty of money to STILL enjoy himself and pay for his hangers-on. Liz clung as tightly as the rest - and on one occasion, a little too tightly!! ;D ;D
Caroline, it occurs to me that EVERYTHING Steve ACCUSES Jeremy of saying as indicators of his guilt are actually responses to things said by others. So if we take a look at that Oh SO damning "It's important to have money while you're young" the preceding statement could VERY easily, given who we're talking about, have been " Julie tells me you're planning to buy/have bought/are planning to go to/ARE PAYING FOR HER TO..............You're a very lucky young man to be able to do all that at your age." Those damning words now appear to have lost the evil which Steve insists is behind them. I imagine that exactly the same can be done with ALL his soundbites.
-
Caroline, it occurs to me that EVERYTHING Steve ACCUSES Jeremy of saying as indicators of his guilt are actually responses to things said by others. So if we take a look at that Oh SO damning "It's important to have money while you're young" the preceding statement could VERY easily, given who we're talking about, have been " Julie tells me you're planning to buy/have bought/are planning to go to/ARE PAYING FOR HER TO..............You're a very lucky young man to be able to do all that at your age." Those damning words now appear to have lost the evil which Steve insists is behind them. I imagine that exactly the same can be done with ALL his soundbites.
Not sure why he keeps using Liz Rimmington as a pillar of honesty and truth - she slept with her best mates boyfriend!! I think torches were still being carried!!
-
Not sure why he keeps using Liz Rimmington as a pillar of honesty and truth - she slept with her best mates boyfriend!! I think torches were still being carried!!
I think it was an opportunity to get her own back on Mathew and Jeremy in one go......... another woman scorned >:( >:(
This case is littered with them. :o :o
-
Not sure why he keeps using Liz Rimmington as a pillar of honesty and truth - she slept with her best mates boyfriend!! I think torches were still being carried!!
I think it was an opportunity to get her own back on Mathew and Jeremy in one go......... another woman scorned >:( >:(
This case is littered with them. :o :o
Girls, I think the more layers get stripped away, the more incestuous this whole thing becomes. Sexed-up women, encouraged by limitless cannabis, all taking a bite from each others boyfriends behind each others' backs and getting revenge on the ones they find out about. Who was it Steve accused of having fun?
-
Hi Caroline I love that cobblers and Ann's cobwebs what a hoot. ;D ;D ;D
-
It's worth watching the short video on Bambertweets explaining about the bloodied bible.
-
It's worth watching the short video on Bambertweets explaining about the bloodied bible.
Just watched it again, it's crazy that the note and the doily thing just disappeared. How have EP managed to get away with this?
-
Just watched it again, it's crazy that the note and the doily thing just disappeared. How have EP managed to get away with this?
I don't know,Maggie,,but it's not right that the possibility of a " suicide note " has vanished.
-
I don't know,Maggie,,but it's not right that the possibility of a " suicide note " has vanished.
That the sort of thing cops do when they find something that doesn't fit into their own suspicions and theories. Evidence is carelessly lost. Just think of the repercussions if there was a suicide note.
-
That the sort of thing cops do when they find something that doesn't fit into their own suspicions and theories. Evidence is carelessly lost. Just think of the repercussions if there was a suicide note.
Well the police will have to come up with something if this is going to be a pressing issue,Lugg.Whether they like it or not.
-
I think a suicide note would provide the answer for the shootings , for Jeremy to have carried out the shootings he almost certain would need to fake a suicide note himself, its no secret Jeremy writes in capitals, { I have 2 letters from Jeremy } for me I think it would be hard to write in lower case.
-
Paranormal Evidence - Whose Bloodied right hand palm print was left on pages of bible?
I can tell you now that that is a very small hand print. If that Bible was laid on Sheila's chest by Jeremy we must ask the question how did that small palm print get there. I doubt very much that it is Jeremy's?
-
I can tell you now that that is a very small hand print. If that Bible was laid on Sheila's chest by Jeremy we must ask the question how did that small palm print get there. I doubt very much that it is Jeremy's?
It's got to be either Junes' or Sheilas' print.It's not a mans'. The bible was at Sheilas' side one minute,,then on her chest in another report.Same as the position of the rifle,,side first,,then placed on top of the body.
-
I can tell you now that that is a very small hand print. If that Bible was laid on Sheila's chest by Jeremy we must ask the question how did that small palm print get there. I doubt very much that it is Jeremy's?
It's about the same size as mine Lugg and I'm very small - there is no way it's a mans
-
Steve,,the murders certainly weren't a game,especially to Jeremy.He wasn't the one with hang-ups about his adoptive parents being unable to conceive. These murders were out of humiliation towards a couple who couldn't have children,,and the shooter could,,as she made it perfectly clear to show them up right until they drew their last breath,by exposing both parents private areas.Nevilles pyjamas were down by his knees,and Junes underwear had been removed and was left soaking in the bucket containing the rest of the soiled clothes.
This is the most disturbing aspect of these murders,,as well as the fact that Sheila had also mentioned about her sons having sex with her.
We don't know definitively if it was June's underwear or Sheila's. As for Jeremy,one can't help but wonder about the past of a convicted mass murderer. I see him from an early age as not knowing where he came from,alienated from his environment,latching onto June as a child faute de mieux when strangers came to the farm hiding behind her skirts but never able to be taken in her arms for a reassuring hug,a distant father figure,likeable but working all hours on the Farm,then at an age when he's still not bonded with anyone sent away to Gresham's where again he knows nobody and is expected to conform to other people's rules. It's no wonder he couldn't wait to get away and eight years later he does flourish in the less stuffy environment of Colchester College;Jeremy is at least reassured that the fault does not lie with him when he relates at last to his fellow students,though he doesn't really have it up top to get decent A Levels or go on to university.
From this moment on Jeremy is making up for lost time,he lives for the moment and is out of control,though there's always the feeling in the back of his mind that he's got it good which keeps his behaviour in check somewhat,even though he doesn't realize how emotionally damaged he is,used as he has been all his life to hide his true feelings. It was just too much to ask of Jeremy to settle down to farm work with the 24/7 365 days a year culture, and with Nevill showing his age and June and Sheila sinking into madness Jeremy determined to take his destiny in his own hands and commit this opportunistic crime..
-
I think a suicide note would provide the answer for the shootings , for Jeremy to have carried out the shootings he almost certain would need to fake a suicide note himself, its no secret Jeremy writes in capitals, { I have 2 letters from Jeremy } for me I think it would be hard to write in lower case.
You just reminded me;there was a suicide note of sorts written in capitals and numbers,wasn't there?
-
We don't know definitively if it was June's underwear or Sheila's. As for Jeremy,one can't help but wonder about the past of a convicted mass murderer. I see him from an early age as not knowing where he came from,alienated from his environment,latching onto June as a child faute de mieux when strangers came to the farm hiding behind her skirts but never able to be taken in her arms for a reassuring hug,a distant father figure,likeable but working all hours on the Farm,then at an age when he's still not bonded with anyone sent away to Gresham's where again he knows nobody and is expected to conform to other people's rules. It's no wonder he couldn't wait to get away and eight years later he does flourish in the less stuffy environment of Colchester College;Jeremy is at least reassured that the fault does not lie with him when he relates at last to his fellow students,though he doesn't really have it up top to get decent A Levels or go on to university.
From this moment on Jeremy is making up for lost time,he lives for the moment and is out of control,though there's always the feeling in the back of his mind that he's got it good which keeps his behaviour in check somewhat,even though he doesn't realize how emotionally damaged he is,used as he has been all his life to hide his true feelings. It was just too much to ask of Jeremy to settle down to farm work with the 24/7 365 days a year culture, and with Nevill showing his age and June and Sheila sinking into madness Jeremy determined to take his destiny in his own hands and commit this opportunistic crime..
Steve, I'm not certain that you can have "an early age" and "faute de mieux" in the same breath. He wouldn't have understood the concept. It's also more than possible that Jeremy suffered no more emotional damage that other children. Please recall what Larkin says of parents generally!!!! It doesn't follow that children experience the same upbringing, especially so with unrelated siblings.
-
We don't know definitively if it was June's underwear or Sheila's. As for Jeremy,one can't help but wonder about the past of a convicted mass murderer. I see him from an early age as not knowing where he came from,alienated from his environment,latching onto June as a child faute de mieux when strangers came to the farm hiding behind her skirts but never able to be taken in her arms for a reassuring hug,a distant father figure,likeable but working all hours on the Farm,then at an age when he's still not bonded with anyone sent away to Gresham's where again he knows nobody and is expected to conform to other people's rules. It's no wonder he couldn't wait to get away and eight years later he does flourish in the less stuffy environment of Colchester College;Jeremy is at least reassured that the fault does not lie with him when he relates at last to his fellow students,though he doesn't really have it up top to get decent A Levels or go on to university.
From this moment on Jeremy is making up for lost time,he lives for the moment and is out of control,though there's always the feeling in the back of his mind that he's got it good which keeps his behaviour in check somewhat,even though he doesn't realize how emotionally damaged he is,used as he has been all his life to hide his true feelings. It was just too much to ask of Jeremy to settle down to farm work with the 24/7 365 days a year culture, and with Nevill showing his age and June and Sheila sinking into madness Jeremy determined to take his destiny in his own hands and commit this opportunistic crime..
Morning Steve
I don't know where Lookout got that it was June's underwear that was soaking in the buckets or that they had been taken off to show humiliation...because that is not the case. It was Sheila that was having the period and might I add that no private parts were showing from either woman. However NB's PJ bottoms had fallen down, I doubt in a million years that they were yanked down on purpose to show humiliation and they simple fell down due to design.
Regarding the note with capital letters on it and the word please which was in lower case..How can anyone suggest it was a suicide note, what on earth tells anyone that is what it is?
The hand written note between the bible might have been, but that was taken out of the equation in the early days and has never been seen since, which causes one to be suspicious, like with so many things related to this case.
Why people put spin on things I will never know. :) :) :) :)
-
You just reminded me;there was a suicide note of sorts written in capitals and numbers,wasn't there?
There is an indecipherable message but given that it's just numbers and letters, it can't be described as a suicide note. More interestingly, where is the note from the bible?
-
That the sort of thing cops do when they find something that doesn't fit into their own suspicions and theories. Evidence is carelessly lost. Just think of the repercussions if there was a suicide note.
If there were a suicide note it would have saved the Police a lot of embarrassment, as it would have supported their initial theory of four murders and suicide.
I don't, for one second, believe there was a suicide note.
-
If there were a suicide note it would have saved the Police a lot of embarrassment, as it would have supported their initial theory of four murders and suicide.
I don't, for one second, believe there was a suicide note.
Hi Neil
It would have been nice to have seen the note that was in the bible and because this went missing it allows suspicion to seep in....However, we can't discount it not being and we can't say it was...If you know what I mean... :-\ :) :) :)
-
Morning Neil I agree with you I don't think a suicide note existed if it did it would be long gone now :'( I do think the note with the 3's written many times is significant to the case but what it means I am not sure think it has relgious connotations.
-
Morning Patti I would like to know what the note that was in the bible said the fact it went missing makes me want to see it more as it must have had some significance :'(
-
Morning Patti I would like to know what the note that was in the bible said the fact it went missing makes me want to see it more as it must have had some significance :'(
Hi Susan
I think we would all love to see it. No one knows what it said, it could be that June had written it and had placed it in her bible as a reminder of something. It could be that it was a suicide note and the police saw no relevance in it, or it was placed somewhere and forgotten about....whatever it was, it's no longer available and again its gross misconduct to destroy evidence when a man is trying to prove his innocence. Just what were the police thinking about when they made such a decision one only knows....and you would think given the technology we have today, someone would try and decipher what we can see sticking out of the bible....It could be that's its nothing, but it could be that it is.....and because its no longer available we wont ever know....how sad is that...as with all of the evidence Jeremy wont ever be able to help himself or prove his innocence one way or another and I can't understand why this argument isn't pursued in court as gross misconduct. :-\ :) :) :)
-
If there were a suicide note it would have saved the Police a lot of embarrassment, as it would have supported their initial theory of four murders and suicide.
I don't, for one second, believe there was a suicide note.
So why why was the note from the bible never disclosed?
-
Hi Patti I think that the fact the note is no longer available speaks for itself why destroy or loose if it had no significance had the prosecution been able to use it we would have all seen it years ago. Don't think it was a suicide note as such but could have been written by June in which she maybe stated she was concerned about Sheila's behaviour but that is me speculating now bad susan :'(
-
Hi Caroline had the note from the Bible been disclosed it may have helped the Defence and we would not want that would we :'( :'( :'(
-
So why why was the note from the bible never disclosed?
Maybe one of us should write to Essex police or London police and ask them what happened to it....I've wrote once and not got a reply......I don't think their openness is quite open yet...lol :) :) :) :)
-
So why why was the note from the bible never disclosed?
I'll play devil's advocate or as Bridget might have argued ... Just because it wasn't disclosed doesn't mean it was definitely a suicide note.
The Jonestown quote is arguably indicative of a link to suicide though.
-
Steve, I'm not certain that you can have "an early age" and "faute de mieux" in the same breath. He wouldn't have understood the concept. It's also more than possible that Jeremy suffered no more emotional damage that other children. Please recall what Larkin says of parents generally!!!! It doesn't follow that children experience the same upbringing, especially so with unrelated siblings.
..that loneliness,that desperate and all-pervasive loneliness which Jeremy had never known anything else but, and from which he was destined never to escape,from toddler to teen,which hitherto prepared him so well for the rest of his life as adult and for which he ultimately became grateful as the lights went out in that cold,soulless prison cell,which reminded him so easily of his Gresham’s dormitory,and his bedroom at White House Farm..
-
..that loneliness,that desperate and all-pervasive loneliness which Jeremy had never known anything else but, and from which he was destined never to escape,from toddler to teen,which hitherto prepared him so well for the rest of his life as adult and for which he ultimately became grateful as the lights went out in that cold,soulless prison cell,which reminded him so easily of his Gresham’s dormitory,and his bedroom at White House Farm..
Had it existed it would have been recognized during the many conversations he's had with Psychologists over the years. It isn't something which can be hidden and would colour and inform his general conversations.
-
Had it existed it would have been recognized during the many conversations he's had with Psychologists over the years. It isn't something which can be hidden and would colour and inform his general conversations.
But he's hidden his true feelings all his life. As he told Julie "it's important to tell the truth wherever possible" and in this he has obfuscated investigators. The inability to confront his own loathing of his adoptive parents is just one sign that he is a consummate actor.
-
Jones,,of the Jonestown massacre suffered severe schizophrenia,,bi-polar and other disorders which produced paranoia and psychosis. He was known to have also abused a variety of drugs which would have complicated a mental illness or cause other effects on their own.
He had a history of Christianity,,but was trying to pull away from such a religion whith his formation of the Peoples' Temple,,which was a communist movement.
Was Sheila trying to rid herself of the religious fanaticism that her mother instilled.? Was she trying,,in her own way,,to break away from the hold it had on her.?
-
But he's hidden his true feelings all his life. As he told Julie "it's important to tell the truth wherever possible" and in this he has obfuscated investigators. The inability to confront his own loathing of his adoptive parents is just one sign that he is a consummate actor.
You love that phrase 'adoptive parents' don't you Steve. You seem to believe it gives you carte blanche to assume that Jeremy hated and despised June and Neville because there was no blood tie therefore assuming there would not be love.
It's pretty insulting to the millions of adoptive families in this world who don't need blood ties or genetics to love and care for each other, very often the ties are closer than in natural families.
The issues about attachment disorder in many instances do not mean the child does not bond but can cause an 'overbonding' with their adoptive parents and other relationships in their lives, they find it hard to let go of relationships ie Sheila with Colin.
Of course there are some children and parents who have had very difficult adoptive experiences as there are some natural families in a similar situation
It is only in severe attachment disorders and mental health illness that this becomes dangerous.
When an adoptive child has been abused and neglected before adoption there are particular difficulties, some children are so very, very damaged no amount of unconditional love can save them, when this occurs it is a tragedy for parents and children alike and they deserve more respect imo.
I would suggest you do some research into the whole complex subject and the supreme tragedies that can happen through no fault of either the adoptive parents or the adopted child.
Sorry to drag the thread off topic but it needs to be said. :) :)
-
But he's hidden his true feelings all his life. As he told Julie "it's important to tell the truth wherever possible" and in this he has obfuscated investigators. The inability to confront his own loathing of his adoptive parents is just one sign that he is a consummate actor.
Steve, it just isn't possible to hide words which AREN'T said. These are what any Psychologist will be listening for and I refuse to believe that more than 20 got it wrong.
-
You love that phrase 'adoptive parents' don't you Steve. You seem to believe it gives you carte blanche to assume that Jeremy hated and despised June and Neville because there was no blood tie therefore assuming there would not be love.
It's pretty insulting to the millions of adoptive families in this world who don't need blood ties or genetics to love and care for each other, very often the ties are closer than in natural families.
The issues about attachment disorder in many instances do not mean the child does not bond but can cause an 'overbonding' with their adoptive parents and other relationships in their lives, they find it hard to let go of relationships ie Sheila with Colin.
Of course there are some children and parents who have had very difficult adoptive experiences as there are some natural families in a similar situation
It is only in severe attachment disorders and mental health illness that this becomes dangerous.
When an adoptive child has been abused and neglected before adoption there are particular difficulties, some children are so very, very damaged no amount of unconditional love can save them, when this occurs it is a tragedy for parents and children alike and they deserve more respect imo.
I would suggest you do some research into the whole complex subject and the supreme tragedies that can happen through no fault of either the adoptive parents or the adopted child.
Sorry to drag the thread off topic but it needs to be said. :) :)
Brilliant post Maggie and from one that knows.....I'll say this, for those with no experience in these matters, should learn from those that do.. :) :) :) :)
-
You love that phrase 'adoptive parents' don't you Steve. You seem to believe it gives you carte blanche to assume that Jeremy hated and despised June and Neville because there was no blood tie therefore assuming there would not be love.
It's pretty insulting to the millions of adoptive families in this world who don't need blood ties or genetics to love and care for each other, very often the ties are closer than in natural families.
The issues about attachment disorder in many instances do not mean the child does not bond but can cause an 'overbonding' with their adoptive parents and other relationships in their lives, they find it hard to let go of relationships ie Sheila with Colin.
Of course there are some children and parents who have had very difficult adoptive experiences as there are some natural families in a similar situation
It is only in severe attachment disorders and mental health illness that this becomes dangerous.
When an adoptive child has been abused and neglected before adoption there are particular difficulties, some children are so very, very damaged no amount of unconditional love can save them, when this occurs it is a tragedy for parents and children alike and they deserve more respect imo.
I would suggest you do some research into the whole complex subject and the supreme tragedies that can happen through no fault of either the adoptive parents or the adopted child.
Sorry to drag the thread off topic but it needs to be said. :) :)
Fantastic post Maggie - well said!!
-
Hi april the family had us all convinced the panic button existed prior to the murders they even convinced Vidvic but later said it had been a misunderstanding and Vidvic apologised or something to that effect. Think steve still believes it existed prior to the murders ;D ;D ;D
Where has this come from Susan?
How did the family have you all convinced? Vidvic mistakenly assumed it was present because Mike Teskowski told everyone it was and he was aware that one currently exists.
The 'Rellies' most certainly did not try to convince anybody of it's existence either before or after the murders.
In fact, until Vidvic asked Ann about it last year, I don't believe any of the relatives have ever mentioned the alarm publicly.
-
Hello Snow Bits
maybe I should apologise and re word it that Vic had us all convinced the panic button existed pre murders and himself and Caroline had several posts she was saying it did'ent and he was saying it did he even told me its approx. location and it certainly was not in the bedroom so I therefore assumed he had been told its location. He did very graciously apologise for his error and the thing was put to bed. Because I assumed Vic had seen the panic button I assumed the relatives had told him. Hands up if I got it wrong I apologise.
-
Hello Snow Bits
maybe I should apologise and re word it that Vic had us all convinced the panic button existed pre murders and himself and Caroline had several posts she was saying it did'ent and he was saying it did he even told me its approx. location and it certainly was not in the bedroom so I therefore assumed he had been told its location. He did very graciously apologise for his error and the thing was put to bed. Because I assumed Vic had seen the panic button I assumed the relatives had told him. Hands up if I got it wrong I apologise.
Well consider yourself corrected! >:( :D
The only reason I asked is because Tyler posted the same incorrect information as an example to Adam and I wondered where such nonsense originated.
Yes it was Vidvics mistake based on the fact that an alarm currently exists together with the assertion by Mike that it existed during the murders. The relatives did not tell Vidvic or anybody else that the alarm existed at the time of the murders.
-
Great Snow Bits can I get up now my knees are getting so sore ;D :'(
-
Great Snow Bits can I get up now my knees are getting so sore ;D :'(
Why were you on your knees? ??? Actually, I don't want to know. :P
-
I can see why susan has a way with men and is quite irresistible! ;D
-
Alias I seem to spend my life on my knees asking for forgiveness I am always getting it wrong :'( :'( :'( :'(
-
Alias I seem to spend my life on my knees asking for forgiveness I am always getting it wrong :'( :'( :'( :'(
Not sure why Snow-bits picked up on such an old post. The panic alarm has been 'put to bed' since then.
-
Not sure why Snow-bits picked up on such an old post. The panic alarm has been 'put to bed' since then.
Because it was repeated recently by Tyler and I was looking for its origin.
-
Not sure why Snow-bits picked up on such an old post. The panic alarm has been 'put to bed' since then.
Diversification tactic???????????
-
Diversification tactic???????????
I think you mean diversionary. ;) But no.
-
Diversification tactic???????????
Most likely...
-
Hello Snow Bits was I the origin for the panic button post I knew I had read it somewhere but don't know how to get the post up Vic's post 310 on the 18th April at 12.18 a.m. this is maybe where I got it from you can get there quicker than me as I can't BUMP ;D ;D ;D I had private conversations with Vic regarding the panic button which will remain private.
-
Actually,Vic DID state on the forum that the relatives believed that Nevill had made his way to the kitchen in order to reach the panic button. This caused a long debate between Vic and Caroline as Jeremy had said that the panic button was installed post murders,at the same time the burglar alarm was installed. Vic was adamant it was installed 'pre' murders and he eventually apologised after one of the family phoned him and told him that it was indeed installed 'post' murders in the presence of Jeremy himself. The posts in question should be on the forum somewhere.
-
I was looking for its origin.
I think that's right.
-
Hello Snow Bits was I the origin for the panic button post I knew I had read it somewhere but don't know how to get the post up Vic's post 310 on the 18th April at 12.18 a.m. this is maybe where I got it from you can get there quicker than me as I can't BUMP ;D ;D ;D I had private conversations with Vic regarding the panic button which will remain private.
You appear to be the origin of saying that the relatives tried to convince everybody that the panic button existed at the time of the murders, which has since been quoted by Tyler to Adam as an example of their deceit.
Chinese whispers and all that. :P
-
Hello tyler it is post 310 18/4 at 12.28 a.m.
-
Actually,Vic DID state on the forum that the relatives believed that Nevill had made his way to the kitchen in order to reach the panic button. This caused a long debate between Vic and Caroline as Jeremy had said that the panic button was installed post murders,at the same time the burglar alarm was installed. Vic was adamant it was installed 'pre' murders and he eventually apologised after one of the family phoned him and told him that it was indeed installed 'post' murders in the presence of Jeremy himself. The posts in question should be on the forum somewhere.
I seem to recall taking part in the conversation because around a similar time, friends of mine DID have such a system installed, by the police, for their protection. I have since checked with them and they didn't have A panic alarm, they had one in every room of their house, which was very much smaller than WHF. It makes no sense at all for only one to be installed in a large house.
-
I seem to recall taking part in the conversation because around a similar time, friends of mine DID have such a system installed, by the police, for their protection. I have since checked with them and they didn't have A panic alarm, they had one in every room of their house, which was very much smaller than WHF. It makes no sense at all for only one to be installed in a large house.
Whether it makes sense to you or not, a single panic button is currently present.
-
Hello april just trawled through Vic's posts and found the one which made me think the relatives had stated the panic button was in situ before the murders. Don't know how to cut and paste other than wallpaper and not too good at that.
-
The panic button discussion keeps popping up. I thought it had been settled.
-
Actually,Vic DID state on the forum that the relatives believed that Nevill had made his way to the kitchen in order to reach the panic button. This caused a long debate between Vic and Caroline as Jeremy had said that the panic button was installed post murders,at the same time the burglar alarm was installed. Vic was adamant it was installed 'pre' murders and he eventually apologised after one of the family phoned him and told him that it was indeed installed 'post' murders in the presence of Jeremy himself. The posts in question should be on the forum somewhere.
That sounds unlikely, however if Vidvic did post that, then he was mistaken.
-
That sounds unlikely, however if Vidvic did post that, then he was mistaken.
He admitted that he was mistaken, and it was all put to rest...
-
Whether it makes sense to you or not, a single panic button is currently present.
Presumably, their threat is deemed to be less that that which my friends were experiencing. Lucky them, eh.
-
Presumably, their threat is deemed to be less that that which my friends were experiencing. Lucky them, eh.
Quite possibly.
-
Hello april just trawled through Vic's posts and found the one which made me think the relatives had stated the panic button was in situ before the murders. Don't know how to cut and paste other than wallpaper and not too good at that.
Susan, could you copy it in quotes?
-
Over the past few years I have always argued that a Panic alarm was installed at Whitehouse farm prior to the murders and that Bamber deliberately set this off. I was wrong.
Caroline was entirely correct when she argued against me and was also correct about the notes that Bobby Boutflour wrote about Bamber setting off the alarm.
No Panic alarm was installed at Whitehouse before the murders.
The button I have seen is one that was installed afterwards. Bamber accompanied the fitter whilst it was fitted.
After the murders, Bamber sat in the kitchen with the alarm set and waited for Barbara Wilson to enter the back door. Much to her surprise the alarm went off, even though Bamber was sat at the kitchen table. When she asked him what he was playing at, he said he wanted to see if the police would arrive quickly or not. Barbara phoned the Police and cancelled the call out.
I have always told the truth on the forum and when it was pointed out to me this morning that I'd got it wrong I thought it correct to apologise.
It is very important to me personally and to members of the family that any arguments should be conducted honestly.
-
Www.jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4232.msg173041.html#msg173041
Which doesn't seem to work, Snow-Bits :D
-
Susan, I don´t know if this will help, but worth a try. I think it is impossible not to copy/paste. It isn´t difficult. Just ask if you don´t understand how to do the following:
Highlight text (left-click on mouse and "drag" the mouse with the left mouse-button down through the text you want to copy), it turns blue. Now right click on the highlighted text, a "box" with some text appears, left-click on "Copy".
Then you can paste the copied text where you want it: right-click and from the "box" that comes up, left-click on "Paste".
-
I bumped the thread :)
-
I bumped the thread :)
Saw it. I still would like to force susan to learn how to copy/paste. ;D
-
Saw it. I still would like to force susan to learn how to copy/paste. ;D
So would I Alias, I am trying to make her as well but she's as stubborn as a mule ;D ;D
-
So would I Alias, I am trying to make her as well but she's as stubborn as a mule ;D ;D
But why??? Dear susan, it is so easy once you try it just once! Your life will gain in quality after you learn this simple, little thing! ;D
-
Alias you have brought me out in a hot flush the thoughts of "bumping" excites me so much ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Alias OK I will learn maybe take a week or so but I will get there. ;D ;D ;D
-
Alias you have brought me out in a hot flush the thoughts of "bumping" excites me so much ;D ;D ;D ;D
Hahaha