Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on June 21, 2014, 09:45:PM
-
'I didn't know what would happen did I ?'
Said Jeremy in court. Just before he said 'That's what you have to establish'.
This was of course referring to the rifle which Jeremy said he left out.
A few hours later on the massacre night Jeremy was telling the police Sheila was a 'depressive psychotic' who knew how to use guns (later retracted) and whose parents had apparently been discussing fostering of her sons earlier.
So why did Jeremy leave a fully loaded rifle laying around when there was Sheila & two 6 year olds there ? And why did Neville not put the rifle away ? AE in her WS said Neville would have put the rifle away? Jeremy in his police interview also admitted Neville was 'reasonably careful with guns'.
Jeremy certainly loaded the rifle. After hearing rabbits ! But did not fire any bullets.
There is no way Jeremy would leave the gun in plain view if he was planning to use it. There was a strong chance Neville would have locked it away in the gun cupboard before bed. Ruining his plans.
With no one paying much attention, Jeremy probably went to put the rifle into the gun cupboard. But instead left it outside. Hidden away but easy to get later on. With the silencer attached.
Where do other people think Jeremy left the gun ?
-
Jeremy left the rifle on the settle in the scullery.
There was another rifle behind the open cupboard door. I can't say that that has been mentioned ?
-
'I didn't know what would happen did I ?'
Said Jeremy in court. Just before he said 'That's what you have to establish'.
This was of course referring to the rifle which Jeremy said he left out.
A few hours later on the massacre night Jeremy was telling the police Sheila was a 'depressive psychotic' who knew how to use guns (later retracted) and whose parents had apparently been discussing fostering of her sons earlier.
So why did Jeremy leave a fully loaded rifle laying around when there was Sheila & two 6 year olds there ? And why did Neville not put the rifle away ? AE in her WS said Neville would have put the rifle away? Jeremy in his police interview also admitted Neville was 'reasonably careful with guns'.
Jeremy certainly loaded the gun. After hearing rabbits ! But did not fire any bullets.
There is no way Jeremy would leave the gun in plain view if he was planning to use it. There was a strong chance Neville would have locked it away in the gun cupboard before bed. Ruining his plans.
With no one paying much attention, Jeremy probably went to put the rifle into the gun cupboard. But instead left it outside. Hidden away but easy to get later on. With the silencer attached.
Where do other people think Jeremy left the gun ?
how do you know that Neville did not put the gun away ? but not lock the cupboard? Apparently there were other guns around in the house -so I don't think he was as careful as you are indicating . How do you know if he locked the cupboard where he put the key?- perhaps Sheila knew where it was ?
Its all supposition .
-
how do you know that Neville did not put the gun away ? but not lock the cupboard? Apparently there were other guns around in the house -so I don't think he was as careful as you are indicating . How do you know if he locked the cupboard where he put the key?- perhaps Sheila knew where it was ?
Its all supposition .
There were other guns lying around the house ? Source please.
Why would Sheila know where the gun cupboard key was ? She did not live there and rarely visited.
Neville said to BW he was worried that he would die in a shooting accident and that he must 'never turn his back on that young man'. So I suspect he kept the gun cupboard key close to him.
-
There were other guns lying around the house ? Source please.
Why would Sheila know where the gun cupboard key was ? She did not live there and rarely visited.
Neville said to BW he was worried that he would die in a shooting accident and that he must 'never turn his back on that young man'. So I suspect he kept the gun cupboard key close to him.
There was no lock on the gun cupboard Adam, therefore there was no key.
-
There was no lock on the gun cupboard Adam, therefore there was no key.
Really ? Source please.
Bit dangerous leaving guns available with a 'psychotic depressive' staying. And a scheming son sniffing around the wills.
-
Really ? Source please.
Bit dangerous leaving guns available with a 'psychotic depressive' staying. And a scheming son sniffing around the wills.
Which suggests that Nevill considered Jeremy neither dangerous nor a snoop.
-
Really ? Source please.
Bit dangerous leaving guns available with a 'psychotic depressive' staying.
EXACTLY
-
Now if anyone can find my requested source, it is Jansus.
-
The annoying Daniel Day !
-
Now if anyone can find my requested source, it is Jansus.
does not look like an "official lockable gun cupboard to me " and lets face it if Neville had tidied away all the gns and locked them away and put the key somewhere safe then this all would not have happened would it
"The gun cupboard where David Boutflour claims he found the silencer was the one inside the downstairs office, as shown in the image attached. Any suggestion by anyone else, that this is, or was, or might not be the gun cupboard in question, should be treated with skepticism...
Gun Cabinet referred to by others, was a reference to Anthony Pargeters gun cabinet, which Jeremy told me was kept in the downstairs toilet at the scene, into which all Pargeters weapons, and ammunitions were usually kept...
Essex police confirm that the gun cupboard inside which was found the silencer, was situated inside th downstairs office at whf..."
-
Really ? Source please.
Bit dangerous leaving guns available with a 'psychotic depressive' staying. And a scheming son sniffing around the wills.
I'm not sure of course, but I don't think a lock was ever mentioned. I've always assumed that it was never locked? Nevill did seem rather gung ho with guns it must be said.
-
I'm not sure of course, but I don't think a lock was ever mentioned. I've always assumed that it was never locked? Nevill did seem rather gung ho with guns it must be said.
You are correct Grahame, there wasn't a lock on the gun cupboard door.
-
You are correct Grahame, there wasn't a lock on the gun cupboard door.
I asked you for a source recently. Still waiting.
Then asked Jansus. Who put up a picture. Which is neither here or there.
If there was no lock why did Jeremy make a big fuss about leaving the rifle out for Sheila ? If she could have just taken one out of the open gun cupboard.
-
I asked you for a source recently. Still waiting.
Then asked Jansus. Who put up a picture. Which is neither here or there.
If there was no lock why did Jeremy make a big fuss about leaving the rifle out for Sheila ? If she could have just taken one out of the open gun cupboard.
Source for what Adam? Last time I gave you a source you totally ignored it and just carried on posting your opinion over and over again so really sorry but I won't be doing it again.
There was NOT a lock on the gun cupboard, I assure you.
Maybe Jeremy made a 'big fuss' about leaving the rifle out because he was just telling the truth ie. He left the rifle out.
-
I asked you for a source recently. Still waiting.
Then asked Jansus. Who put up a picture. Which is neither here or there.
If there was no lock why did Jeremy make a big fuss about leaving the rifle out for Sheila ? If she could have just taken one out of the open gun cupboard.
Sorry Adam the challenge was to you to find the source that there was a lock. But I don't believe it was ever mentioned. I think the picture of the shotgun resting up against a wall is evidence of how lax the family were in handling guns. Also when the relatives allegedly found the silencer they didn't mention any lock being on the cupboard. It was just a cupboard under the stairs as far as I can see. Hardly a very secure place.
-
I did not ask for a source before and missed you're post the first time.
Now I have asked for a source. So will not miss it.
I have no source saying it was lockable. But always assumed it was lockable. It was a gun cupboard. Not hard to put a lock on.
-
Adam why may I ask did Jeremy have to mention the rifle at all surely in some people's eyes that would be incriminating him and that was the last thing he would want if he did infact murder his family. I am like Grahame I am not a Jeremy Bamber "supporter" just feel he did not have a fair trial and I appreciate if he had a fair trial he could still be found guilty.
-
AE said Neville would not have guns lying around. Assume she meant they would all be put away/locked.
Neville was worried about dying in a shooting accident. Not sure why he invited a 'depressive Psychotic' (according to Jeremy) to stay with two children. Then spoke about fostering.
-
I did not ask for a source before and missed you're post the first time.
Now I have asked for a source. So will not miss it.
I have no source saying it was lockable. But always assumed it was lockable. It was a gun cupboard. Not hard to put a lock on.
Then we are at an impasse Adam. Neither of us appear to be able to prove it either way?
-
There were other guns lying around the house ? Source please.
Why would Sheila know where the gun cupboard key was ? She did not live there and rarely visited.
Neville said to BW he was worried that he would die in a shooting accident and that he must 'never turn his back on that young man'. So I suspect he kept the gun cupboard key close to him.
Just look at the picture. There was a shotgun photographed up against the wall.
-
AE said Neville would not have guns lying around. Assume she meant they would all be put away/locked.
Neville was worried about dying in a shooting accident. Not sure why he invited a 'depressive Psychotic' (according to Jeremy) to stay with two children. Then spoke about fostering.
Then I suggest that Ann Eaton was obviously mistaken and the shotgun against the wall establishes that fact it appears?
-
AE said Neville would not have guns lying around. Assume she meant they would all be put away/locked.
Neville was worried about dying in a shooting accident. Not sure why he invited a 'depressive Psychotic' (according to Jeremy) to stay with two children. Then spoke about fostering.
Whatever Adam, I do assure you the gun cupboard did not have a lock. It had a catch to
keep it closed but no lock. It was barely a cupboard. How did AE know how Neil treated his guns she was hardly ever in the farmhouse.
-
Whatever Adam, I do assure you the gun cupboard did not have a lock. It had a catch to
keep it closed but no lock. It was barely a cupboard. How did AE know how Neil treated his guns she was hardly ever in the farmhouse.
I rather believe it was just one of those things one or other of the family did in order to constantly put pressure upon people to gain support against Jeremy.
-
I rather believe it was just one of those things one or other of the family did in order to constantly put pressure upon people to gain support against Jeremy.
I agree Grahame, also you are correct there wasn't a lock on the gun cupboard!!!!! ;D
-
Then we are at an impasse Adam. Neither of us appear to be able to prove it either way?
No but there is an obvious answer to Adam's question of why Jeremy made a big deal of leaving the rifle out.
1) In the middle of a rage it is hard to believe that Sheila would go seek out a gun she had a history or throwing things or grabbing pots and pans (which happens to be the weapon of choice for women and while some mock this a frying pan can be a potent weapon)
2) the rifle would normally have been found with the scope and suppressor attached, indeed Nevill had the scope installed professionally and didn't take it off because there was no reason to do so. With the exception of shooting at extremely close range the scope would be beneficial and they did not use the rifle for extremely close range shooting. Likewise the suppressor would be beneficial.
3) the magazine would have been empty and needed to have been loaded.
4) she needed to reload the magazine several times.
It is hard to believe Sheila would go seek out a gun period in the middle of a rage let alone have the ability to successfully load it without someone stopping her before she could load it because she would need to first load the magazine and have to set the gun down so it could be taken away. But if she had sought it ou to load she would not have bothered taking off the scope and suppressor.
Jeremy made up the story to pretend that the gun was a weapon of opportunity that was staring her in the face, made up that the magazine was already loaded so that she didn't need to load the magazine and thus could have rapidly loaded the gun by simply inserting the magazine and chambering a round instead of having to load a magazine and thus provide the opportunity to be disarmed. Finally, it was so that he could claim the gun already lacked the suppressor and scope and thus that is how she would have found it.
To deal with the need to reload he claimed he left near the gun a box of ammo that had been full or nearly full and that he loaded the magazine from it. So it had 48-50 rounds and counting the 10 in the magazine another 38-40 remained for her to reload from. This provided an excuse to make it easy for her to reload. But the staging fell short as the box he staged had 30 rounds. If it actually had 48-50 then it should have had 23-25 remaining after the murders. It had 30 though- too many. So either the box was just staged there an dnot used at all or some bullets were used from this pile and others from a different source which makes no sense at all so this actually hurt a lot instead of helping.
Worrying about a locked closet that she would not be able to find a key to had nothing at all to do with why he claimed what he did about leaving the weapon out with bullets and a loaded magazine nearby.
Adam missed the boat on this one.
-
Maggie says so. So that's it.
So Jeremy should not feel guilty about hearing rabbits, loading the rifle. Going to shoot rabbits. Not firing any shots. Then leaving the fully loaded rifle by the sofa. Because Sheila had lots of guns to choose from. And she knew how to load them as well.
Mind you Jeremy has never shown any regret for the above. 'I didn't know what would happen, did I' ? He said in court.
-
No but there is an obvious answer to Adam's question of why Jeremy made a big deal of leaving the rifle out.
1) In the middle of a rage it is hard to believe that Sheila would go seek out a gun she had a history or throwing things or grabbing pots and pans (which happens to be the weapon of choice for women and while some mock this a frying pan can be a potent weapon)
2) the rifle would normally have been found with the scope and suppressor attached, indeed Nevill had the scope installed professionally and didn't take it off because there was no reason to do so. With the exception of shooting at extremely close range the scope would be beneficial and they did not use the rifle for extremely close range shooting. Likewise the suppressor would be beneficial.
3) the magazine would have been empty and needed to have been loaded.
4) she needed to reload the magazine several times.
It is hard to believe Sheila would go seek out a gun period in the middle of a rage let alone have the ability to successfully load it without someone stopping her before she could load it because she would need to first load the magazine and have to set the gun down so it could be taken away. But if she had sought it ou to load she would not have bothered taking off the scope and suppressor.
Jeremy made up the story to pretend that the gun was a weapon of opportunity that was staring her in the face, made up that the magazine was already loaded so that she didn't need to load the magazine and thus could have rapidly loaded the gun by simply inserting the magazine and chambering a round instead of having to load a magazine and thus provide the opportunity to be disarmed. Finally, it was so that he could claim the gun already lacked the suppressor and scope and thus that is how she would have found it.
To deal with the need to reload he claimed he left near the gun a box of ammo that had been full or nearly full and that he loaded the magazine from it. So it had 48-50 rounds and counting the 10 in the magazine another 38-40 remained for her to reload from. This provided an excuse to make it easy for her to reload. But the staging fell short as the box he staged had 30 rounds. If it actually had 48-50 then it should have had 23-25 remaining after the murders. It had 30 though- too many. So either the box was just staged there an dnot used at all or some bullets were used from this pile and others from a different source which makes no sense at all so this actually hurt a lot instead of helping.
Worrying about a locked closet that she would not be able to find a key to had nothing at all to do with why he claimed what he did about leaving the weapon out with bullets and a loaded magazine nearby.
Adam missed the boat on this one.
Personally I would have thought he should have put it away personally, especially as there were kids around. But I suppose he was just following the slipshod way of the family on that one?
But if you work it out he needen't have mentioned the gun at all. No one would have been any the wiser. Having said that he needn't have mentioned the phone call either? He was either an innocent man, or an exceptionally stupid guilty one?
-
The plan of saying he left a fully loaded rifle out is not too bad. For the reasons mentioned above.
The problem was it took two reloads and a brutal beating to finish the massacre. Rather than just 11 bullets.
-
Personally I would have thought he should have put it away personally, especially as there were kids around. But I suppose he was just following the slipshod way of the family on that one?
But if you work it out he needen't have mentioned the gun at all. No one would have been any the wiser. Having said that he needn't have mentioned the phone call either? He was either an innocent man, or an exceptionally stupid guilty one?
Jeremy's double alibi attempt was his best option. See previous threads.
Saying he left a fully loaded rifle for Sheila was not a bad idea either. But... see above.
-
Maggie says so. So that's it.
So Jeremy should not feel guilty about hearing rabbits, loading the rifle. Going to shoot rabbits. Not firing any shots. Then leaving the fully loaded rifle by the sofa. Because Sheila had lots of guns to choose from. And she knew how to load them as well.
Mind you Jeremy has never shown any regret for the above. 'I didn't know what would happen, did I' ? He said in court.
No Adam, you are welcome to your opinion, however on this I am certain there was not a lock, ho
If you choose to not accept my certainty, that is up to you. :)
-
Personally I would have thought he should have put it away personally, especially as there were kids around. But I suppose he was just following the slipshod way of the family on that one?
But if you work it out he needen't have mentioned the gun at all. No one would have been any the wiser. Having said that he needn't have mentioned the phone call either? He was either an innocent man, or an exceptionally stupid guilty one?
His story of seeing bunnies at is was getting dark and got the gun to shoot them is not credible because he was not known to shoot them.
His story of finding the gun with the suppressor and scope not attached is even less credible because Nevill would have no reason to remove either and was known to leave them attached.
His story of leaving of placing the gun near the door then dumping the bullets out in the kitchen and loading the magazine in front of Sheila as she sat in the kitchen is not credible either especially in light of there being too many bullets left for that ammo to have been the source of the ammo used in the crimes.
His story of leaving the gun, magazine and ammo all out is likewise not credible.
Added together it is pure BS that was invented to try tpo pretend there wa s aweapon of opportunity for Sheila to grab that she would not have sought out on her own, woudl not have found in that condition, woudl have had to go seek ammo that was stored separately and would have otherwise have had to load the magazine and thus leave the gun alone to be taken away.
He lied about her firing this wepaon and all other wepaons in the house and even lied about using the weapon himself the week before the murders. He denied using it early on. But in September afte rpolice confronted him about the last known user finding the gun with the suppressor and scope attached and putting it away in the same condition he changed his story claiming he used it throughout the week that preceeded the murders. He went from not tougching it to useing it repeatedly and claimed that each time he used it , it was in a different condition sometime shaving the scope and suppressor other times lacking them which is absurd.
You don't forget that you used the rifle constantly but then a month later remember such when all of a sudden you have a need for the gun to have been used by someone after Anthony used it and worse to claim Nevill also constantly used it and that he kept taking the scope and suppressor off though he was not know to do so and it would make no sense for him to do so.
He lied and people who want to hide their eyes from that are simpy trying to deny reality.
-
His story of seeing bunnies at is was getting dark and got the gun to shoot them is not credible because he was not known to shoot them.
His story of finding the gun with the suppressor and scope not attached is even less credible because Nevill would have no reason to remove either and was known to leave them attached.
His story of leaving of placing the gun near the door then dumping the bullets out in the kitchen and loading the magazine in front of Sheila as she sat in the kitchen is not credible either especially in light of there being too many bullets left for that ammo to have been the source of the ammo used in the crimes.
His story of leaving the gun, magazine and ammo all out is likewise not credible.
Added together it is pure BS that was invented to try tpo pretend there wa s aweapon of opportunity for Sheila to grab that she would not have sought out on her own, woudl not have found in that condition, woudl have had to go seek ammo that was stored separately and would have otherwise have had to load the magazine and thus leave the gun alone to be taken away.
He lied about her firing this wepaon and all other wepaons in the house and even lied about using the weapon himself the week before the murders. He denied using it early on. But in September afte rpolice confronted him about the last known user finding the gun with the suppressor and scope attached and putting it away in the same condition he changed his story claiming he used it throughout the week that preceeded the murders. He went from not tougching it to useing it repeatedly and claimed that each time he used it , it was in a different condition sometime shaving the scope and suppressor other times lacking them which is absurd.
You don't forget that you used the rifle constantly but then a month later remember such when all of a sudden you have a need for the gun to have been used by someone after Anthony used it and worse to claim Nevill also constantly used it and that he kept taking the scope and suppressor off though he was not know to do so and it would make no sense for him to do so.
He lied and people who want to hide their eyes from that are simpy trying to deny reality.
As I said before there was no need for him to have mentioned either the gun or the telephone call. By the way I don't think it was he would told the story of being watched by Sheila as he loaded the gun? I thought he said that he did not show her how to do it?
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5440.0.html
-
The plan of saying he left a fully loaded rifle out is not too bad. For the reasons mentioned above.
The problem was it took two reloads and a brutal beating to finish the massacre. Rather than just 11 bullets.
-
Adam why will you not reply to my post about Jeremy and the rifle :'(
-
I did not ask for a source before and missed you're post the first time.
Now I have asked for a source. So will not miss it.
I have no source saying it was lockable. But always assumed it was lockable. It was a gun cupboard. Not hard to put a lock on.
No, it wasn't a gun cupboard, it was a cupbaord with was used to keep guns - big difference and there was no lock.
-
As I said before there was no need for him to have mentioned either the gun or the telephone call. By the way I don't think it was he would told the story of being watched by Sheila as he loaded the gun? I thought he said that he did not show her how to do it?
1) He said he loaded the magazine in front of her. He specifically stated the rifle was not in th ekitchen with him and that he took the magazine to the weapon and inserted it elsewhere. His assertion was that her watching him meant she could load a gun but he was wrong. Just seeing her load the mgazine would neither explain where to insert the magazine nor more importantly how to chamber a round or let her be aware a round needed to be chambered.
2)The telephone call and all the lies about getting the gun out and leaving it out were all part of his scheme to frame Sheila.
If he didn't make up the phone call then he would not have had an excuse to call police and would have had to go to sleep and then when the bodies were found the next day he would have to pretend he knows nothing, say he was asleep in bed and hope they believe it. He thought the phone clal was better because he could use that lie to pretend he had proof he was home. That is why he made such a big deal about making sure police saw him arrive at the scene after them.
The call also was used to claim that Nevill said she had a gun on them and had gone crazy to furthe rhis frame job.
Had the bodies been foudn the next day apart from the gun sitting on her, which the killer could simply drop it on her, there woudl be nothing to establish she did it. No forensic evidence that she beat or shot anyone or even loaded a gun.
The claim that Nevill said she had a gun on them was integral to his frame job of her.
His story of the gun, loaded magazine and extra bullets being left out was to firther the narrative of her holding them at gunpoint.
How would the following look:
They are all found dead, gun is found on Sheila. Gun normally is stored with scope and suppressor. Why would Sheila go to the closet and get a gun at all let alone remove both? Going to a closet, going to a separate area to get bullets, removing the accessories to make it easier to aim the gun at very close range and using the gun to kill everyone suggests planning not spontaneous crazy actions.
His tale was to make it seem the gun was a target of opportunity and that Sheila used it to kill everyone despite the complete lack of forensic evidence she did so.
The fake phone call and tale about leaving the gun out was integral to his framing job.
But for these things they even more readily would have figured out that Sheila didin't do it and the killer simply tossed the gun on her. Jeremy would have been suspected and Julie might still have blabbed. The strongest evidence that Jeremy was the killer though as opposed to someone else framing Sheila was Jeremy's own active frame job. He did such because just leaving the gun on her wasn't enough.
-
I think in statements it was said that Neville would just make sure guns were safe and put them away at the end of the day - that's all . And I think it was said he kept a loaded gun under his bed ?
-
NO LOCK!!
(http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/_/rsrc/1335203506880/how-and-why-did-sheila-do-it/Gun%20Cupboard.jpg?height=1200&width=600)
-
good photo - good source ;D
pity we cant see the blood on the cobweb as well.
-
NO LOCK!!
(http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/_/rsrc/1335203506880/how-and-why-did-sheila-do-it/Gun%20Cupboard.jpg?height=1200&width=600)
Towards the lower half there is a latch and there is a strike plate on the other side. This latch could be controlled by a key as opposed to a handle. You need a photo of the outside of the door.
-
NO LOCK!!
(http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/_/rsrc/1335203506880/how-and-why-did-sheila-do-it/Gun%20Cupboard.jpg?height=1200&width=600)
Thank you Caroline ......... NO LOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Towards the lower half there is a latch and there is a strike plate on the other side. This latch could be controlled by a key as opposed to a handle. You need a photo of the outside of the door.
Oh for gods sake - I KNOW there was no lock but we can go on all night and for the next few weeks arguing the toss but in the end there will still be NO LOCK.
-
I think there might be a lock, I can´t tell for sure, but that whitish square on the narrow, end side of the door could be a lock-thing (the thing that goes into the door frame when a key is turned), which I have no idea what is called...
Buuut, can´t tell for sure, need to see the front of the door. 8)
-
Could that not be a key lock ?
-
Could that not be a key lock ?
It could and more likely is a key lock than a knob because knobs are usually on both sides. Moreover the handle pull would not be needed if there were a knob. So more likely it is a lever lock.
That still doesn't mean it was always locked or that the key would not have been stored somewhere in the office and easily accessible.
Still the main reason for the claims of leaving the gun out were for the reasons I mentioned not worrying about Sheila being unable to unlock it.
-
Oh for gods sake - I KNOW there was no lock but we can go on all night and for the next few weeks arguing the toss but in the end there will still be NO LOCK.
You know how? I heard it did have a lock and the image you posted seems to demonstrate such. There is a lever and catch adjacent to it clearly visible. It is unusual to have a knob on one end not another and clearly the back has no knob where the latch is. Moreover, if there were a knob the drawer/handle pull attached to the upper outside would not be needed. It looks like a lever lock.
-
It could and more likely is a key lock than a knob because knobs are usually on both sides. Moreover the handle pull would not be needed if there were a knob. So more likely it is a lever lock.
That still doesn't mean it was always locked or that the key would not have been stored somewhere in the office and easily accessible.
Still the main reason for the claims of leaving the gun out were for the reasons I mentioned not worrying about Sheila being unable to unlock it.
It's NOT a key lock, key locks go all the way through! It is simply a 'catch' not a lock. It's the kind that has a ball bearing which fits into a plate on the surround on the door frame which keeps the door closed.
-
You know how? I heard it did have a lock and the image you posted seems to demonstrate such. There is a lever and catch adjacent to it clearly visible. It is unusual to have a knob on one end not another and clearly the back has no knob where the latch is. Moreover, if there were a knob the drawer/handle pull attached to the upper outside would not be needed. It looks like a lever lock.
Ha, ha!! There is NO LEVER - it's a pull handle ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
Jeremy may have attempted to commit the massacre using just 11 bullets.
Once he realised he had to re load the first time, he decided to make Sheila look even more 'crazy'. Shooting the asleep twins. Eight times.
-
You know how? I heard it did have a lock and the image you posted seems to demonstrate such. There is a lever and catch adjacent to it clearly visible. It is unusual to have a knob on one end not another and clearly the back has no knob where the latch is. Moreover, if there were a knob the drawer/handle pull attached to the upper outside would not be needed. It looks like a lever lock.
Perhaps you shouldn't listen to ALL you hear because as we have recently found out - your source isn't always reliable!
-
It's NOT a key lock, key locks go all the way through! It is simply a 'catch' not a lock. It's the kind that has a ball bearing which fits into a plate on the surround on the door frame which keeps the door closed.
It would have no way to open then. It needs to have a handle to open it which is what is usually on both sides.
You are describing the kind of lock that is attached outside a door not incorporated into a door, a sliding latch like this:
http://www.harborfreight.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/i/m/image_7977.jpg?01AD=3tIodD1FKoWngm3ISYQ8wVwojDKyt8BwaetgI4hOvwg13dxr_EzLXNQ&01RI=64AE74E4254CDC2&01NA=na
Cabinet lever locks usually do not go all the way through to the other side of the door to have a lock on each side they are like the latch in the photo.
-
It would have no way to open then. It needs to have a handle to open it which is what is usually on both sides.
You are describing the kind of lock that is attached outside a door not incorporated into a door, a sliding latch like this:
http://www.harborfreight.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/i/m/image_7977.jpg?01AD=3tIodD1FKoWngm3ISYQ8wVwojDKyt8BwaetgI4hOvwg13dxr_EzLXNQ&01RI=64AE74E4254CDC2&01NA=na
Cabinet lever locks usually do not go all the way through to the other side of the door to have a lock on each side they are like the latch in the photo.
What are you talking about - this is the kind of mechanism I'm talking about, all you need is a pull handle which is what is on the front of the door - there is NO LATCH! The part with the bearing fits on the door (slightly recessed) and the other part fits on the door frame so when the door is pushed closed, the bearing fits on the dimple.
You can argue that black is white if you like, but you'll be wrong again. There was no lock and there is no latch!
-
1) He said he loaded the magazine in front of her. He specifically stated the rifle was not in th ekitchen with him and that he took the magazine to the weapon and inserted it elsewhere. His assertion was that her watching him meant she could load a gun but he was wrong. Just seeing her load the mgazine would neither explain where to insert the magazine nor more importantly how to chamber a round or let her be aware a round needed to be chambered.
2)The telephone call and all the lies about getting the gun out and leaving it out were all part of his scheme to frame Sheila.
If he didn't make up the phone call then he would not have had an excuse to call police and would have had to go to sleep and then when the bodies were found the next day he would have to pretend he knows nothing, say he was asleep in bed and hope they believe it. He thought the phone clal was better because he could use that lie to pretend he had proof he was home. That is why he made such a big deal about making sure police saw him arrive at the scene after them.
The call also was used to claim that Nevill said she had a gun on them and had gone crazy to furthe rhis frame job.
Had the bodies been foudn the next day apart from the gun sitting on her, which the killer could simply drop it on her, there woudl be nothing to establish she did it. No forensic evidence that she beat or shot anyone or even loaded a gun.
The claim that Nevill said she had a gun on them was integral to his frame job of her.
His story of the gun, loaded magazine and extra bullets being left out was to firther the narrative of her holding them at gunpoint.
How would the following look:
They are all found dead, gun is found on Sheila. Gun normally is stored with scope and suppressor. Why would Sheila go to the closet and get a gun at all let alone remove both? Going to a closet, going to a separate area to get bullets, removing the accessories to make it easier to aim the gun at very close range and using the gun to kill everyone suggests planning not spontaneous crazy actions.
His tale was to make it seem the gun was a target of opportunity and that Sheila used it to kill everyone despite the complete lack of forensic evidence she did so.
The fake phone call and tale about leaving the gun out was integral to his framing job.
But for these things they even more readily would have figured out that Sheila didin't do it and the killer simply tossed the gun on her. Jeremy would have been suspected and Julie might still have blabbed. The strongest evidence that Jeremy was the killer though as opposed to someone else framing Sheila was Jeremy's own active frame job. He did such because just leaving the gun on her wasn't enough.
If he just said nothing at all the crime scene alone would have put Sheila in the frame. In actual fact and it is a fact Jeremy said it was those men with the guns. They killed them. No framing of Sheila there. The trouble is if he was innocent he probably would have done exactly the same thing. The only difference is that he was found guilty. If he was found not guilty we would probably not be having this argument now?
-
You know how? I heard it did have a lock and the image you posted seems to demonstrate such. There is a lever and catch adjacent to it clearly visible. It is unusual to have a knob on one end not another and clearly the back has no knob where the latch is. Moreover, if there were a knob the drawer/handle pull attached to the upper outside would not be needed. It looks like a lever lock.
You did? Could you point the rest of us to this information?
-
It's NOT a key lock, key locks go all the way through! It is simply a 'catch' not a lock. It's the kind that has a ball bearing which fits into a plate on the surround on the door frame which keeps the door closed.
You are one smart lass Caroline. ;)
-
Kind of a strange set-up - a table and a chair right in front of the cupboard so that the door can´t even open properly. You have to kneel down to get to the things in the cupboard - not much room for that.
Was it used that much at all?
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=18699;image)
-
You are one smart lass Caroline. ;)
Thanks Grahame, you know the kind of mechanism I mean right?
-
If he just said nothing at all the crime scene alone would have put Sheila in the frame. In actual fact and it is a fact Jeremy said it was those men with the guns. They killed them. No framing of Sheila there. The trouble is if he was innocent he probably would have done exactly the same thing. The only difference is that he was found guilty. If he was found not guilty we would probably not be having this argument now?
-
Not sure the crime scene put Sheila in the frame:
i) The appellant's expressed dislike of his family;
ii) His speaking of his plans to kill his family and thereafter his confessions to his girlfriend, Julie Mugford;
iii) The finding of his mother's bicycle at Goldhanger;
iv) The appellant's admitted ability to effect covert entry into and exit from the farmhouse and the finding of the hacksaw blade outside the bathroom window. His claim to have entered the house in that way after the first arrest was an attempt to explain these findings;
v) Because on the facts of the case it could only have been the appellant or Sheila Caffell who carried out the killings, the factors below proved they were not the responsibility of the appellant's sister:
a) Although seriously mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or her father;
b) Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them. Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;
c) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen;
d) Her hands and feet were clean. They were not blood stained and neither was there any sugar upon them;
e) Hand swabs from her body did not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions; and
f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged.
vi) The sound moderator had on any view been attached to the rifle during the fight with Nevill Bamber in the kitchen. But if Sheila Caffell had committed suicide it must have been removed before she shot herself. The following aspects of the evidence established it was still in place on the gun when the appellant's sister was murdered:
a) The blood grouping analysis proved (on the particular facts of the case) that Sheila Caffell's blood was inside the moderator; and
b) Had the appellant's sister murdered the other members of her family with the moderator attached to the gun and then discovered she could not reach the trigger to kill herself, the moderator would have been found next to her body. There would have been no reason for her to have removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to commit suicide in her parents' room.
vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:
a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;
b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;
c) As a matter of common sense, Nevill Bamber would have called the police before the appellant;
d) Had the appellant really received such a call, he would have immediately made a 999 call, alerted the farm workers who lived close to the farmhouse and then driven at speed to his parents home; and
e) Instead he had spoken to Julie Mugford before calling the police. When he subsequently contacted the Police, it was not by way of the emergency system.
viii) He stood to inherit considerable sums of money.
-
Not sure the crime scene put Sheila in the frame:
i) The appellant's expressed dislike of his family;
ii) His speaking of his plans to kill his family and thereafter his confessions to his girlfriend, Julie Mugford;
iii) The finding of his mother's bicycle at Goldhanger;
iv) The appellant's admitted ability to effect covert entry into and exit from the farmhouse and the finding of the hacksaw blade outside the bathroom window. His claim to have entered the house in that way after the first arrest was an attempt to explain these findings;
v) Because on the facts of the case it could only have been the appellant or Sheila Caffell who carried out the killings, the factors below proved they were not the responsibility of the appellant's sister:
a) Although seriously mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or her father;
b) Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them. Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;
c) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen;
d) Her hands and feet were clean. They were not blood stained and neither was there any sugar upon them;
e) Hand swabs from her body did not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions; and
f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged.
vi) The sound moderator had on any view been attached to the rifle during the fight with Nevill Bamber in the kitchen. But if Sheila Caffell had committed suicide it must have been removed before she shot herself. The following aspects of the evidence established it was still in place on the gun when the appellant's sister was murdered:
a) The blood grouping analysis proved (on the particular facts of the case) that Sheila Caffell's blood was inside the moderator; and
b) Had the appellant's sister murdered the other members of her family with the moderator attached to the gun and then discovered she could not reach the trigger to kill herself, the moderator would have been found next to her body. There would have been no reason for her to have removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to commit suicide in her parents' room.
vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:
a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;
b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;
c) As a matter of common sense, Nevill Bamber would have called the police before the appellant;
d) Had the appellant really received such a call, he would have immediately made a 999 call, alerted the farm workers who lived close to the farmhouse and then driven at speed to his parents home; and
e) Instead he had spoken to Julie Mugford before calling the police. When he subsequently contacted the Police, it was not by way of the emergency system.
viii) He stood to inherit considerable sums of money.
Well it did at first Adam and if Jeremy had kept quiet about everything there would have been no case against him. She would have remained in the frame simply because there would be no one else to pin it on.
-
Not sure the crime scene put Sheila in the frame:
i) The appellant's expressed dislike of his family;
ii) His speaking of his plans to kill his family and thereafter his confessions to his girlfriend, Julie Mugford;
iii) The finding of his mother's bicycle at Goldhanger;
iv) The appellant's admitted ability to effect covert entry into and exit from the farmhouse and the finding of the hacksaw blade outside the bathroom window. His claim to have entered the house in that way after the first arrest was an attempt to explain these findings;
v) Because on the facts of the case it could only have been the appellant or Sheila Caffell who carried out the killings, the factors below proved they were not the responsibility of the appellant's sister:
a) Although seriously mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or her father;
b) Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them. Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;
c) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen;
d) Her hands and feet were clean. They were not blood stained and neither was there any sugar upon them;
e) Hand swabs from her body did not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions; and
f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged.
vi) The sound moderator had on any view been attached to the rifle during the fight with Nevill Bamber in the kitchen. But if Sheila Caffell had committed suicide it must have been removed before she shot herself. The following aspects of the evidence established it was still in place on the gun when the appellant's sister was murdered:
a) The blood grouping analysis proved (on the particular facts of the case) that Sheila Caffell's blood was inside the moderator; and
b) Had the appellant's sister murdered the other members of her family with the moderator attached to the gun and then discovered she could not reach the trigger to kill herself, the moderator would have been found next to her body. There would have been no reason for her to have removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to commit suicide in her parents' room.
vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:
a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;
b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;
c) As a matter of common sense, Nevill Bamber would have called the police before the appellant;
d) Had the appellant really received such a call, he would have immediately made a 999 call, alerted the farm workers who lived close to the farmhouse and then driven at speed to his parents home; and
e) Instead he had spoken to Julie Mugford before calling the police. When he subsequently contacted the Police, it was not by way of the emergency system.
viii) He stood to inherit considerable sums of money.
This is the third time you have posted this same post! Something you have been warned about over and over. It was decided that links could be posted so long as you explain why you're posting said link. I'll ask again that you don't keep posting the same repetitive posts!
-
It related to what Grahame said - 'Nothing at the crime scene showed it was Sheila'.
-
Well it did at first Adam and if Jeremy had kept quiet about everything there would have been no case against him. She would have remained in the frame simply because there would be no one else to pin it on.
Yes, Jeremy should have stayed quiet. But there were lots of reasons he told Julie. Thread created.
-
It related to what Grahame said - 'Nothing at the crime scene showed it was Sheila'.
You don't need to post the whole post to make a point, a link would have done with a reference to which part you were referring to.
-
Yes, Jeremy should have stayed quiet. But IMO there were lots of reasons he told Julie. Thread created.
-
Yes, Jeremy should have stayed quiet. But there were lots of reasons he told Julie. Thread created.
Thread answered.
-
If the relationship was already on the rocks as stated by some, then there was every reason for Jeremy not to have told JM.
-
I think Jeremy was testing JM,as maybe in their past a conversation may have got back to him via JM so as to deem her an untrustworthy person. One way of finding out.
I wonder why JM never liked Brett Collins ? Was he too outspoken for her ? He was Jeremys' buddy so would have been more loyal than she was,,as was proved.
-
I have been reading Jeremy's statements, two of them and part of what I presume to be a court transcript. I can't see where he has changed his statement regarding times? Perhaps someone could inform me as to where the statements are where he has done thins?
I know that JM changed the times of when she received a phone call from him early in the morning and it is quite evident that she did this in order for her statement to be in harmony with things that other prosecution witnesses.
But for the life of me I cannot find any more of Jeremy's witness statements that back up the claim of the guilters that he changed the times several times?
-
I have been reading Jeremy's statements, two of them and part of what I presume to be a court transcript. I can't see where he has changed his statement regarding times? Perhaps someone could inform me as to where the statements are where he has done thins?
I know that JM changed the times of when she received a phone call from him early in the morning and it is quite evident that she did this in order for her statement to be in harmony with things that other prosecution witnesses.
But for the life of me I cannot find any more of Jeremy's witness statements that back up the claim of the guilters that he changed the times several times?
The EP made their time-puzzle add up with the help of not one, but two clocks which showed the wrong time.
-
I think everyone barring Jeremy suffered from lapses of memory.
-
I think everyone barring Jeremy suffered from lapses of memory.
Methinks all this jiggling about with times did not come from Jeremy but from everybody else?
-
I think Jeremy was testing JM,as maybe in their past a conversation may have got back to him via JM so as to deem her an untrustworthy person. One way of finding out.
I wonder why JM never liked Brett Collins ? Was he too outspoken for her ? He was Jeremys' buddy so would have been more loyal than she was,,as was proved.
Would guess that JM was jealous of Brett Collins, Lookout.
Brett Collins told the police he was sure Jeremy was innocent. He also stated that Jeremy often broke down and became upset about his family during the time before his arrest.
-
Would guess that JM was jealous of Brett Collins, Lookout.
Brett Collins told the police he was sure Jeremy was innocent. He also stated that Jeremy often broke down and became upset about his family during the time before his arrest.
I guess Brett could have been a thorn in her side because he would probably contradict all of her "revelations"
-
I guess Brett could have been a thorn in her side because he would probably contradict all of her "revelations"
Well Brett was with Jeremy after the murders far more than Julie was, he seemed to be more of a support to him and allowed him to be how he needed to be. Wish I could find his interview notes. I know Mike posted them but cant find them.
-
Well Brett was with Jeremy after the murders far more than Julie was, he seemed to be more of a support to him and allowed him to be how he needed to be. Wish I could find his interview notes. I know Mike posted them but cant find them.
Whether Brett was just his best bud or more is a matter of great speculation.
Some insist they were romantically involved not just hanging out to do guy stuff and hunt for chicks together. Some suggest he was a partner in crime as far as drug endeavors, the murders and even murders overseas. Some suggest he was just out to use Jeremy so he could party hardy on Jeremy's dime.
Julie clearly hoped he would settle down and marry her with the family out of the way. Instead he just wanted to party. Lord knows I had some wild friends but I wasn't hanging out with them by the time I was his age. Julie clearly decided she was not waiting for him anylonger hoping he would settle down and marry her. Many women get to that point where they feel they wasted enough time on a relationship and to move on. The amazing thing is she would probably have married him knowing he killed his family. It took both killing his family and choosing to party instea dof settle down to get her to finally ditch him and what do women do when they no longer give a crap about you? The tell all your dirty secrets and screw you over. To be fair there are men who are assholes who do that too though.
Not only to ruin the reputaiton but there are are surprising number who love to reveal nude photos and videos of their exgirlfriends to screw them over.
In her case it took that to get her to be morally upstanding and do what she should have done all along. I don't endorse being an immature jerk and screwing an ex by revealing things that are no one else's business (when I see a brekaup of a famous couple and they keep their affairs private it actually gives be greater respect for them) but serious criminal behavior is a different matter. That is a secret that should not be kept and a confidence that should be betrayed.
Would I tell my wife if I murdered someone? Hell no because I would not want to put her in the position of having to be scared of me, having to worry about what could happen, having to grapple with her conscience of wheither she should turn me in (which all are thinking about the impact on her) and finally the impact on me, that it could result in her leaving and/or turning me in.
But I don't have a wife who would accompany me to rob my parents and think it is great. There are documented cases of wives and girlfriends who have kept some pretty horrible secrets. I can't imagine my wife being like any of them though.
-
The cupboard door catch looks similar to this one.
-
The cupboard door catch looks similar to this one.
Yes, reader. As Caroline stated it was a catch quite similar to your photo, it held the door shut but it did not lock.
-
It is common knowledge Brett was gay, although don't see what that had to do with anything apart from the fact Julie found their friendship difficult, possibly making her jealous and unhappy. You are inferring that Julie dumped Jeremy but that is not accurate, there is no doubt it was the other way round and that Jeremy had wearied of Julie and ended the relationhip. You have put a spin on this claimimg it was the other way round but it won't wash. Julie was a hurt, scorned, dumped woman and very possibly she was looking for revenge as hurt and angry people often do, whether there was any truth in her story is a different issue, to me it seems difficult to believe as parts of it make little sense and her triumphant behaviour claiming her £25, 000 from the News of the World inferred victory rather than reflecting the tragedy of the deaths of 2 defenceless little boys and 3 adults.
Whether Jeremy is innocent or guilty Julie Mugford's behaviour was shameful from start to finish.
-
I can't see why this mans' sexuality had anything whatsoever to do with the case,,but according to RWB,he made quite an issue of it ! Along with other irrelevancies !
Jeremy felt comfortable with Brett and also felt able to share his inner feelings with someone more understanding than a jealous woman full of spite.
-
I can't see why this mans' sexuality had anything whatsoever to do with the case,,but according to RWB,he made quite an issue of it ! Along with other irrelevancies !
Jeremy felt comfortable with Brett and also felt able to share his inner feelings with someone more understanding than a jealous woman full of spite.
It certainly should not have but RWB and his ilk tried to use Jeremy's sexuality as some sort of proof of depravity which is hard to beliee, after all 1985 was not the middle ages and it says more about RWB and friends than about Jeremy or Brett.
-
Whether Brett was just his best bud or more is a matter of great speculation.
Some insist they were romantically involved not just hanging out to do guy stuff and hunt for chicks together. Some suggest he was a partner in crime as far as drug endeavors, the murders and even murders overseas. Some suggest he was just out to use Jeremy so he could party hardy on Jeremy's dime.
Julie clearly hoped he would settle down and marry her with the family out of the way. Instead he just wanted to party. Lord knows I had some wild friends but I wasn't hanging out with them by the time I was his age. Julie clearly decided she was not waiting for him anylonger hoping he would settle down and marry her. Many women get to that point where they feel they wasted enough time on a relationship and to move on. The amazing thing is she would probably have married him knowing he killed his family. It took both killing his family and choosing to party instea dof settle down to get her to finally ditch him and what do women do when they no longer give a crap about you? The tell all your dirty secrets and screw you over. To be fair there are men who are assholes who do that too though.
Not only to ruin the reputaiton but there are are surprising number who love to reveal nude photos and videos of their exgirlfriends to screw them over.
In her case it took that to get her to be morally upstanding and do what she should have done all along. I don't endorse being an immature jerk and screwing an ex by revealing things that are no one else's business (when I see a brekaup of a famous couple and they keep their affairs private it actually gives be greater respect for them) but serious criminal behavior is a different matter. That is a secret that should not be kept and a confidence that should be betrayed.
Would I tell my wife if I murdered someone? Hell no because I would not want to put her in the position of having to be scared of me, having to worry about what could happen, having to grapple with her conscience of wheither she should turn me in (which all are thinking about the impact on her) and finally the impact on me, that it could result in her leaving and/or turning me in.
But I don't have a wife who would accompany me to rob my parents and think it is great. There are documented cases of wives and girlfriends who have kept some pretty horrible secrets. I can't imagine my wife being like any of them though.
It is strange that Jeremy never reciprocated.
-
It certainly should not have but RWB and his ilk tried to use Jeremy's sexuality as some sort of proof of depravity which is hard to beliee, after all 1985 was not the middle ages and it says more about RWB and friends than about Jeremy or Brett.
Maggie,can you imagine that being voiced in a courtroom today ?
-
Yes, reader. As Caroline stated it was a catch quite similar to your photo, it held the door shut but it did not lock.
The Bambers it appears were not a very safety conscious family in regards to guns it appears. Me, I won't have a gun in the house even though it would be securely locked away. I've seen too many accidents with guns. Even when I see a knife left out I quickly put it back in the draw. My attitude probably stems from when my kids were young. I've seen some of my American friends (where gun control in some States are not very stringent. How they let their young kids play with guns. One of my friends who was the manager in a funeral service had to deal with a mother and father once where their youngest son about 15 was playing with his father's shotgun and his friend blew his head off with it. Personally I can't see people's fascination with guns?
-
It certainly should not have but RWB and his ilk tried to use Jeremy's sexuality as some sort of proof of depravity which is hard to beliee, after all 1985 was not the middle ages and it says more about RWB and friends than about Jeremy or Brett.
RWB used every trick in the book to denigrate Jeremy's character. He went to granny Speakman's house to get her to change her will so as to exclude Jeremy from it. He was careful not to include himself in her will so he could say in court that he would in no way benefit from her will. But he put his wife's name in it instead.
Pamela however was a decent person. She was included in June's will. But would not accept it, saying that she would not want to benefit in any way from the death's of her family.
-
The whole case was built on discrimination from start to finish. Nobody liked Jeremy,nor his friend. I don't think it would go down well today,somehow.
Don't like that man,he's a public schoolboy,talks " posh " ( whatever that is ) is well off,wears Hugo Boss suits,dines at the best restaurants, is arrogant,etc etc------------------let's jail him,he's in the way !!
-
The whole case was built on discrimination from start to finish. Nobody liked Jeremy,nor his friend. I don't think it would go down well today,somehow.
Don't like that man,he's a public schoolboy,talks " posh " ( whatever that is ) is well off,wears Hugo Boss suits,dines at the best restaurants, is arrogant,etc etc------------------let's jail him,he's in the way !!
Well I certainly detect a dynamic thrust against Jeremy where the relatives were concerned, which appeared to be spearheaded by RWB. If others are honest they would confess this as well. I will go further. I still think this is going on to this day? There is far too much effort on the part of some guilters that it is almost unbelievable that they go to so much effort in order to prove Jeremy guilty AGAIN, when he is securely behind bars. I also have it on very good authority that the relatives are still afraid that some evidence may turn up that will free Jeremy. Have you noticed that when a CCRC decision is near. Or where there is a new book coming out etc that both Vic and Hartley turn up on the forum. Believe me the family are still very much afraid. They are practically hoping that he will somehow die so they can at last have some peace from him.
-
Indeed,Grahame,and why should,or would anyone be afraid if there happens to be new evidence ? I'd question their " fear " for a start,,though we know what that's about and so do they ! The only harm done would be to the pockets of those who put him where he is,that's if Jeremy ever persues the matter.
I've noticed lots of things Grahame,particularly those who leap onto the forum from nowhere,though I suspect that the relatives are kept well-informed anyway by these messengers.
I wonder if arrangements to flee to the Isle of Man are still pending if Jeremy is freed ? This is where the relatives said that they'd move to. Strange how all the " birds have flown ",or are intending to scarper when that day comes.
They've already complained to EP how the justice system is letting THEM down ! First when Jeremy was downgraded in prison,then the fact that Jeremy tried to sue them a few years ago,for lost earnings regarding the caravan site,I think and because he was already inside,he wasn't allowed to continue,but he was told that there'd be consideration given on his release,so all is not over for him there.
That would be quite a few years back pay. ;D No wonder they're scared ! Nothing whatsoever to do with the mans persona. I wonder if EP will be taken-in again. The old Patriarch won't be there next time !
-
RWB used every trick in the book to denigrate Jeremy's character. He went to granny Speakman's house to get her to change her will so as to exclude Jeremy from it. He was careful not to include himself in her will so he could say in court that he would in no way benefit from her will. But he put his wife's name in it instead.
Pamela however was a decent person. She was included in June's will. But would not accept it, saying that she would not want to benefit in any way from the death's of her family.
Every single thing I have heard about June´s sister, Pam, shows her in a good light. Sweet and classy woman!
-
Indeed,Grahame,and why should,or would anyone be afraid if there happens to be new evidence ? I'd question their " fear " for a start,,though we know what that's about and so do they ! The only harm done would be to the pockets of those who put him where he is,that's if Jeremy ever persues the matter.
I've noticed lots of things Grahame,particularly those who leap onto the forum from nowhere,though I suspect that the relatives are kept well-informed anyway by these messengers.
I wonder if arrangements to flee to the Isle of Man are still pending if Jeremy is freed ? This is where the relatives said that they'd move to. Strange how all the " birds have flown ",or are intending to scarper when that day comes.
They've already complained to EP how the justice system is letting THEM down ! First when Jeremy was downgraded in prison,then the fact that Jeremy tried to sue them a few years ago,for lost earnings regarding the caravan site,I think and because he was already inside,he wasn't allowed to continue,but he was told that there'd be consideration given on his release,so all is not over for him there.
That would be quite a few years back pay. ;D No wonder they're scared ! Nothing whatsoever to do with the mans persona. I wonder if EP will be taken-in again. The old Patriarch won't be there next time !
I dont understand what they have to fear? JB is not going to do anything to them if he is freed - afterall he is not going to risk going back inside is he?
If they did not actually "tamper " with any evidence then they will just say that they thought he was guilty and stick by their evidence?
Financially - I guess JB could have some of the inheritance untangled and returned to him?
The press? - Yes I could understand they would be hounded. That could be difficult.
-
Every single thing I have heard about June´s sister, Pam, shows her in a good light. Sweet and classy woman!
Pamela is a true lady in every sense of the word. She must think at times. :-\
-
Pamela is a true lady in every sense of the word. She must think at times. :-\
This here is actually quite a "statement": Pamela however was a decent person. She was included in June's will. But would not accept it, saying that she would not want to benefit in any way from the death's of her family.
-
I dont understand what they have to fear? JB is not going to do anything to them if he is freed - afterall he is not going to risk going back inside is he?
If they did not actually "tamper " with any evidence then they will just say that they thought he was guilty and stick by their evidence?
Financially - I guess JB could have some of the inheritance untangled and returned to him?
The press? - Yes I could understand they would be hounded. That could be difficult.
I'm afraid it would be Jeremy himself who'd have to watch his back !
-
I'm afraid it would be Jeremy himself who'd have to watch his back !
I have heard it said that if Jeremy was ever released that certain people have vowed to kill him.
-
I have heard it said that if Jeremy was ever released that certain people have vowed to kill him.
That doesn't surprise me one bit,Grahame. A hired assassin ?
-
Just to clarify, Caroline posted a picture of a brass and steel catch, whereas I posted a picture of a catch made mainly of nylon that would have a white appearance consistent with the photograph of the cupboard door.
-
It's what's known as a ball catch,Reader.
-
Just to clarify, Caroline posted a picture of a brass and steel catch, whereas I posted a picture of a catch made mainly of nylon that would have a white appearance consistent with the photograph of the cupboard door.
It does look very similar.