Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Steve_uk on June 27, 2014, 01:57:PM
-
As Julie turns 50 this Summer it may be apposite to look back for a moment, to reminisce and reflect on the legacy of this notorious case of which Julie was so much a part. Of course none of us are the same as we were 29 years ago; we have all moved on in some part of our lives and so it is with Julie, now living in a smart Winnipeg suburb and seemingly the woman who has it all: a loving husband, two healthy children and a stratospheric rise up the ladder of the education profession to rank amongst one of the most highly paid in that sector today.
Yet it was not always the case for Julie, the product of a broken home and allegations of abuse within it,the one constant being the excellent free State education of a Northern town so often mocked by the London-based tabloid press, yet which gave Julie the escape route she needed and indeed the safety and security which it afforded her may well be the reason she chose to continue in that sphere when around her things looked less certain.
It may be worthwhile here to pause for a moment and take a look back at the Britain of the 1980s, a place which had broken with all economic policy pertaining since 1945 and which now championed the pursuit of individualism and the acquisition of wealth, as politicians told the workless people of the North to "get on their bike" and find work in the more prosperous areas. Many did follow this advice including Julie's family, and it was for this reason that Julie found herself at Colchester Sixth Form College amidst a more prosperous community. It's not hard to fathom that Julie must have realized she was comparatively lucky in the scheme of things as wages for those in work rose year on year and with student loans not yet introduced Julie must at this stage have been optimistic about her future as she secured a place at Goldsmith's University to train to become a teacher.
Yet there must always have been a doubt in Julie's mind as there was with many people, as the champagne flowed for some yet the Miner's Strike showed just how deeply the country was divided. Julie would have known instinctively which side she preferred to be on, as to be fair anyone in her place would(remember Sheila was quoted as saying "it's important to be in the right crowd"): if she kept her head down and worked hard (so we were constantly told) things would work out.
It was amid this background of the new work ethic that Julie met Jeremy Bamber, working as a casual barman at Sloppy Joe's restaurant in Colchester where she was a waitress. It's uncertain as to whether it was love at first sight, but they both seemed to be suited, with Julie as the brains of the outfit and Jeremy with the eye for a pretty girl and never so happy as when he had a cocktail shaker in his hands. In fact had this story worked out differently these two who met as Yuppies may now have been running a wine bar in a fashionable area of London and nobody would bat an eyelid as they ordered their Caipirinha and watched the world go by, as the owners made the transition from exuberant youth to comfortable middle age.
However there is no way to avoid the subsequent narrative because reader, this is no Mills and Boon paperback, but a tragedy worthy of the great stories of which Shakespeare himself took and reworked,with redolences of the troubled personage of a Hamlet, the bloodthirstiness of a Macbeth, or the miscommunication evoking a Romeo and Juliet, depending on your point of view.
A word about Jeremy here, though the thread for the most part concerns itself with Julie and her motivations. An adoptee at birth, Jeremy was sent to Gresham's School at eight years of age, an institution renowned for its Cadet Force and its links to the military. It served the children of the landed gentry of East Anglia, and though Jeremy's parents Nevill and June Bamber were very comfortably off they were not in that Premier League when it came to the pecking order in society to which wealth and privilege bought access. Jeremy survived his schooling- one might say he went through the motions without any distinction in particular, though any dirt which tabloid journalists might have wished subsequently to have dug up remained unforthcoming, Jeremy remaining through life rather squeamish if anything, which only adds to the conundrum of this story.
For those like myself who do still retain an empathy for Julie (though far more for Colin), it is only fair that we bear the onslaught of the Jeremy supporters who maintain amongst other things that Julie was an accomplice (yet if she is an accomplice Jeremy is not innocent) or was prepared at least to go along with his scheme of murdering five people for a family inheritance which would set them both up for life and remove the insecurity which had always surrounded her once and for all. Other diehard supporters assert that Julie's statements to Police are simply a pack of lies, extracted out of her by a combination of peer pressure, Police and relatives and that the Jeremy Bamber conviction was the price paid for Julie's extrication from all charges.
Julie's statement to Police is a combination of the mundane and the breathtakingly ghoulish, which could only too readily alienate her from any modicum of public sympathy. For example on Sheet 4 we are told by Julie:
"We were talking round the house and he stated that he would like to kill his parents. He said that he would have to kill Sheila and the twins as well. I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that not about Sheila and the twins."
Julie: how could you possibly know enough about the family in October 1984 to differentiate between any of the family members who were subsequently slain, how could you possibly argue for Sheila and the boys on this occasion and in the same breath condemn the parents to die, letting the whole matter slip from your train of thought on any following occasion, especially the night of Tuesday 5th August 1985 when your boyfriend telephoned you with the message: "It's tonight or never.." knowing that the power of life and death was in your hands? How could you see Jeremy kitted out in Williams and Griffin and buy yourself a black dress from Miss Selfridge and go through the charade of the funerals with a mass murderer on your arm and be content a few days later to have Jeremy move a settee into your new address, whilst outwardly maintaining your composure? You say in your statement that you wanted to make Jeremy happy: is this just a complete communications breakdown, or is there something more sinister behind it all?
"Julie is telling lots of lies" Jeremy tells us during his first interrogation by Police on Sunday 10 September 1985,yet won't elaborate on what these things are. Whilst Jeremy's personality is central to this case,(as all adoptees do not become mass murderers) one cannot help but think that he is holding back on information which may have incriminated Julie(whilst by definition incriminating himself),or maybe a woman's love for the picaresque villain is the all-consuming emotion which explains this case without need for further investigation. Were the social mores of the time such that money was the all-consuming god which showered power and status on people who deep down had no roots to fall back on, no backbone of character as Jeremy saw what religion had done to his mother and sister and vowed to steer a different course? Did the Winner Takes All philosophy triumph as some explored short cuts to the Thatcherism of the 1980s, except that in this case there were no winners, just a pile of corpses and some sad, lonely people as Jeremy played Theseus to Julie's Ariadne, yet the conclusive skein of wool which could unravel this mystery remains ever elusive, as Jeremy Bamber begins his 29th year of incarceration, where old sins cast long shadows.
-
Hello steve uk bet you vote Labour ;D
-
Steve,,that was some post,,which,by the way,doesn't give us an answer,but---------------nevertheless tells us that you too keep your cards close to your chest also. An excellent overall account.
I remember reading that JM's mum was very fond of Jeremy and he of her too as he used to call her " mum ". How he must have longed for a normal life,Sheila too,,from the oppressive confines of White House Farm and June with her religious mania.It must have been stifling.
My God,it wasn't Sheila who was the " nutter " !
-
It's ALWAYS the quiet,unassuming ones !!
-
Steve,,that was some post,,which,by the way,doesn't give us an answer,but---------------nevertheless tells us that you too keep your cards close to your chest also. An excellent overall account.
I remember reading that JM's mum was very fond of Jeremy and he of her too as he used to call her " mum ". How he must have longed for a normal life,Sheila too,,from the oppressive confines of White House Farm and June with her religious mania.It must have been stifling.
My God,it wasn't Sheila who was the " nutter " !
Thanks lookout. It would be churlish of me not to want Julie Smerchanski to get on with her own life,but if you believe Jeremy totally innocent then the corollary is Julie lied. What we as a society do with Jeremy is another matter: some judicial systems like Saudi Arabia give the victims a say,and Colin is of the opinion Jeremy should never be released. Against this is the destruction of the human spirit which lifelong incarceration brings. A terrible dilemma for us all.
-
Thanks lookout. It would be churlish of me not to want Julie Smerchanski to get on with her own life,but if you believe Jeremy totally innocent then the corollary is Julie lied. What we as a society do with Jeremy is another matter: some judicial systems like Saudi Arabia give the victims a say,and Colin is of the opinion Jeremy should never be released. Against this is the destruction of the human spirit which lifelong incarceration brings. A terrible dilemma for us all.
I'm afraid Julie,in her infinite wisdom at the time,went along with the theory of there being safety in numbers as fingers pointed to Jeremy. She'd felt it her duty to be on the side of the relatives,,although if she'd have had anything about her at all,she'd have felt a pang of pity for the man who was being vilified by many.
I'll admit,it must have been a rotten position for her to have been in at the time after having been through so much in their relatively short courtship,,but at the same time,the thought of a " cash prize " at the end of it all,must have lightened the load a bit.
Whether it would have been a different story if they hadn't parted company,I don't know. That would have depended on how loyal a person she was at the time. £25,000,or Jeremy.
The witnesses for the prosecution were more or less forced to fabricate in order to see the case through and get a conviction at the end of it.
Anyone else other than Jeremy on the stand,would have kicked off at some of the twists and turns that were made during the trial. I just think it's a national disgrace that he was sent to prison for one of the most unfair trials of this century.
-
Thanks lookout. It would be churlish of me not to want Julie Smerchanski to get on with her own life,but if you believe Jeremy totally innocent then the corollary is Julie lied. What we as a society do with Jeremy is another matter: some judicial systems like Saudi Arabia give the victims a say,and Colin is of the opinion Jeremy should never be released. Against this is the destruction of the human spirit which lifelong incarceration brings. A terrible dilemma for us all.
I personally believe life imprisonment is inhumane. I used to believe in capital punishment. But there are some murderers who must never be released as they are just too sick to do so. I honestly do not know what the answer is. It seems a simply matter for some, for whom it is easy to say kill em all. I used to think like that, a life for a life etc. Until I understood what that Biblical verse actually meant. Which is exact no more than what is due. The verse is in fact telling us the exact opposite of how many interpret it to mean. eg: The natural thing with most is revenge upon someone who has wronged them. So you get some saying something like, "He beat my daughter up. I'll kill him for that". Or, "He stole my car, so I will burn his house down".
So that law was to prevent overkill if you like. It was an attempt to control one's natural tendency for revenge. In other words do not exact a punishment that is out of proportion with regards to the crime. But of course that rule has been misinterpreted by most down the years so that they take it as licence to kill that person who has killed another person.
But it is again my own belief that if JB is guilty then he must remain in prison. Although I think it right for the individuals who were directly affected by his alleged crime to forgive him if they have the strength to do so. Although if it were my family I'm not sure how I would react to him?
-
I wouldn't go against my better judgement to say I'd forgive anyone,because I'm not of the mind to. If someone killed my family,I would want revenge and would never rest until I got it. Little things I can let slide,,but certainly nothing major.
I know it's better for the health to forgive,as usually,if you wait long enough,those who've wronged will come to a sticky end anyway. I've known that to happen over the years.
I'm an impetuous person by nature,so would rather strike while the iron's hot !
-
I think it would be possible for me to forgive the crime, in fact I know it would. But add on top of that the years of accusations that have been thrown the families way - then I think you are in a position where any kind of forgiveness it completely out of the question.
-
I used to know a lady (I knew her as Mrs. Hugher) Her son worked at London airport as a meteorologist. One night he was working alone in his office and a young man came in who was drugged up on something and shot him in the back of the head killing him instantly.
She wrote to the murderer who was sent to prison forgiving him. But it affected her immensely. I remember that she couldn't eat of drink anything after 6pm, Which was about the time her son was murdered.
But the law is different from personal feelings as it is meant to keep order in society. It has not got the luxury of who to forgive and who to convict. It must stick to ridged principles as laid down by government.
-
I'm afraid Julie,in her infinite wisdom at the time,went along with the theory of there being safety in numbers as fingers pointed to Jeremy. She'd felt it her duty to be on the side of the relatives,,although if she'd have had anything about her at all,she'd have felt a pang of pity for the man who was being vilified by many.
I'll admit,it must have been a rotten position for her to have been in at the time after having been through so much in their relatively short courtship,,but at the same time,the thought of a " cash prize " at the end of it all,must have lightened the load a bit.
Whether it would have been a different story if they hadn't parted company,I don't know. That would have depended on how loyal a person she was at the time. £25,000,or Jeremy.
The witnesses for the prosecution were more or less forced to fabricate in order to see the case through and get a conviction at the end of it.
Anyone else other than Jeremy on the stand,would have kicked off at some of the twists and turns that were made during the trial. I just think it's a national disgrace that he was sent to prison for one of the most unfair trials of this century.
Sometimes love does fade as we see people in a different light due to happenstance,we see their bad qualities outweigh their good ones or we finally manage to get on their wavelength and don't like what we see. Julie thought she was being loyal and would stay loyal,she thought that love would conquer all but it wasn't enough as she closed the bedroom door and realized she had fallen in love with a monster,a man who worshipped money to the exclusion of all other,a man with whom she could not possibly bear children..
-
..all this running through her mind as she awaited Jeremy's return with Brett that Saturday afternoon on the doorstep of Moreshead Mansions,never to have that key in her grasp. Was she bereft of her true love and wondering where her future lay,or did she think to herself "I helped you kill five people and this is how you repay me.."
-
..or was it all just a terrible mistake,as a Julie desperate to cling onto her job ordered sleeping pills from the doctor,which Jeremy used to his advantage in a vain attempt to tie her into murder,along with the sequence of telephone calls which helped to sound her out as well as make her an accessory?
-
Sometimes love does fade as we see people in a different light due to happenstance,we see their bad qualities outweigh their good ones or we finally manage to get on their wavelength and don't like what we see. Julie thought she was being loyal and would stay loyal,she thought that love would conquer all but it wasn't enough as she closed the bedroom door and realized she had fallen in love with a monster,a man who worshipped money to the exclusion of all other,a man with whom she could not possibly bear children..
It would also appear that it wasn't only he who " worshipped money ".
As for children,,I wouldn't be too sure if Jeremy was even capable of that,as for some unknown reason the woman he was living with had a couple of miscarriages,and it didn't seem to be anything to do with her as she already had children to her first marriage.
-
"Julie became my girlfriend" Jeremy defiantly told a bemused DCI Jones and Bob Miller on 10 September,still unaware how much Julie had told,yet unprepared for the onslaught which was to ensue.
-
It would also appear that it wasn't only he who " worshipped money ".
As for children,,I wouldn't be too sure if Jeremy was even capable of that,as for some unknown reason the woman he was living with had a couple of miscarriages,and it didn't seem to be anything to do with her as she already had children to her first marriage.
Could this man who bought Lego for Suzette's children and played with them as if they were his own be capable of such a monstrosity,or did he decide that if he couldn't have children of his own then Sheila herself did not deserve any? Was the ill-timed programme on miscarriages that Tuesday night the trigger as Jeremy unwound on his chintz upholstered chair at Bourtree Cottage,before ingesting a huge dose of cannabis and cocaine and finally making the decision to proceed..
-
Steve,,it wasn't Jeremy who thought on the lines of either having children or not having them.
-
steve I agree my love is fading daily has been for years ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Should "life imprisonment" be classed as a form of torture ?
-
I would imagine so,haughton. Without a doubt.
-
I doubt the Prison Officers would like it much either,as there's no hope they can offer them and nothing they can do to counteract their recalcitrance.
-
I hope that Jeremy is guilty - otherwise that sentence is just too cruel.
-
I hope that Jeremy is guilty - otherwise that sentence is just too cruel.
Nobody in either innocent or guilty camp would have foreseen this situation where Jeremy still protests his innocence after 29 years. It seems that in his own mind as he expressed to Julie that he really had committed the perfect crime..
-
That being the case,Steve,,then Jeremy has beaten off 27 mental health workers who are trained in every field of mental illness,the polygram and any other assessment that has been conducted on Jeremy,,making him the most clever psychopathic monster in the history of man,having never been detected as a raving lunatic.
Who but a raving lunatic would murder 5 people including 2 children ?
Are you honestly saying that Jeremy has beaten the system ??
-
That being the case,Steve,,then Jeremy has beaten off 27 mental health workers who are trained in every field of mental illness,the polygram and any other assessment that has been conducted on Jeremy,,making him the most clever psychopathic monster in the history of man,having never been detected as a raving lunatic.
Who but a raving lunatic would murder 5 people including 2 children ?
Are you honestly saying that Jeremy has beaten the system ??
Yes I'm afraid I am lookout,and I blame drugs partly,the scourge of the modern age. It was Jeremy's need for a quick fix to relieve the monotony of the humdrum on the tractor,but of course all giving the brain a certain numbness,which is why I could never partake; Jeremy also thought he had tied Julie in with her cannabis dealing,the sleeping pills and the telephone calls.
-
Yes I'm afraid I am lookout,and I blame drugs partly,the scourge of the modern age. It was Jeremy's need for a quick fix to relieve the monotony of the humdrum on the tractor,but of course all giving the brain a certain numbness,which is why I could never partake; Jeremy also thought he had tied Julie in with her cannabis dealing,the sleeping pills and the telephone calls.
Right,,well remind me to further my education regarding psychiatry,because by all accounts,it seems to be a well-paid mugs game.
-
Right,,well remind me to further my education regarding psychiatry,because by all accounts,it seems to be a well-paid mugs game.
How does anyone else really know what is going through another's mind? Jeremy had the best training going with his education at Gresham's before those militaristic teachers who droned on yet got very little out of Jeremy, perfect for the Police interrogations where Jeremy had very little to say realizing near silence was the safest option,as Roger Wilkes discovered when he came to write his book. Jeremy realized that his cocktail of central nervous system stimulants could blunt his emotions and gird up his loins for the deed,otherwise he was quite squeamish being an A blood type by biology. He took his cannabis and his cocaine,and after they had worn off and he had consumed his breakfast he sat down to talk to DS Jones and Bob Miller.
-
You tell a fine tale,Steve. Full of ideas and cold cabbage. ;D
Though I have to admit that a strict upbringing coupled with a school run with military precision,sets you in good stead for any sort of an interrogation,especially that which you know nothing about !
-
You tell a fine tale,Steve. Full of ideas and cold cabbage. ;D
Though I have to admit that a strict upbringing coupled with a school run with military precision,sets you in good stead for any sort of an interrogation,especially that which you know nothing about !
Jeremy was very good at acting a little dimmer than he already was,rather like Gerda in the Agatha Christie novel "The Hollow",but Julie knew he was the culprit and Jeremy knew she knew..
-
Jeremy was very good at acting a little dimmer than he already was,rather like Gerda in the Agatha Christie novel "The Hollow",but Julie knew he was the culprit and Jeremy knew she knew..
But Julie couldn't say it outright ! Even at the mortuary,Julie asked a dead Sheila who'd done it. What a peculiar thing to do. I believe that both Sheila and Julie attended a clairvoyant ?
-
Jeremy was very good at acting a little dimmer than he already was,rather like Gerda in the Agatha Christie novel "The Hollow",but Julie knew he was the culprit and Jeremy knew she knew..
So from now on should we address you as Hercule, Steve? :)
-
But Julie couldn't say it outright ! Even at the mortuary,Julie asked a dead Sheila who'd done it. What a peculiar thing to do. I believe that both Sheila and Julie attended a clairvoyant ?
That was Colin I think,recommended by Michael Bentine,and thank goodness he got some solace from it.
-
That was Colin I think,recommended by Michael Bentine,and thank goodness he got some solace from it.
Now I know where the robin on the window-sill came from ::) Gypsy Rose Lee ! Probably a stuffed one.
-
That was Colin I think,recommended by Michael Bentine,and thank goodness he got some solace from it.
Colin and Sheila lived as tenants in a "clairvoiant" lady´s house. They both had readings don´t know about Julie.
P.S. Colin had his reading with Sheila present, but she preferred to get hers privatey, so he was not there.
-
That being the case,Steve,,then Jeremy has beaten off 27 mental health workers who are trained in every field of mental illness,the polygram and any other assessment that has been conducted on Jeremy,,making him the most clever psychopathic monster in the history of man,having never been detected as a raving lunatic.
Who but a raving lunatic would murder 5 people including 2 children ?
Are you honestly saying that Jeremy has beaten the system ??
No he is not that.
He is s psychopath. But they are not all smashing in doors saying 'here's Jonnie'. He is charming. Like Hanratty did, whose body was exhumed and DNA found him guilty.
Why does he protest his innocence ? I will locate my thread.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5358.0.html
-
Adam I would appreciate if you would locate your thread.
-
No he is not that.
He is s psychopath. But they are not all smashing in doors saying 'here's Jonnie'. He is charming. Like Hanratty did, whose body was exhumed and DNA found him guilty.
Why does he protest his innocence ? I will locate my thread.
How do you know he is a psychopath when all tests over at least 27 years have shown negative of psychopathy and personality disorders?
-
Ted Bundy was handsome & charismatic.
He denied committing multiple murders for over ten years. Finally confessing just before his execution, to try to delay it.
-
Ted Bundy was handsome & charismatic.
He denied committing multiple murders for over ten years. Finally confessing just before his execution, to try to delay it.
Yes, he was but that proves absolutely nothing.
-
Adam I would appreciate if you would locate your thread.
It is above you're post.
-
It is above you're post.
But we want written proof,Adam.
-
No he is not that.
He is s psychopath. But they are not all smashing in doors saying 'here's Jonnie'. He is charming. Like Hanratty did, whose body was exhumed and DNA found him guilty.
Why does he protest his innocence ? I will locate my thread.
He had endured six years at Gresham's,six lonely,wasted years where he grew ever distant from his parents at every holiday,where he stayed in his bedroom communicating with nobody,rather as he lives today. He had two brief round-the-world trips where he could breathe in that felicitous interlude,a handful of one night stands which meant nothing,and a passionate affair with Suzette,with whom he drifted apart when she could bear no more children. He almost found happiness with Julie but was unprepared and unready for domesticity,and the stifling noose tightened once more as a bleak future beckoned among that desolate Essex landscape and the yearning to return to the bright lights of London to experience what would merely have been more transitory delectation..
-
Adam so sorry must get some glasses ;D ;D ;D maybe I will have a party ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
How do you know he is a psychopath when all tests over at least 27 years have shown negative of psychopathy and personality disorders?
You know what. You are right.
I do not know what a psychopath is. Robert Napper, Peter Sutcliffe, ? Killing random strangers without a reason.
Jeremy committed a crime mainly for financial gain. Horrendous yes. Would he have committed more crimes ? Probably not. He had got what he wanted.
-
No-----------he hadn't got what he wanted at all. Think about it. ::)
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,5529.0.html
-
So from now on should we address you as Hercule, Steve? :)
If you like mon ami. It would be nice and snug at Whitehaven Mansions,but unlike Jeremy I'm not prepared to kill to get it.
-
You mean to say that you'd forfeit everything to go and live at Whitehaven Mansions ? Shame on you. You've got a good life where you are ;D ;D ;D ;D Some people are never satisfied. ::)
-
If you like mon ami. It would be nice and snug at Whitehaven Mansions,but unlike Jeremy I'm not prepared to kill to get it.
:) :) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
You mean to say that you'd forfeit everything to go and live at Whitehaven Mansions ? Shame on you. You've got a good life where you are ;D ;D ;D ;D Some people are never satisfied. ::)
I know,but watching the Encore channel at 7pm is not quite the same thing..
-
I know,but watching the Encore channel at 7pm is not quite the same thing..
Even that's a new one on me. Shows you how far behind the times I am.
-
Even that's a new one on me. Shows you how far behind the times I am.
Sky channel 123. But I hanker after the old times more than anyone: books not videos,real pianos not digital,a horse and trap and some romance,which is why I have some sympathy with Julie deceived by a rotter.
-
Sky channel 123. But I hanker after the old times more than anyone: books not videos,real pianos not digital,a horse and trap and some romance,which is why I have some sympathy with Julie deceived by a rotter.
You're an old romantic Steve. ;)
-
Next time you speak to someone not very knowledgeable about the case, tell them the reason (according to Jeremy) why Julie told the police & courts what she did.
The last person I told looked at me as if to say 'uh, are you serious'.
-
Sky channel 123. But I hanker after the old times more than anyone: books not videos,real pianos not digital,a horse and trap and some romance,which is why I have some sympathy with Julie deceived by a rotter.
You're not the only one,Steve,I agree about the old fashioned values and items,,but I fail to understand why your sympathies lie with Julie,as she too liked the finer things in life,and went after them by whatever means that she could.
-
You're not the only one,Steve,I agree about the old fashioned values and items,,but I fail to understand why your sympathies lie with Julie,as she too liked the finer things in life,and went after them by whatever means that she could.
But she worked her way up from nothing, worked as a waitress and packer at Maldon Growers, decorated Bourtree Cottage,endured June's snide comments without answering back whilst taking over the maternal role Jeremy never experienced,all this whilst juggling university studies and teaching practice. No wonder she needed those sleeping pills. And look what she's achieved since. How she kept her sanity I'll never know..
-
But she worked her way up from nothing, worked as a waitress and packer at Maldon Growers, decorated Bourtree Cottage,endured June's snide comments without answering back whilst taking over the maternal role Jeremy never experienced,all this whilst juggling university studies and teaching practice. No wonder she needed those sleeping pills. And look what she's achieved since. How she kept her sanity I'll never know..
Steve,you'd be surprised just how many do keep their sanity under adverse conditions,and without the need for sleeping pills,or a lift of £25,000 into the bargain. That in itself makes all the difference.
-
But she worked her way up from nothing, worked as a waitress and packer at Maldon Growers, decorated Bourtree Cottage,endured June's snide comments without answering back whilst taking over the maternal role Jeremy never experienced,all this whilst juggling university studies and teaching practice. No wonder she needed those sleeping pills. And look what she's achieved since. How she kept her sanity I'll never know..
But Steve, all Further Ed students worked in the holidays and maybe weekends and still do to supplement their grants/loans etc. she was not at all unusual in that way. When she worked in the hols she wasn't doing teaching practice or college studies and managed without sleeping pills. Also many of them have done extremely well in their careers without having £25,000 hand outs to help them along the way. Sorry if it sounds harsh but it is true imo.
-
But she worked her way up from nothing, worked as a waitress and packer at Maldon Growers, decorated Bourtree Cottage,endured June's snide comments without answering back whilst taking over the maternal role Jeremy never experienced,all this whilst juggling university studies and teaching practice. No wonder she needed those sleeping pills. And look what she's achieved since. How she kept her sanity I'll never know..
Steve, you forget that on top of this, she was a drug dealer, thief and fraudster.
You´d think she wouldn´t need those sleeping pills with all those activities! She didn´t take them anyway, so she DIDN´T need them.
-
Steve, you forget that on top of this, she was a drug dealer, thief and fraudster.
You´d think she wouldn´t need those sleeping pills with all those activities! She didn´t take them anyway, so she DIDN´T need them.
Was she the Scarface of Goldsmiths College ? Didn't Jeremy deal in drugs ? Or did he go to Amsterdam after the massacre for the windmills ?
What did she steal ? Oh yes Jeremy basically gave her no choice but to act as a lookout when he robbed his parents.
Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud to perjury in such a serious trial. A woman (apparently) scorned eh.
-
Was she the Scarface of Goldsmiths College ? Didn't Jeremy deal in drugs ? Or did he go to Amsterdam after the massacre for the windmills ?
What did she steal ? Oh yes Jeremy basically gave her no choice but to act as a lookout when he robbed his parents.
Susan Battersby's 1984 minor cheque book fraud go perjury in such a serious trial. A woman (apparently) scorned eh.
It wasn´t Susan Batterby´s cheque book fraud. She was very reluctant, but Julie, who´s idea it was in the first place, talked her into it. It took some time....
Julie was no saint, though guilters have to paint that picture of her.
-
It wasn´t Susan Batterby´s cheque book fraud. She was very reluctant, but Julie, who´s idea it was in the first place, talked her into it. It took some time....
Julie was no saint, though guilters have to paint that picture of her.
There is no need at all to paint her as a saint and I certainly don't do so. As soon as she found out he did it she should have ran to police. Better late than never though.
-
It wasn´t Susan Batterby´s cheque book fraud. She was very reluctant, but Julie, who´s idea it was in the first place, talked her into it. It took some time....
Julie was no saint, though guilters have to paint that picture of her.
No one is a saint. Including Julie.
-
Just why did JM need the sleeping pills ?? Assisting Jeremy to achieve his goal ?
-
The sleeping pills were hard to wash down,so she didn't take them,but Jeremy seized the opportunity to incriminate her by default,just as he did with the Ladies' bicycle. Cynicism of the highest order. He did it with June,he did it with a succession of female prison visitors including Daisygate. In this life people may act a part for a time but they quickly revert to type. During and subsequent to the funerals Julie didn't like what she saw.
-
There is no need at all to paint her as a saint and I certainly don't do so. As soon as she found out he did it she should have ran to police. Better late than never though.
If she is to be believed, she could have prevented the murders.
-
If she is to be believed, she could have prevented the murders.
Indeed she could,and any feelings of guilt should remain with her,and not the fact that she pretends to fear for her family should Jeremy be released.
-
Indeed she could,and any feelings of guilt should remain with her,and not the fact that she pretends to fear for her family should Jeremy be released.
We just don't know whether Julie feels any remorse,but it's a lot trickier with children whether you're dealing with Julie's or Ann Eaton's.
-
We just don't know whether Julie feels any remorse,but it's a lot trickier with children whether you're dealing with Julie's or Ann Eaton's.
Ann Eatons' children were already hardened when they were taken to WHF just days after the tragedy while AE was making the beds where two little boys were shot dead. No wonder those kids had nightmares. Would AE have been in their graves as quick ? Disgusting.No remorse there !
-
We just don't know whether Julie feels any remorse,but it's a lot trickier with children whether you're dealing with Julie's or Ann Eaton's.
Colin had survivor's guilt and if Jeremy's claims were actually true he also would have had survivor's guilt. Colin felt bad because the boys did not want to stay over. He had no way to know what would happen and why they didn't want to stay had nothing to do with what happened but it is like when an airline crashes and someone wanted to back out last minute but you made them go and then it crashes you feel guilty.
Jeremy claims he left the murder weapon by the loaded magazine and extra bullets instead of putting it away. The allegation is that Sheila found same and ended up using this weapon of opportunity on the family but otherwise would not have gone to do so. He should have felt guilty about being the cause. He never expressed that to anyone. Even if he didn't fele that way long term initially you would think about it and mnetion it until you got over it and some never get over something like that it follows them to the grave. He didn't give that a throught which is just one more reason to doubt his claims.
-
Colin had survivor's guilt and if Jeremy's claims were actually true he also would have had survivor's guilt. Colin felt bad because the boys did not want to stay over. He had no way to know what would happen and why they didn't want to stay had nothing to do with what happened but it is like when an airline crashes and someone wanted to back out last minute but you made them go and then it crashes you feel guilty.
Jeremy claims he left the murder weapon by the loaded magazine and extra bullets instead of putting it away. The allegation is that Sheila found same and ended up using this weapon of opportunity on the family but otherwise would not have gone to do so. He should have felt guilty about being the cause. He never expressed that to anyone. Even if he didn't fele that way long term initially you would think about it and mnetion it until you got over it and some never get over something like that it follows them to the grave. He didn't give that a throught which is just one more reason to doubt his claims.
As Jeremy told Julie over dinner at Blazer's restaurant,Blackheath: "I don't feel anything..maybe there is something wrong with me." He was typical of those of his generation who wanted all the trappings of success without putting in the spadework to get it.
-
As Jeremy told Julie over dinner at Blazer's restaurant,Blackheath: "I don't feel anything..maybe there is something wrong with me." He was typical of those of his generation who wanted all the trappings of success without putting in the spadework to get it.
Colin also talks along those lines about the weeks immediately after the tragedies. To his own surprise (and other´s - he became a suspect because of his calmness) he was very calm, even elated in a strange sort of way.
The "real" reaction came later. Too much to take in, and defence mechanisms kick in - for both Jeremy and Colin.
Colin also "partied" after the tragedy - too hard to sit home alone, it is normal. Both for Jeremy and for Colin.
-
A delayed reaction is horrible ,,as you have to relive something all over again to realise that it has happened.
-
A delayed reaction is horrible ,,as you have to relive something all over again to realise that it has happened.
Jeremy's grief has been spasmodic: firstly blubbering at Bourtree Cottage so loudly that first morning he could be heard from the street,then his collapse at the funeral as the cortege passed the television cameras,then his admitting to Julie that he didn't feel anything. No wonder she finally realized what a shallow shower he was..
-
Jeremy's grief has been spasmodic: firstly blubbering at Bourtree Cottage so loudly that first morning he could be heard from the street,then his collapse at the funeral as the cortege passed the television cameras,then his admitting to Julie that he didn't feel anything. No wonder she finally realized what a shallow shower he was..
Julies face never altered.I didn't notice her grief,or anyone else's weeping and wailing because they were all too busy watching Jeremy like a hawk.
I bet Jeremy felt like howling like a wolf,but had to stem his feelings because of cameras shoved in his face. How intrusive at a time like that. Even then there was an inquest afterwards on Jeremys' overall behaviour of how he was perceived to have shed crocodile tears,and copied Colin on how he should behave at a funeral. The eyes of the world were scrutinising Jeremy,and left nothing private.
-
As Jeremy told Julie over dinner at Blazer's restaurant,Blackheath: "I don't feel anything..maybe there is something wrong with me." He was typical of those of his generation who wanted all the trappings of success without putting in the spadework to get it.
Actually Steve that may very well have been the truth, so much loss is too much for the mind to deal with and it isn't unusual for people who have suffered traumatic loss to feel like that and to actually question themselves in that way. It sounds very natural to me.
-
Jeremy's grief has been spasmodic: firstly blubbering at Bourtree Cottage so loudly that first morning he could be heard from the street,then his collapse at the funeral as the cortege passed the television cameras,then his admitting to Julie that he didn't feel anything. No wonder she finally realized what a shallow shower he was..
So you were around him all the time Steve? They are just a few snapshots which we have heard about. According to Brett Collins he broke down on numerous occasions however, Anne Eaton claimed she didn't shed a tear for a long time so was she guilty?
-
So you were around him all the time Steve? They are just a few snapshots which we have heard about. According to Brett Collins he broke down on numerous occasions however, Anne Eaton claimed she didn't shed a tear for a long time so was she guilty?
He's finally got round to talking to the victims daily as he walks round his prison cell. If committing the murders didn't turn him insane his incarceration for 29 years certainly will,when he has nothing to say and never did have anything to say to anyone..
-
He's finally got round to talking to the victims daily as he walks round his prison cell. If committing the murders didn't turn him insane his incarceration for 29 years certainly will,when he has nothing to say and never did have anything to say to anyone..
What if he didn't do it Steve, won't you feel really guilty?
-
What if he didn't do it Steve, won't you feel really guilty?
I won't because the evidence points to him, not like people who think Bamber is guilty have made things up out of thin air.
What about if he is guilty? Won't you feel guilty for supporting a child killer?
-
He's finally got round to talking to the victims daily as he walks round his prison cell. If committing the murders didn't turn him insane his incarceration for 29 years certainly will,when he has nothing to say and never did have anything to say to anyone..
I don't think he is insane, he has a large ego though. He's wrapped many people around his finger and it still manipulative - not just internet canks (not talking about members here) but legally trained professionals throw their weight behind Bamber - not sure what the allure is because the evidence isn't there.
-
Nobody in either innocent or guilty camp would have foreseen this situation where Jeremy still protests his innocence after 29 years. It seems that in his own mind as he expressed to Julie that he really had committed the perfect crime..
It is often said there is no such thing as a perfect crime the ppassing of time normally casts the truth , in this case over a quarter of a century and still today cases on both sides still ensue daily.Perhaps your real point Steve has J S moved on to this most likely has she still a tiny return to the past im not sure each and every passing os early August will bring memories for all, as to Jeremy is life in jail inhuman, yes I feel it is , is termination of a criminal human yes to that , one thing to think of as a famous lady recently wrote in the papers victims of crime those murdered had no choice of humane death.
-
It is often said there is no such thing as a perfect crime the ppassing of time normally casts the truth , in this case over a quarter of a century and still today cases on both sides still ensue daily.Perhaps your real point Steve has J S moved on to this most likely has she still a tiny return to the past im not sure each and every passing os early August will bring memories for all, as to Jeremy is life in jail inhuman, yes I feel it is , is termination of a criminal human yes to that , one thing to think of as a famous lady recently wrote in the papers victims of crime those murdered had no choice of humane death.
There seems to be no movement at all from Julie's side,which does suggest that her testimony for the most part was true. She was also spared another media circus in 2012 when a British judge dismissed Jeremy's latest appeal,if anyone would like to comment?http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/city-woman-key-witness-if-uk-judge-allows-appeal-148056175.html
-
As Julie turns 50 this Summer it may be apposite to look back for a moment,to reminisce and reflect on the legacy of this notorious case of which Julie was so much a part. Of course none of us are the same as we were 29 years ago; we have all moved on in some part of our lives and so it is with Julie,now living in a smart Winnipeg suburb and seemingly the woman who has it all: a loving husband,two healthy children and a stratospheric rise up the ladder of the education profession to rank amongst one of the most highly paid in that sector today.
Yet it was not always the case for Julie,the product of a broken home and allegations of abuse within it,the one constant being the excellent free State education of a Northern town so often mocked by the London-based tabloid press,yet which gave Julie the escape route she needed and indeed the safety and security which it afforded her may well be the reason she chose to continue in that sphere when around her things looked less certain.
It may be worthwhile here to pause for a moment and take a look back at the Britain of the 1980s,a place which had broken with all economic policy pertaining since 1945 and which now championed the pursuit of individualism and the acquisition of wealth,as politicians told the workless people of the North to "get on their bike" and find work in the more prosperous areas. Many did follow this advice including Julie's family,and it was for this reason that Julie found herself at Colchester Sixth Form College amidst a more prosperous community. It's not hard to fathom that Julie must have realized she was comparatively lucky in the scheme of things as wages for those in work rose year on year and with student loans not yet introduced Julie must at this stage have been optimistic about her future as she secured a place at Goldsmith's University to train to become a teacher.
Yet there must always have been a doubt in Julie's mind as there was with many people,as the champagne flowed for some yet the Miner's Strike showed just how deeply the country was divided. Julie would have known instinctively which side she preferred to be on,as to be fair anyone in her place would(remember Sheila was quoted as saying "it's important to be in the right crowd"): if she kept her head down and worked hard (so we were constantly told) things would work out.
It was amid this background of the new work ethic that Julie met Jeremy Bamber,working as a casual barman at Sloppy Joe's restaurant in Colchester where she was a waitress. It's uncertain as to whether it was love at first sight,but they both seemed to be suited,with Julie as the brains of the outfit and Jeremy with the eye for a pretty girl and never so happy as when he had a cocktail shaker in his hands. In fact had this story worked out differently these two who met as Yuppies may now have been running a wine bar in a fashionable area of London and nobody would bat an eyelid as they ordered their Caipirinha and watched the world go by,as the owners made the transition from exuberant youth to comfortable middle age.
However there is no way to avoid the subsequent narrative because reader,this is no Mills and Boon paperback,but a tragedy worthy of the great stories of which Shakespeare himself took and reworked,with redolences of the troubled personage of a Hamlet, the bloodthirstiness of a Macbeth,or the miscommunication evoking a Romeo and Juliet,depending on your point of view.
A word about Jeremy here,though the thread for the most part concerns itself with Julie and her motivations. An adoptee at birth,Jeremy was sent to Gresham's School at eight years of age,an institution renowned for its Cadet Force and its links to the military. It served the children of the landed gentry of East Anglia,and though Jeremy's parents Nevill and June Bamber were very comfortably off they were not in that Premier League when it came to the pecking order in society to which wealth and privilege bought access. Jeremy survived his schooling- one might say he went through the motions without any distinction in particular,though any dirt which tabloid journalists might have wished subsequently to have dug up remained unforthcoming,Jeremy remaining through life rather squeamish if anything,which only adds to the conundrum of this story.
For those like myself who do still retain an empathy for Julie(though far more for Colin), it is only fair that we bear the onslaught of the Jeremy supporters who maintain amongst other things that Julie was an accomplice (yet if she is an accomplice Jeremy is not innocent) or was prepared at least to go along with his scheme of murdering five people for a family inheritance which would set them both up for life and remove the insecurity which had always surrounded her once and for all. Other diehard supporters assert that Julie's statements to Police are simply a pack of lies,extracted out of her by a combination of peer pressure,Police and relatives and that the Jeremy Bamber conviction was the price paid for Julie's extrication from all charges.
Julie's statement to Police is a combination of the mundane and the breathtakingly ghoulish,which could only too readily alienate her from any modicum of public sympathy. For example on Sheet 4 we are told by Julie:
"We were talking round the house and he stated that he would like to kill his parents. He said that he would have to kill Sheila and the twins as well. I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that not about Sheila and the twins."
Julie: how could you possibly know enough about the family in October 1984 to differentiate between any of the family members who were subsequently slain,how could you possibly argue for Sheila and the boys on this occasion and in the same breath condemn the parents to die,letting the whole matter slip from your train of thought on any following occasion,especially the night of Tuesday 5th August 1985 when your boyfriend telephoned you with the message: "It's tonight or never.." knowing that the power of life and death was in your hands? How could you see Jeremy kitted out in Williams and Griffin and buy yourself a black dress from Miss Selfridge and go through the charade of the funerals with a mass murderer on your arm and be content a few days later to have Jeremy move a settee into your new address,whilst outwardly maintaining your composure? You say in your statement that you wanted to make Jeremy happy: is this just a complete communications breakdown,or is there something more sinister behind it all?
"Julie is telling lots of lies" Jeremy tells us during his first interrogation by Police on Sunday 10 September 1985,yet won't elaborate on what these things are. Whilst Jeremy's personality is central to this case,(as all adoptees do not become mass murderers)one cannot help but think that he is holding back on information which may have incriminated Julie(whilst by definition incriminating himself),or maybe a woman's love for the picaresque villain is the all-consuming emotion which explains this case without need for further investigation. Were the social mores of the time such that money was the all-consuming god which showered power and status on people who deep down had no roots to fall back on, no backbone of character as Jeremy saw what religion had done to his mother and sister and vowed to steer a different course? Did the Winner Takes All philosophy triumph as some explored short cuts to the Thatcherism of the 1980s,except that in this case there were no winners,just a pile of corpses and some sad,lonely people as Jeremy played Theseus to Julie's Ariadne,yet the conclusive skein of wool which could unravel this mystery remains ever elusive,as Jeremy Bamber begins his 29th year of incarceration,where old sins cast long shadows.
Steve, I'm aware that I've often criticized them, but I'd like to say what a JOY it is to again read your thoughtful, well written and correctly spelt posts.
I have previously felt that we've been diametrically opposed, however I can NOW see more in the way of similarities than differences. It occurs to me that your reasons for defending Julie may be very close to my own for defending Jeremy. Your links to Julie are your shared strong Northern roots, education and career choices. My links to Jeremy are our shared "Southerness", education and, of course, adoption................I have also wondered what were the similarities shared by Julie and Jeremy.
It's interesting that whilst you have condemned Jeremy for wanting "La dolce vita" without working for it, it was at the same place of employment, WORKING -no matter the reason for it- that he and Julie met. You speak of how Jeremy was caught up in the mood of "Thatcherism" which was at its' height in the 1980's, yet Jeremy was no intellectual and was already part of that strata of society who already had it, however, in order to appear more intellectual than he really was, and maybe to impress Julie, I suspect he was more than willing to play the "Thatcherism" game. I suspect the "Thatcherism" ethic meant MUCH more to the VERY much sharper Julie, who appears to have done rather more than absorb the knowledge through the process of osmosis. It seems to me that Julie may have had a "life-plan" -or might that be a fantasy she hoped would be a reality?- which she followed rigidly and never deviated from. Thus Julie the achiever met Jeremy who already HAD achieved that which Julie was hoping to-STATUS- and as status and wealth USUALLY go hand in hand and are USUALLY happy bed partners, becoming his girlfriend was probably a "no brainer."
If we accept that Julie had a life-plan -which Jeremy became a part of- it's reasonable to assume that here was a girl who did her thinking with reason, and given her background of broken home and possible abuse, rather than emotion, thus it's plausible to assume that whatever happened within the relationship, however distasteful it may have been to many, she would have been more capable of staying with, it if it meant she would achieve her aims, than would a girl who thought emotionally. I'm inclined to believe that this is what she may have done until Jeremy made it impossible for her to remain.
Did she love him? I think it's too complex a question to answer with a simple Yes or No. If the question is, did she love him because he appeared to be capable of fulfilling her requirements, I think the answer would be Yes, she did. However, if the question is, did she love him in an all consuming, follow him to the ends of the earth, live in a shed with him, DIE for him sort of way, I feel the answer is emphatically NO WAY. Would Julie have achieved what she has, HAD she been been the type to go with their heart, rather than their head? I very much doubt it. Julie showed a determination to HAVE, driven by her background and past experiences. That drive was more hers than Jeremy's because he had never experienced the need FOR it, he wouldn't have had the hunger and drive to NEED to make it happen because he was assured it was going to happen, anyway. However, in my mind there remains a highly significant but unanswered question. WHATEVER Jeremy may, or not, have done, had Julie's aim of becoming the next Mrs Bamber been realized with the aid of HUGELY expensive rings and the promise of further indulgences, how altruistic would she then have been? How then would she have reconciled her conscience about no longer being able to sleep with the man who, she told a jury, was responsible for the deaths of three adults and two children. I can only think she would have gone with what she believed to be the best thing for HER.
-
Could this man who bought Lego for Suzette's children and played with them as if they were his own be capable of such a monstrosity,or did he decide that if he couldn't have children of his own then Sheila herself did not deserve any? Was the ill-timed programme on miscarriages that Tuesday night the trigger as Jeremy unwound on his chintz upholstered chair at Bourtree Cottage,before ingesting a huge dose of cannabis and cocaine and finally making the decision to proceed..
Steve, are you suggesting that Jeremy may have thought himself to be infertile? What reason might he have had, in his early 20's to think that? OR, is it that you're simply referring to Suzette's "supposed" miscarriages?
I think we need to look VERY carefully at, and with some understanding, of her situation. Firstly, she was French, not stupid and she was a mature, experienced woman in an undoubtedly heady and exciting extra marital affair with a good looking, well heeled but emotionally inexperienced BOY with no proven track record of being either responsible or reliable, and not having achieved anything but the modern day equivalent of the Grand Tour. She already HAD children and whilst talk of "making babies" might make a powerful aphrodisiac at certain moments, in the cold light of reality, it probably wasn't on her agenda, SO, as a mature woman who was MORE than aware that, generally speaking, immature boys DON'T make good and consistent fathers and the mother is generally the one who is left, literally holding the baby, she may have felt it was kinder, rather than to spell this fact out to him, to let him down gently by saying that she'd suffered a miscarriage.
She probably had been fond of him. She MAY have loved him, but it wouldn't have prevented her from recognizing that by having a child with him she'd probably be getting two for the price of one.
-
Steve, are you suggesting that Jeremy may have thought himself to be infertile? What reason might he have had, in his early 20's to think that? OR, is it that you're simply referring to Suzette's "supposed" miscarriages?
I think we need to look VERY carefully at, and with some understanding, of her situation. Firstly, she was French, not stupid and she was a mature, experienced woman in an undoubtedly heady and exciting extra marital affair with a good looking, well heeled but emotionally inexperienced BOY with no proven track record of being either responsible or reliable, and not having achieved anything but the modern day equivalent of the Grand Tour. She already HAD children and whilst talk of "making babies" might make a powerful aphrodisiac at certain moments, in the cold light of reality, it probably wasn't on her agenda, SO, as a mature woman who was MORE than aware that, generally speaking, immature boys DON'T make good and consistent fathers and the mother is generally the one who is left, literally holding the baby, she may have felt it was kinder, rather than to spell this fact out to him, to let him down gently by saying that she'd suffered a miscarriage.
She probably had been fond of him. She MAY have loved him, but it wouldn't have prevented her from recognizing that by having a child with him she'd probably be getting two for the price of one.
Very good observations, April.
I find it absurd that Jeremy would have been in any way jealous of Sheila for having children and that that somehow influenced his decision to kill them all, as Steve has sometimes suggested. 1) He was a man. 2) He was a YOUNG man.
-
Very good observations, April.
I find it absurd that Jeremy would have been in any way jealous of Sheila for having children and that that somehow influenced his decision to kill them all, as Steve has sometimes suggested. 1) He was a man. 2) He was a YOUNG man.
Thank-you Alias. Yes, I agree with what you say. Whilst anything IS possible, I suppose, I imagine it's highly UNlikely that Jeremy, or ANYONE else ONLY just in their 20's, would kill someone else's children because their girlfriend wasn't pregnant that month.
-
Steve, I'm aware that I've often criticized them, but I'd like to say what a JOY it is to again read your thoughtful, well written and correctly spelt posts.
I have previously felt that we've been diametrically opposed, however I can NOW see more in the way of similarities than differences. It occurs to me that your reasons for defending Julie may be very close to my own for defending Jeremy. Your links to Julie are your shared strong Northern roots, education and career choices. My links to Jeremy are our shared "Southerness", education and, of course, adoption................I have also wondered what were the similarities shared by Julie and Jeremy.
It's interesting that whilst you have condemned Jeremy for wanting "La dolce vita" without working for it, it was at the same place of employment, WORKING -no matter the reason for it- that he and Julie met. You speak of how Jeremy was caught up in the mood of "Thatcherism" which was at its' height in the 1980's, yet Jeremy was no intellectual and was already part of that strata of society who already had it, however, in order to appear more intellectual than he really was, and maybe to impress Julie, I suspect he was more than willing to play the "Thatcherism" game. I suspect the "Thatcherism" ethic meant MUCH more to the VERY much sharper Julie, who appears to have done rather more than absorb the knowledge through the process of osmosis. It seems to me that Julie may have had a "life-plan" -or might that be a fantasy she hoped would be a reality?- which she followed rigidly and never deviated from. Thus Julie the achiever met Jeremy who already HAD achieved that which Julie was hoping to-STATUS- and as status and wealth USUALLY go hand in hand and are USUALLY happy bed partners, becoming his girlfriend was probably a "no brainer."
If we accept that Julie had a life-plan -which Jeremy became a part of- it's reasonable to assume that here was a girl who did her thinking with reason, and given her background of broken home and possible abuse, rather than emotion, thus it's plausible to assume that whatever happened within the relationship, however distasteful it may have been to many, she would have been more capable of staying with, it if it meant she would achieve her aims, than would a girl who thought emotionally. I'm inclined to believe that this is what she may have done until Jeremy made it impossible for her to remain.
Did she love him? I think it's too complex a question to answer with a simple Yes or No. If the question is, did she love him because he appeared to be capable of fulfilling her requirements, I think the answer would be Yes, she did. However, if the question is, did she love him in an all consuming, follow him to the ends of the earth, live in a shed with him, DIE for him sort of way, I feel the answer is emphatically NO WAY. Would Julie have achieved what she has, HAD she been been the type to go with their heart, rather than their head? I very much doubt it. Julie showed a determination to HAVE, driven by her background and past experiences. That drive was more hers than Jeremy's because he had never experienced the need FOR it, he wouldn't have had the hunger and drive to NEED to make it happen because he was assured it was going to happen, anyway. However, in my mind there remains a highly significant but unanswered question. WHATEVER Jeremy may, or not, have done, had Julie's aim of becoming the next Mrs Bamber been realized with the aid of HUGELY expensive rings and the promise of further indulgences, how altruistic would she then have been? How then would she have reconciled her conscience about no longer being able to sleep with the man who, she told a jury, was responsible for the deaths of three adults and two children. I can only think she would have gone with what she believed to be the best thing for HER.
Hi April and welcome back to the site after your few days absence with what must be one of the top ten posts on this site,moving the thread on in ways I had not envisaged. Just what do we make of Julie and Jeremy as individuals and Julie and Jeremy as a team? I think Julie did realize that her life was precariously balanced,with her one chance of making something of herself coming in the teaching field,not marriage to Jeremy,which is why she so desperately sought a good night's sleep with the request for sleeping tablets from the doctor. Sometimes you can get into a vicious circle with worrying about pupils' attainment as well as the sheer volume of paperwork,and in the end you just have to say to yourself you've done your best,not get emotionally involved but remain detached,just as a doctor who lies awake at night worrying about his patients with cancer is not going to last long in his profession.
Unfortunately for the victims this detachment which we are told to maintain when we are trainee teachers Julie somehow projected onto the twins,Sheila and the Bambers and here is where I do part company with her because I find it incomprehensible. I can only surmise that Julie had indeed fallen deeply in love with Jeremy and even after the murders it was a while before she did confide in Liz Rimington that she thought Jeremy was behind it all. This is what makes Julie's story sound real to me because if we all look back on ourselves as 20 year-olds we're all guilty of falling in love and misjudging others,whether they be work colleagues or fellow students,because we're just not conversant enough with the human condition to know enough on the subject.
I'm not sure I agree that Jeremy had achieved success; he was no doubt relieved to be free from the shackles of Gresham's and did get some A Levels at college,but I think he was floundering when he left education and anxious not to be found out for the nonentity that he really was. I think Ann Eaton thought of him as rather a joke and tragically his most support came from the very people he disparaged -Nevill and June. It was June who realized that she had lost control of both her children and attempted to make amends near the end of her life by giving Jeremy a greater say in board meetings and signing over the Maida Vale flat to Sheila.Jeremy had sown his wild oats with the round the world trips and thereafter Nevill wanted him to settle down to the farming way of life,which Jeremy was not cut out for,yet daren't let on for fear of being cut out of the wills.
I don't know the answer to your last question: I think things had irretrievably broken down between the couple after the murders and had Julie wanted to be manageress of a wine bar in a smart area of London I think Jeremy would only have been too happy to oblige,but as Julie told Jeremy at Blazer's restaurant,Blackheath,she was feeling the guilt for both of them. I might add here that I doubt Jeremy has ever had a meaningful relationship with any other human being on this earth,which I find desperately sad:the nearest real emotion he produced was that same evening at the restaurant when Julie read to him a poem she had written before the murders and Jeremy did burst into tears. I would contrast this with the charade of the crocodile tears at the funerals and the play-acting as Julie called it when he visited White House Farm in the company of Ann Eaton shortly after the murders,once again never feeling sorry for his actions in slaughtering so many,but tears for his relationship break down with Julie when time had just run out on both of them.
-
Steve, are you suggesting that Jeremy may have thought himself to be infertile? What reason might he have had, in his early 20's to think that? OR, is it that you're simply referring to Suzette's "supposed" miscarriages?
I think we need to look VERY carefully at, and with some understanding, of her situation. Firstly, she was French, not stupid and she was a mature, experienced woman in an undoubtedly heady and exciting extra marital affair with a good looking, well heeled but emotionally inexperienced BOY with no proven track record of being either responsible or reliable, and not having achieved anything but the modern day equivalent of the Grand Tour. She already HAD children and whilst talk of "making babies" might make a powerful aphrodisiac at certain moments, in the cold light of reality, it probably wasn't on her agenda, SO, as a mature woman who was MORE than aware that, generally speaking, immature boys DON'T make good and consistent fathers and the mother is generally the one who is left, literally holding the baby, she may have felt it was kinder, rather than to spell this fact out to him, to let him down gently by saying that she'd suffered a miscarriage.
She probably had been fond of him. She MAY have loved him, but it wouldn't have prevented her from recognizing that by having a child with him she'd probably be getting two for the price of one.
I don't know why Jeremy and Suzette stayed together for so long: she was certainly an attractive woman in her prime and Jeremy may have been proud that he could "pull" such a mature woman. I wasn't suggesting that Jeremy though he was impotent-more likely he taunted Nevill with that accolade near the end of Nevill's life when Jeremy was wondering why he and Sheila had ever been adopted in the first place. When Suzette went back to her husband Jeremy lost contact with the children and may have been on the rebound when he first met Julie..rejected by a blonde so he'd take up with a brunette. But Jeremy and Suzette were far more suited in my opinion than Jeremy and Julie for the very reason that Julie was driven,and Jeremy always had to be the Number 1 and went through the motions of farming those last months for the sole purpose of becoming it.
-
Very good observations, April.
I find it absurd that Jeremy would have been in any way jealous of Sheila for having children and that that somehow influenced his decision to kill them all, as Steve has sometimes suggested. 1) He was a man. 2) He was a YOUNG man.
But the twins were the future usurpers,and not long before June might find the money to send them to Gresham's. Jeremy was already frantic June might change her will in favour of the Church. There were his attempts to "make babies"with Suzette Ford,which for whatever reason ended in failure. Then on the night preceding the murders there was the programme on miscarriages..
-
Julie testified that June offered to buy her a house in London or Essex. June disapproved of her staying at Jeremy's.
Julie rejected the offer.
-
Hi April and welcome back to the site after your few days absence with what must be one of the top ten posts on this site,moving the thread on in ways I had not envisaged. Just what do we make of Julie and Jeremy as individuals and Julie and Jeremy as a team? I think Julie did realize that her life was precariously balanced,with her one chance of making something of herself coming in the teaching field,not marriage to Jeremy,which is why she so desperately sought a good night's sleep with the request for sleeping tablets from the doctor. Sometimes you can get into a vicious circle with worrying about pupils' attainment as well as the sheer volume of paperwork,and in the end you just have to say to yourself you've done your best,not get emotionally involved but remain detached,just as a doctor who lies awake at night worrying about his patients with cancer is not going to last long in his profession.
Unfortunately for the victims this detachment which we are told to maintain when we are trainee teachers Julie somehow projected onto the twins,Sheila and the Bambers and here is where I do part company with her because I find it incomprehensible. I can only surmise that Julie had indeed fallen deeply in love with Jeremy and even after the murders it was a while before she did confide in Liz Rimington that she thought Jeremy was behind it all. This is what makes Julie's story sound real to me because if we all look back on ourselves as 20 year-olds we're all guilty of falling in love and misjudging others,whether they be work colleagues or fellow students,because we're just not conversant enough with the human condition to know enough on the subject.
I'm not sure I agree that Jeremy had achieved success; he was no doubt relieved to be free from the shackles of Gresham's and did get some A Levels at college,but I think he was floundering when he left education and anxious not to be found out for the nonentity that he really was. I think Ann Eaton thought of him as rather a joke and tragically his most support came from the very people he disparaged -Nevill and June. It was June who realized that she had lost control of both her children and attempted to make amends near the end of her life by giving Jeremy a greater say in board meetings and signing over the Maida Vale flat to Sheila.Jeremy had sown his wild oats with the round the world trips and thereafter Nevill wanted him to settle down to the farming way of life,which Jeremy was not cut out for,yet daren't let on for fear of being cut out of the wills.
I don't know the answer to your last question: I think things had irretrievably broken down between the couple after the murders and had Julie wanted to be manageress of a wine bar in a smart area of London I think Jeremy would only have been too happy to oblige,but as Julie told Jeremy at Blazer's restaurant,Blackheath,she was feeling the guilt for both of them. I might add here that I doubt Jeremy has ever had a meaningful relationship with any other human being on this earth,which I find desperately sad:the nearest real emotion he produced was that same evening at the restaurant when Julie read to him a poem she had written before the murders and Jeremy did burst into tears. I would contrast this with the charade of the crocodile tears at the funerals and the play-acting as Julie called it when he visited White House Farm in the company of Ann Eaton shortly after the murders,once again never feeling sorry for his actions in slaughtering so many,but tears for his relationship break down with Julie when time had just run out on both of them.
I don't know why Jeremy and Suzette stayed together for so long: she was certainly an attractive woman in her prime and Jeremy may have been proud that he could "pull" such a mature woman. I wasn't suggesting that Jeremy though he was impotent-more likely he taunted Nevill with that accolade near the end of Nevill's life when Jeremy was wondering why he and Sheila had ever been adopted in the first place. When Suzette went back to her husband Jeremy lost contact with the children and may have been on the rebound when he first met Julie..rejected by a blonde so he'd take up with a brunette. But Jeremy and Suzette were far more suited in my opinion than Jeremy and Julie for the very reason that Julie was driven,and Jeremy always had to be the Number 1 and went through the motions of farming those last months for the sole purpose of becoming it.
Steve, how kind :) Thank-you so much.
I concur with much of what you say but I'm less inclined than you to see Julie as helpless because I see her "drivenness" -sorry, that's an Aprilism- but I DO recall what it felt like to be 20 and believing I'd found the man of my dreams and I fully understand what you mean about "precarious balance" and I imagine that she experienced an internal struggle in trying to reconcile marriage with Jeremy AND a career in teaching. Whilst it MAY have been her fantasy, I don't believe it was EVER going to work in reality.
I'm interested in the detachment that you were encouraged to hold onto -is it still the same, I wonder?- and that you feel Julie projected onto the twins. Are you perhaps suggesting that Julie saw them more as practice pupils than little people, thus holding them at arms length emotionally OR might she have been trying to convey to Jeremy her skills as a potential mother to his children?
I can understand that you don't believe Jeremy had achieved success. Actually, neither do I. I was trying to paint a picture of him that 20 year old Julie may have seen, especially if she had been bought up in a household where money had been in short supply and she'd heard that things would be much better if only they had more of it. Add to this the urbanity that Jeremy, as a public schoolboy, had been trained to convey and, given that he managed to charm the more mature Suzette, there would have been an irresistible attraction for a determined and driven 20 year old. I think, although it saddens me to say it, you are absolutely correct in that Ann Eaton saw him as a joke. I think, too, that this is something she learned from her father, who I FIRMLY believe resented Jeremy with every fibre of his being. I think it likely that June MAY have thought to give Jeremy more responsibility by giving him more say in the running of the holiday park. Maybe she knew that whilst he appeared to be WILLING to farm, he had no natural love for the job.
I'm compelled to agree that Jeremy has never experienced a meaningful relationship and like you, it saddens me but such is virtually impossible if one is being forced into being someone other than what one is OR forced into a situation one has no natural inclination for, simply to fulfil another persons expectations and needs. Partly for that reason, they MAY have been crocodile tears which he shed at the funeral because being forced in to an unnatural role makes real feelings difficult to reach into. It pleases me to learn that he shed REAL tears after listening to a poem because it shows he was capable of emotion.
I agree that Suzette was a more suitable partner than Julie for Jeremy. He may have experienced in her the mothering instinct he found lacking in June. He may have luxuriated in the feeling of being nurtured for the first time in his life. There may have been a warmth and contentment about her which made him feel safe. I suspect he felt he could be himself because she probably didn't challenge him because she didn't feel the need. Julie, on the other hand, had unfulfilled needs, which because of their intellectual inbalance, Jeremy would never be able to meet. I feel that the most he could have done for Julie was to be her financial cushion and ultimately, despite the cushion, they'd have been in an emotionally unsatisfying relationship, neither getting their needs met.
-
Steve, how kind :) Thank-you so much.
I concur with much of what you say but I'm less inclined than you to see Julie as helpless because I see her "drivenness" -sorry, that's an Aprilism- but I DO recall what it felt like to be 20 and believing I'd found the man of my dreams and I fully understand what you mean about "precarious balance" and I imagine that she experienced an internal struggle in trying to reconcile marriage with Jeremy AND a career in teaching. Whilst it MAY have been her fantasy, I don't believe it was EVER going to work in reality.
I'm interested in the detachment that you were encouraged to hold onto -is it still the same, I wonder?- and that you feel Julie projected onto the twins. Are you perhaps suggesting that Julie saw them more as practice pupils than little people, thus holding them at arms length emotionally OR might she have been trying to convey to Jeremy her skills as a potential mother to his children?
I can understand that you don't believe Jeremy had achieved success. Actually, neither do I. I was trying to paint a picture of him that 20 year old Julie may have seen, especially if she had been bought up in a household where money had been in short supply and she'd heard that things would be much better if only they had more of it. Add to this the urbanity that Jeremy, as a public schoolboy, had been trained to convey and, given that he managed to charm the more mature Suzette, there would have been an irresistible attraction for a determined and driven 20 year old. I think, although it saddens me to say it, you are absolutely correct in that Ann Eaton saw him as a joke. I think, too, that this is something she learned from her father, who I FIRMLY believe resented Jeremy with every fibre of his being. I think it likely that June MAY have thought to give Jeremy more responsibility by giving him more say in the running of the holiday park. Maybe she knew that whilst he appeared to be WILLING to farm, he had no natural love for the job.
I'm compelled to agree that Jeremy has never experienced a meaningful relationship and like you, it saddens me but such is virtually impossible if one is being forced into being someone other than what one is OR forced into a situation one has no natural inclination for, simply to fulfil another persons expectations and needs. Partly for that reason, they MAY have been crocodile tears which he shed at the funeral because being forced in to an unnatural role makes real feelings difficult to reach into. It pleases me to learn that he shed REAL tears after listening to a poem because it shows he was capable of emotion.
I agree that Suzette was a more suitable partner than Julie for Jeremy. He may have experienced in her the mothering instinct he found lacking in June. He may have luxuriated in the feeling of being nurtured for the first time in his life. There may have been a warmth and contentment about her which made him feel safe. I suspect he felt he could be himself because she probably didn't challenge him because she didn't feel the need. Julie, on the other hand, had unfulfilled needs, which because of their intellectual inbalance, Jeremy would never be able to meet. I feel that the most he could have done for Julie was to be her financial cushion and ultimately, despite the cushion, they'd have been in an emotionally unsatisfying relationship, neither getting their needs met.
I wonder why in that case their relationship did last as long as it did. Was there real love involved or just physical attraction,or was Jeremy indeed using Julie to sound her out about murder? Did Nevill work Jeremy too hard on the Farm as Jeremy complained of or was he just going through the motions doing the bare minimum? Why did Jeremy hate his parents so vehemently,or is James Richards lying along with Julie..
-
I wonder why in that case their relationship did last as long as it did. Was there real love involved or just physical attraction,or was Jeremy indeed using Julie to sound her out about murder? Did Nevill work Jeremy too hard on the Farm as Jeremy complained of or was he just going through the motions doing the bare minimum? Why did Jeremy hate his parents so vehemently,or is James Richards lying along with Julie..
Steve, that's an awful lot of question in very few words :) Why do ANY relationships last well past their sell by dates? The simple answer is agendas. ie being with the other is useful OR it's easier financially to be a couple OR being part of a couple is preferable to being alone OR it still works physically OR.............the list is endless but at the end of the day they BOTH had a choice and both COULD have linked up with other partners.
I think it possible that Nevill MAY have pushed Jeremy hard because of his own expectations of him. I don't know that this was entirely fair because he'd had the benefit of Ag college with elevated him to something more than farm labourer, which was what he seemed to be expecting Jeremy to be. However, Jeremy was paid very well, had his own house and car PLUS the assurance of a financially secure future.
Much has been made of Jeremy saying he "hated" his parents. Hate is a VERY strong emotion and where it exists withing a family situation, it often conflicts with it's opposite emotion, love. Jeremy MAY have been like Sheila in that whilst they gave him "things" what he really wanted was to be shown, and to FEEL that his parents loved him. He may have used the word "hate" in order to look manly but often the use of the word covers a pain the speaker would rather others don't see.