Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Adam on March 06, 2015, 09:06:AM
-
I've never read that Jeremy was regular attender at WHF for a 9pm supper. After a 14/17 hour day I assume he would want to get away from the farm for a few hours.
He hated June and had not spoken to her for years, according to MM. Even after her death he was saying nasty things about her to the police, AE said. Jeremy admitted as much when testifying.
He didn't need to see Sheila or the twins. They had both gone to see him earlier in the day, and he could see them any time he wanted while they were at WHF . The twins likely to be in bed anyway.
Neville he saw every day and again, he also had a poor relationship with him.
The supper that night must have been a bundle of laughs. Jeremy telling Julie his day went 'as best as can be expected'.
A guilty Jeremy obviously needed to attend WHF that night. To load the rifle and put it in an easily accessible place. He could have opened the bathroom window an inch to ensure easy access. And he would have made sure everyone was staying at WHF, as expected.
Having supper also supports his claim that Sheila had easy access to a rifle and that a fostering conversation pushed her over the edge. It also gives the impression he had a good relationship with his family, otherwise why have supper with people you don't get along with ?
An innocent Jeremy is one unlucky man. But has never shown any regret for leaving the loaded rifle out, after conversations about fostering had taken place. Although he thought Sheila was a 'nutter'. Simply saying at court 'I didn't know what was going happen, did I ?'
Do other people believe the judge was referring to the last supper as one of his 'curious coincidences' ?
-
I don't think that Bamber having supper with his family is a curious coincidence. But I do think the content of the conversation that night during supper, the whole rabbit incident, leaving the weapon out etc are all very curious coincidences yes.
-
I have never read Jeremy claim he had supper with his parents on a regular basis. Why an earth would he have supper with people he hated ?
He probably knows BW, the housekeeper or farm workers would refute him if he claimed he did have regular suppers with Neville and June.
There is no doubt he had supper a few hours before the massacre. Which is damaging circumstantial evidence. Because it gave him the opportunity for final rifle and window preparations.
-
I have never read Jeremy claim he had supper with his parents on a regular basis. Why an earth would he have supper with people he hated ?
He probably knows BW, the housekeeper or farm workers would refute him if he claimed he did have regular suppers with Neville and June.
There is no doubt he had supper a few hours before the massacre. Which is damaging circumstantial evidence. Because it gave him the opportunity for final rifle and window preparations.
Did Jeremy keep a diary? WHY would it need to be put in writing that Jeremy had supper with his parents? WHY would he have needed to have supper with them "on a regular basis"? Do we have, in writing, EVERY visit Sheila made to the farm?
Your constant use of "hate" is juvenile in the extreme. I believe it was you who, at one moment, posited that Jeremy hadn't spoken to June since he was at school, yet you STILL seem to think it suspicious that Jeremy didn't have supper with them "on a regular basis."
-
Did Jeremy keep a diary? WHY would it need to be put in writing that Jeremy had supper with his parents? WHY would he have needed to have supper with them "on a regular basis"? Do we have, in writing, EVERY visit Sheila made to the farm?
Your constant use of "hate" is juvenile in the extreme. I believe it was you who, at one moment, posited that Jeremy hadn't spoken to June since he was at school, yet you STILL seem to think it suspicious that Jeremy didn't have supper with them "on a regular basis."
Well Jeremy said his relationship with June broke down in 1978. MM testifying they had not spoken for years.
So not suspicious at all that he would never have supper with June and Neville.
However having supper on the massacre night is damaging circumstantial evidence. But something he had to do.
-
Well Jeremy said his relationship with June broke down in 1978. MM testifying they had not spoken for years.
So not suspicious at all that he would never have supper with June and Neville.
However having supper on the massacre night is damaging circumstantial evidence. But something he had to do.
But there is nothing to indicate that he'd not previously had supper with them.
MM MAY have testified that "they hadn't spoken for years" but I wonder how she thinks he introduced her daughter to them. HOW does she explain that he went to tell them that he and her daughter planned to marry? I once suggested that in order to support her daughter she MAY not have told the entire truth. You refused to accept that anyone would NOT tell the truth under oath.
-
Judging by the two rashers of bacon he'd been lucky to find in his own 'fridge at home,I reckon all of his meals were eaten with his family,including breakfast,being at the farm early.
Other than that,he ate out with Julie.
-
The last supper is a classic example of circumstantial evidence making a 360 degree turn.
From supporting Jeremy - fostering conversations, loaded gun left for Sheila.
To incriminating Jeremy- loading the gun, opening the window, supper with relatives he resented.
-
Jeremy stated that he ate a sandwich whilst standing at the kitchen sink. 'Having supper with the family' gives me,at least,an image of all of the family sitting around the table sharing a meal,rather than grabbing a quick bite at the kitchen sink. But I suppose it is down to individual interpretation.
-
I've had supper with my parents on and off I've also resented them time to time sometimes justified sometimes not
Does that mean I am a mass murderer?
God Adam I hope you don't become a Judge
-
I've had supper with my parents on and off I've also resented them time to time sometimes justified sometimes not
Does that mean I am a mass murderer?
God Adam I hope you don't become a Judge
David,bear in mind that Jeremy is accepting supper from the mother he hasn't spoken with for years.
If such makes you a potential mass murderer, it makes the same of me.
adam is ALREADY judge .....................AND jury of, what appears to be, his own tiny, limited world.
-
I've had supper with my parents on and off I've also resented them time to time sometimes justified sometimes not
Does that mean I am a mass murderer?
God Adam I hope you don't become a Judge
Never mind a judge.It's the jury bit that bothers me,lecturing the others and convincing them that some poor soul is guilty,even though other jurors think differently he'll be changing their minds for them if they're daft enough to listen.
-
Never mind a judge.It's the jury bit that bothers me,lecturing the others and convincing them that some poor soul is guilty,even though other jurors think differently he'll be changing their minds for them if they're daft enough to listen.
His ability to do that would rest largely on how charismatic is his personality. I experience little sign of that here.
-
His ability to do that would rest largely on how charismatic is his personality. I experience little sign of that here.
Yes. What's the opposite of charismatic by the way ? ;D You could find one answer is " irritating ",among others.
-
Yes. What's the opposite of charismatic by the way ? ;D You could find one answer is " irritating ",among others.
Does "antiChrist" come anywhere close ???
-
Jeremy worked at his parents´ farm. Of course he had meals there on a regular basis.
Anything Jeremy did can be turned into something sinister. Adam also keeps referring to a dining table Jeremy made for Sheila and Colin as a wedding present - as if it is something sinister. I just don´t get that!
-
Jeremy worked at his parents´ farm. Of course he had meals there on a regular basis.
Anything Jeremy did can be turned into something sinister. Adam also keeps referring to a dining table Jeremy made for Sheila and Colin as a wedding present - as if it is something sinister. I just don´t get that!
Have you got a source that Jeremy often had supper with June and Neville.
I think it was very nice of Jeremy to make a table for Sheila.
-
Have you got a source that Jeremy often had supper with June and Neville.
I think it was very nice of Jeremy to make a table for Sheila.
No, I don´t have a source, but common sense tells me that he would frequently have eaten at the farm, probably every day even.
Wasn´t his fridge at Head Street not almost empty?
-
No, I don´t have a source, but common sense tells me that he would frequently have eaten at the farm, probably every day even.
Wasn´t his fridge at Head Street not almost empty?
Well he worked there because he had to. But couldn't be trusted with a key to WHF. So had to gain access to WHF a few hours before the massacre another way.
Common sense suggests he would avoid June and Neville after work. He did not get along with either.
-
Well he worked there because he had to. But couldn't be trusted with a key to WHF. So had to gain access to WHF a few hours before the massacre another way.
Common sense suggests he would avoid June and Neville after work. He did not get along with either.
I see it differently. His fridge was empty, I don´t think he cooked much for himself. He would have eaten breakfast, lunch and sometimes dinner at the farm.
-
I see it differently. His fridge was empty, I don´t think he cooked much for himself. He would have eaten breakfast, lunch and sometimes dinner at the farm.
Have you got a source that his fridge was empty ?
He was starving and made himself breakfast and three cups of coffee after the massacre.
-
Have you got a source that his fridge was empty ?
He was starving and made himself breakfast and three cups of coffee after the massacre.
Julie and Ann Eaton went out for food for themselves that morning, so he wouldn´t have had much food there.
-
Julie and Ann Eaton went out for food for themselves that morning, so he wouldn´t have had much food there.
So no real source.
It seems the basis of Jeremy having supper with Neville and June on a regular basis, is that his fridge may not have been full on the massacre morning.
-
So no real source.
It seems the basis of Jeremy having supper with Neville and June on a regular basis, is that his fridge may not have been full on the massacre morning.
WhatEVER could be proved, YOU would probably move the goal[posts by saying it didn't constitute YOUR idea of what a regular basis was.
-
So no real source.
It seems the basis of Jeremy having supper with Neville and June on a regular basis, is that his fridge may not have been full on the massacre morning.
So you think that Jeremy, after long work days, went home to cook for himself? I don´t think so! June would have had meals ready for Nevill and Jeremy, lunch and dinner both. Kind of her job at the farm.
-
So you think that Jeremy, after long work days, went home to cook for himself? I don´t think so! June would have had meals ready for Nevill and Jeremy, lunch and dinner both. Kind of her job at the farm.
Well he could have gone out to eat, or just had a ready made meal or sandwich when finishing work. Or eaten earlier, rather than after 9pm. I'm sure the farm would survive a 30 minute break.
Did Jeremy and June simply not speak to each other when he had his 'regular' suppers ?
-
Well he could have gone out to eat, or just had a ready made meal or sandwich when finishing work. Or eaten earlier, rather than after 9pm. I'm sure the farm would survive a 30 minute break.
Did Jeremy and June simply not speak to each other when he had his 'regular' suppers ?
They had to speak. Jeremy worked at his parents´ farm, of course they spoke.
-
Well he could have gone out to eat, or just had a ready made meal or sandwich when finishing work. Or eaten earlier, rather than after 9pm. I'm sure the farm would survive a 30 minute break.
Did Jeremy and June simply not speak to each other when he had his 'regular' suppers ?
Given that it was you who asserted that they hadn't spoken to each other since Jeremy was at school, YOU tell us.
-
They had to speak. Jeremy worked at his parents´ farm, of course they spoke.
They spoke when he needed money. Well actually Jeremy would write letters.
-
They spoke when he needed money. Well actually Jeremy would write letters.
Of course they spoke, don´t be silly.
-
Of course they spoke, don´t be silly.
Did they pray together ?
-
Did they pray together ?
Please don´t mock the victims, it isn´t funny. :'(
-
Please don´t mock the victims, it isn´t funny. :'(
They must have prayed to thank the lord prior to supper.
-
They spoke when he needed money. Well actually Jeremy would write letters.
You appear to be saying that he only requested money when he travelled -not unusual but I think, circa 1980, phone calls to and from Oz and NZ still had to be booked and I don't think Skype was available. WHAT alternative did he have OTHER than to write. It seems he may have only made three requests for money as he was only away on three occasions. If they weren't speaking when he was at home he couldn't have asked.
-
They must have prayed to thank the lord prior to supper.
I don´t know why you think it is appropriate to mock June´s beliefs. Please show some respect.
-
I don´t know why you think it is appropriate to mock June´s beliefs. Please show some respect.
A sick thought process is what comes immediately to mind.
-
A sick thought process is what comes immediately to mind.
He has done it before. I find it very odd. :o
-
It's just a fact. Neville, June and Jeremy must have prayed before supper. Jeremy did say June was a 'religious maniac'.
I would say it is pretty conclusive that Jeremy having supply at WHF a few hours before the massacre is devastating circumstantial evidence for Jeremy.
There is no source or reason to suggest he had supper at WHF on a regular basis.
-
It's just a fact. Neville, June and Jeremy must have prayed before supper. Jeremy did say June was a 'religious maniac'.
I would say it is pretty conclusive that Jeremy having supply at WHF a few hours before the massacre is devastating circumstantial evidence for Jeremy.
There is no source or reason to suggest he had supper at WHF on a regular basis.
That is such a silly assumption. It doesn´t prove anything, don´t know why you are jumping on this.
-
That is such a silly assumption. It doesn´t prove anything, don´t know why you are jumping on this.
Well it's a fact that Jeremy had supper at WHF at 9am.
At least six hours later everyone was dead.
-
Well it's a fact that Jeremy had supper at WHF at 9am.
At least six hours later everyone was dead.
The dinner doesn´t prove anything!
-
It's just a fact. Neville, June and Jeremy must have prayed before supper. Jeremy did say June was a 'religious maniac'.
I would say it is pretty conclusive that Jeremy having supply at WHF a few hours before the massacre is devastating circumstantial evidence for Jeremy.
There is no source or reason to suggest he had supper at WHF on a regular basis.
It would be interesting to know how often Jeremy had supper there or if this was a rare occurence.
-
It's just a fact. Neville, June and Jeremy must have prayed before supper. Jeremy did say June was a 'religious maniac'.
I would say it is pretty conclusive that Jeremy having supply at WHF a few hours before the massacre is devastating circumstantial evidence for Jeremy.
There is no source or reason to suggest he had supper at WHF on a regular basis.
If it's a fact, provide the proof. There is no source or reason to suggest that he DIDN'T have supper there any more or less than any other young man living independently of his parents. It wholly depends on what one sees as being a regular basis. I notice you haven't volunteered to say.
-
Well it's a fact that Jeremy had supper at WHF at 9am.
At least six hours later everyone was dead.
Do you mean breakfast? ???
-
It would be interesting to know how often Jeremy had supper there or if this was a rare occurence.
Mat, I doubt it was a weekly occurrence, but neither was harvest. It may only have been as and when it suited. I doubt that June and Neville would have curtailed their own busy life to entertain Jeremy on an ad hoc basis. There probably wasn't a warm and loving relationship between them but I'd hazard a guess that it was NOWHERE near as bad as the picture Adam paints and whilst there's no proof it SEEMS that it was Sheila who had all June's concern which probably didn't go down well with Jeremy.
-
Jeremy did not have a key to WHF.
So would have been taking a big risk not entering WHF at 9pm on the massacre night for the alleged supper.
At 2.00am he would have had to force entry to the bathroom window, look for the rifle and matching bullets, then load the rifle. Without being heard.
He also could not claim there was a 'conversation about fostering' a few hours earlier. Or that there was a loaded rifle available for Sheila.
I'm sure even supporters agree it was a 'curious coincidence' that Jeremy had a 9pm supper with Neville, June and Sheila.
-
Jeremy did not have a key to WHF.
So would have been taking a big risk not entering WHF at 9pm on the massacre night for the alleged supper.
At 2.00am he would have had to force entry to the bathroom window, look for the rifle and matching bullets, then load the rifle. Without being heard.
He also could not claim there was a 'conversation about fostering' a few hours earlier. Or that there was a loaded rifle available for Sheila.
I'm sure even supporters agree it was a 'curious coincidence' that Jeremy had a 9pm supper with Neville, June and Sheila.
Not really, Adam, I see nothing curious in it.
-
Jeremy did not have a key to WHF.
So would have been taking a big risk not entering WHF at 9pm on the massacre night for the alleged supper.
At 2.00am he would have had to force entry to the bathroom window, look for the rifle and matching bullets, then load the rifle. Without being heard.
He also could not claim there was a 'conversation about fostering' a few hours earlier. Or that there was a loaded rifle available for Sheila.
I'm sure even supporters agree it was a 'curious coincidence' that Jeremy had a 9pm supper with Neville, June and Sheila.
Having dinner with them allowed him to claim to police there was the discussion about fostering the children that evening. Such discussion could have happened a previous time or might not have happened yet at all he may have killed everyone before the parents had a chance to broach it. It also permitted him to MAKE up the claim he loaded the rifle and left it and extra bullets out.
He had no need to have dinner with them in order to be able to load the weapon and prepare things. He could have done that at any time of the day. He knew how to unlock the windows from the outside, knew there was an extra key in the coal shed and contrary to his claims it isn't clear the key was always kept inside the door lock at night, plus leaving a window unlocked could have been done prior to leaving work at 6PM. There is nothing to suggest the family went around checking the locks on the windows each night so nothing to suggest he would have to wait till 9PM to unlock a window.
Eating dinner provided him with the opportunity to claim to police he was there to overhear discussions taking place and present to load the gun and leave it.
I never saw anyone ask if he stayed there Monday night to eat dinner with his sister and nephews. Usually you would eat the initial night or final night of a stay if only doing it once though some would eat dinner each night with them.
-
Having dinner with them allowed him to claim to police there was the discussion about fostering the children that evening. Such discussion could have happened a previous time or might not have happened yet at all he may have killed everyone before the parents had a chance to broach it. It also permitted him to MAKE up the claim he loaded the rifle and left it and extra bullets out.
He had no need to have dinner with them in order to be able to load the weapon and prepare things. He could have done that at any time of the day. He knew how to unlock the windows from the outside, knew there was an extra key in the coal shed and contrary to his claims it isn't clear the key was always kept inside the door lock at night, plus leaving a window unlocked could have been done prior to leaving work at 6PM. There is nothing to suggest the family went around checking the locks on the windows each night so nothing to suggest he would have to wait till 9PM to unlock a window.
Eating dinner provided him with the opportunity to claim to police he was there to overhear discussions taking place and present to load the gun and leave it.
I never saw anyone ask if he stayed there Monday night to eat dinner with his sister and nephews. Usually you would eat the initial night or final night of a stay if only doing it once though some would eat dinner each night with them.
Ha!!! I HAD just been about to ask the question......................although I guess an answer can only be speculative. He actually DID stay for supper on the last night of Sheila's visit, didn't he?
-
If Jeremy said that there was a discussion about having the children fostered,then it was the truth. You're as bad as RWB saying there was no such thing taking place,and how the heck would he know ?
The idea was to give both Sheila and June some respite. Sheila having been released from hospital that year and June getting over another bout of depression.
There was also the suggestion that Sheila would benefit from convalescing at the coast of Eastbourne.
-
If Jeremy said that there was a discussion about having the children fostered,then it was the truth. You're as bad as RWB saying there was no such thing taking place,and how the heck would he know ?
The idea was to give both Sheila and June some respite. Sheila having been released from hospital that year and June getting over another bout of depression.
There was also the suggestion that Sheila would benefit from convalescing at the coast of Eastbourne.
I think what is being suggested is that it may NOT have occurred that night, but at some other time, either with Sheila being present OR simply mulled over prior to her arrival.
-
Ha!!! I HAD just been about to ask the question......................although I guess an answer can only be speculative. He actually DID stay for supper on the last night of Sheila's visit, didn't he?
It was her last night there because he killed her. Weren't they supposed to stay longer had she not been killed or were they supposed to be leaving on Wednesday? That's even more suspicious if they were killed the last night they stayed so he would not have had the chance to kill them all in the same location after that night. I was under the impression they were staying till Friday or the weekend.
-
Well he was working during the day.
Sneaking off to force entry into a window in broad daylight was risky. And wasn't June, or BW, or the housekeeper in the house ? Or even Neville ? He did live there.
To have supper allows him to see rabbits and load the rifle. And put it in an accessible place, where Neville would not look. Open the bathroom window and ensure everyone was sleeping at WHF. As well as tell the police the loaded rifle was left out only 5 hours earlier.
The fostering conversation also carries a lot of weight if it is said hours before a massacre.
-
It was her last night there because he killed her. Weren't they supposed to stay longer had she not been killed or were they supposed to be leaving on Wednesday? That's even more suspicious if they were killed the last night they stayed so he would not have had the chance to kill them all in the same location after that night. I was under the impression they were staying till Friday or the weekend.
I think there COULD be a problem here with out respective senses of humour??? ;D The reason I said Jeremy was there on the last night of her visit was because she (sadly) didn't live to SEE another night.
I seem to think that Colin was taking the boys away on Friday of that week and they and Sheila were due to leave the farm on Thursday but DON'T quote me.
-
Jeremy had to make sure everyone was sleeping at WHF.
One of the twins may have had an accident and been rushed to hospital by June and Sheila. Or June may have decided to stay at a relatives.
Unlikely but when there is over £436,000 at stake it is better to check.
-
If Jeremy said that there was a discussion about having the children fostered,then it was the truth. You're as bad as RWB saying there was no such thing taking place,and how the heck would he know ?
The idea was to give both Sheila and June some respite. Sheila having been released from hospital that year and June getting over another bout of depression.
There was also the suggestion that Sheila would benefit from convalescing at the coast of Eastbourne.
This shows again your bias. According to you everything Jeremy says MUST be true and the police have to have been lying though Jeremy is the one with the strongest motivation to lie and a great deal of evidence established he lied about many things.
We know through objective evidence the parents planned to pose to Sheila the idea of part time foster care. We have no way to know whether had a chance to talk to Sheila about such before she died. If they did it could have taken place at a different time than Jeremy claims. We only have Jeremy's word that it took place the evening of the murders and while you choose to believe anything he claims without exception not matter what evidence there is to the contrary- I take his claims as unsupported allegations unless there is proof that such things occurred or there is no reason he would lie so his claims appear to be truthful.
He had a reason to lie and claim the discussion took place right before the murders. He was claiming such was the motivation for killing them that night so naturally he had a reason to lie about he timing and lie to say they spoke to Sheila even if they chickened out like Colin or didn't have the opportunity yet.
So we can't be sure he is telling the truth.
-
You hang on to your BIAS and I'll stick to mine---------okay ?
-
I think there COULD be a problem here with out respective senses of humour??? ;D The reason I said Jeremy was there on the last night of her visit was because she (sadly) didn't live to SEE another night.
I seem to think that Colin was taking the boys away on Friday of that week and they and Sheila were due to leave the farm on Thursday but DON'T quote me.
I understood what you meant. I tried tossing you a life raft so it wouldn't appear like such a poor tasting comment. You ruined my effort with this admission though...
-
I understood what you meant. I tried tossing you a life raft so it would appear like such a poor tasting comment. You ruined my effort with this admission though...
Your unexpected generosity overwhelms me, Scipio. Thank-you :)
-
Your unexpected generosity overwhelms me, Scipio. Thank-you :)
I meant "wouldn't" of course
-
I meant "wouldn't" of course
That WAS the conclusion I'd arrived at :)