Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: JackiePreece on January 02, 2016, 10:56:AM
-
Very good digging by Holly on the red
New Year...New Forensics...And A Time For Closure...?
When I was checking out something unrelated I stumbled across the following. If the casings still exist this could potentially provide the proof everyone is looking for.
JB states he left the magazine full (10) and maybe a bullet in the breach (1). 25 shots were fired with 24 casings recovered. Therefore the perp must have loaded a further 14 or 15 bullets.
The new forensic technique involves fingerprints on metals whereby the fingerprint/sweat causes corrosion of the metal so even if washed or wiped an indelible print remains and the technique is able to reveal the fingerprint.
http://www2.le.ac.uk/research/challenges/safe/fingerprint
As we know the bullets are tiny so unlikely to contain full prints but they should contain enough partials to determine whose prints are on the 13 or 14 casings: JB or SC. If none then this might strongly suggest JB was the perp and wore gloves. Alternatively enough partials may be found strongly suggesting SC was the perp. Or of course the technique might reveal JB's prints either in full or sufficient partials to conclude beyond any doubt he was the perp.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/aug/28/forensicscience.fingerpr
-
Was this test ever carried out ? Or might there be one or two flying pigs around ? ::)
-
I think it's very very new technology
Ngb might know
-
Jackie,everything's very very new since 1985. ;D ;D Investigations back then were pretty archaic in comparison.
Well they seemed so in Essex.
-
Perhaps Holly could contact the campaign team and tell them of her find ? The more info the better I'd have thought. She's quite a sleuth,eh ?
-
did they not treat the casings with something though to try and get prints? would that affect the results?
-
there is a link to the technology on this forum in 2011
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,491.msg7872.html#msg7872
-
Not sure.It would I suppose,depend on what was used to obtain any prints. Whatever it might have been wouldn't have obviously been as accurate given standards of today.
There was so much cross-contamination with items back then it would be a job and a half to get any sort of a correct result.
To hear the words of the " top cop ",Gradwell say that the investigation stank was enough for me and should have also sent warnings to others too.
-
here is an interesting thread by Mike - if someone wants to post the documents - perhaps Holly would be interested?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1071.msg33037.html#msg33037
I have only posted one
-
on 15th Aug why were they worried about prints if they thought it was murder suicide?
-
Maybe to match those of the " unknown male " which were found on the rifle ?
-
this is interesting - source Michael turner appeal notes 2002?
Robert Boutflour claimed Jeremy had been trying to get Sheila to load the rifle in front of June and Pamela, but Pamela made no such reference of the incident in her statements. Jeremy denied ever doing this. It is now known fingerprints were found on the bullet cases of the cartridges, but this was not disclosed. Whose fingerprints were these? [18] One can only postulate that the police told Robert Boutflour the fingerprints were Sheila’s, and in an attempt to explain it, he made a statement of how Sheila’s fingerprints came to be on the bullet cases. He had been adamant that Sheila a farmers daughter, would not have known how to fire the weapon. Peter Eaton says in his draft statements to The City of London Police, that he saw Sheila with a gun on a shoot in Scotland some years previous, and he also states that he had seen photographs of Sheila holding a gun. [19] In fact most of the relatives in the case made u
-
someone said before the casings were too small for prints ( but I guess not for DNA) but I am guessing they did not find fibres from gloves either?
I wonder what the document was that said their were prints?
-
Did people really think that Sheila hadn't known one end of a gun/rifle from the other ? On a working farm ?
-
this is interesting - source Michael turner appeal notes 2002?
Robert Boutflour claimed Jeremy had been trying to get Sheila to load the rifle in front of June and Pamela, but Pamela made no such reference of the incident in her statements. Jeremy denied ever doing this. It is now known fingerprints were found on the bullet cases of the cartridges, but this was not disclosed. Whose fingerprints were these? [18] One can only postulate that the police told Robert Boutflour the fingerprints were Sheila’s, and in an attempt to explain it, he made a statement of how Sheila’s fingerprints came to be on the bullet cases. He had been adamant that Sheila a farmers daughter, would not have known how to fire the weapon. Peter Eaton says in his draft statements to The City of London Police, that he saw Sheila with a gun on a shoot in Scotland some years previous, and he also states that he had seen photographs of Sheila holding a gun. [19] In fact most of the relatives in the case made u
"Holding" a gun is rather different to firing a gun. Without question, if I was trying to load a gun, such would have to be my concentration on it, that it wouldn't be too difficult to disarm me.
-
see this is the sort of thing that gets the case a bad name >:(
one document says one thing - then we get this
No fingerprint records existed to prove any of the bullet cases had been done..
There exists no police records to prove that any of the bullet cases were fingerprinted to try and prove who handled them, and loaded them into the gun - according to a report made in the name of Detective sergeant 1099 R. T. Gilbert, dated 1st May, 2000, it states the following:-
"On the 24th March 2000, I attended HQ fingerprints and looked through the file kept there that relates to the BAMBER enquiry. I was able to ascertain the full extent of the fingerprint search at various scenes that were relevant to this enquiry. What was clear was that there was no record of the spent cartridges that had been seized from White house farm, Tolleshunt D'Arcy having been searched for fingerprints
-
someone said before the casings were too small for prints ( but I guess not for DNA) but I am guessing they did not find fibres from gloves either?
I wonder what the document was that said their were prints?
It'll hopefully come to light with the rest of those which don't run in consecutive order.
-
Did people really think that Sheila hadn't known one end of a gun/rifle from the other ? On a working farm ?
My friend's daughter has absolutely NO interest in guns, has never touched one and has never been on a shoot. Like me, she knows that the bullet comes out of the end with a hole in it.
-
My friend's daughter has absolutely NO interest in guns, has never touched one and has never been on a shoot. Like me, she knows that the bullet comes out of the end with a hole in it.
Ngb who knows a lot about guns has previously stated it would have been very easy for Sheila to use the gun in question
I accept his opinion
-
Ngb who knows a lot about guns has previously stated it would have been very easy for Sheila to use the gun in question
I accept his opinion
If she was proficient with guns, per se, it probably was. The first -and only- time I fired a gun, even holding it felt alien to me, and I required help. I was told that I could have been bruised(?) but that thought had never occurred to me. If Sheila fired all those shots, why was she not bruised?
-
If she was proficient with guns, per se, it probably was. The first -and only- time I fired a gun, even holding it felt alien to me, and I required help. I was told that I could have been bruised(?) but that thought had never occurred to me. If Sheila fired all those shots, why was she not bruised?
you would be if it was a shotgun . I have seen claims that this rifle is easy to use and would not produce bruising.
-
My friend's daughter has absolutely NO interest in guns, has never touched one and has never been on a shoot. Like me, she knows that the bullet comes out of the end with a hole in it.
If they founf nothing on the casings, how many people here would hold up their hands and admit that Jeremy must be guilty?
-
If she was proficient with guns, per se, it probably was. The first -and only- time I fired a gun, even holding it felt alien to me, and I required help. I was told that I could have been bruised(?) but that thought had never occurred to me. If Sheila fired all those shots, why was she not bruised?
Or at least had 'some' sign that he had fired it.
-
you would be if it was a shotgun . I have seen claims that this rifle is easy to use and would not produce bruising.
And if those "claims" refer to a proficient gun user, that may be the case, but Sheila wasn't and numerous shots were fired.
-
If they founf nothing on the casings, how many people here would hold up their hands and admit that Jeremy must be guilty?
I would assume they would find Jeremys DNA on some of the casings or all of the casings - if it was the latter - guilty
.
If they found Sheilas DNA on some casings and Jeremys on others that would indicate she was responsible
Jeremys on part - nothing on the others - probably would mean guilt as he used gloves - although apparently it would be hard to load the gun with gloves
So I am thinking it would depend on what they found on each casing and whether the super glue would affect the results.
So why do we think there was some residue on the casings but NO records of fingerprints being taken
-
And if those "claims" refer to a proficient gun user, that may be the case, but Sheila wasn't and numerous shots were fired.
I am no gun expert - you would have to ask NGB . It depends on recoil strength .
-
Ngb who knows a lot about guns has previously stated it would have been very easy for Sheila to use the gun in question
I accept his opinion
Me too,as even a child who watched " how it was done " would immediately grasp its concept.
-
I would assume they would find Jeremys DNA on some of the casings or all of the casings - if it was the latter - guilty
.
If they found Sheilas DNA on some casings and Jeremys on others that would indicate she was responsible
Jeremys on part - nothing on the others - probably would mean guilt as he used gloves - although apparently it would be hard to load the gun with gloves
So I am thinking it would depend on what they found on each casing and whether the super glue would affect the results.
So why do we think there was some residue on the casings but NO records of fingerprints being taken
Why? He didn't deny handling the bullets, he said he 'tipped then out' so he's already made his excuse.
-
Why? He didn't deny handling the bullets, he said he 'tipped then out' so he's already made his excuse.
No - tipping out is different to loading them in the magazine. In his story he only loaded some not all that were used in the shootings and some came from a different box we have to assume? He would not have touched those would he?
50 on the side - 29 or 30 left .
And I don't think he would be making an excuse for DNA evidence that was not even in existence then.
Did not someone say some bullets had been loaded twice ? So some would have both DNA on?
-
No - tipping out is different to loading them in the magazine. In his story he only loaded some not all that were used in the shootings and some came from a different box we have to assume? He would not have touched those would he?
50 on the side - 29 or 30 left .
And I don't think he would be making an excuse for DNA evidence that was not even in existence then.
Did not someone say some bullets had been loaded twice ? So some would have both DNA on?
A different box? I don't think I've heard that before.
What I mean is if he tipped them out, he could easily say that some rolled across the counter and he had to pick them up. There wouldn't be prints or DNA on all and given that he admits to handling at least 11 it's not going to prove anything unless it's Sheila's prints/DNA - if not, we're right back where we started.
-
There were two magazines. One ten shot, and one five shot, that was supplied the gunshop. [Radcliffes]
-
A different box? I don't think I've heard that before.
What I mean is if he tipped them out, he could easily say that some rolled across the counter and he had to pick them up. There wouldn't be prints or DNA on all and given that he admits to handling at least 11 it's not going to prove anything unless it's Sheila's prints/DNA - if not, we're right back where we started.
what I meant was - 50 bullets held in the box on the counter - 25 used? Should be 25 left in the box - but there were more ( 29 or 30?) - so where did the other bullets come from - everyone just says there were other boxes of ammunition in the gun cupboard? So if 5 bullets were not from the box on the counter they wont have Jeremys DNA on them will they?
I am sure someone will correct me if I am wrong but it is mentioned in the book by CAL . And I think Scipio tried to explain it but he made it so complicated it did not really register.
-
There were two magazines. One ten shot, and one five shot, that was supplied the gunshop. [Radcliffes]
sorry do you mean for the murder weapon there were two magazines - but the one on the rifle was the 10 magazine?
Were the magazines easily changed ?
-
from Mike
This has got something to do with why DCI Jones, and DS Jones, visit to see Jeremy on the 9th August 1985, to ask him if he had any idea where 5 Bullets known to have been discharged in the shootings had originated from? This matter arose because only 20rounds were missing from the box of ammunition found on the kitchen worktop, but 25 shots were known to have been shot, producing a disparity involving 5 rounds...
-
Caroline - do you accept my point there would be 5 bullets from somewhere else?
-
Caroline - do you accept my point there would be 5 bullets from somewhere else?
Well, they didn't come from the box that he opened on the counter. Had Sheila been guilty, is it likely that she would have gone elsewhere to look for ammunition when there was an open box spilled on the counter top? Perhaps Jeremy partially filled the magazine using ammunition from an near empty box and then opened the new one?
-
Well, they didn't come from the box that he opened on the counter. Had Sheila been guilty, is it likely that she would have gone elsewhere to look for ammunition when there was an open box spilled on the counter top? Perhaps Jeremy partially filled the magazine using ammunition from an near empty box and then opened the new one?
Well he could not say that now could he?
I don't know what the answer is or even if there could be another magazine for the gun ? But it seems odd that either of them would go elsewhere for the missing bullets.
-
Well he could not say that now could he?
I don't know what the answer is or even if there could be another magazine for the gun ? But it seems odd that either of them would go elsewhere for the missing bullets.
But Jeremy wouldn't have had to go elsewhere. He fills the magazine before he goes home, he uses what was left from one box and then opens a new one - this is the one he later puts on the counter top.
-
But Jeremy wouldn't have had to go elsewhere. He fills the magazine before he goes home, he uses what was left from one box and then opens a new one - this is the one he later puts on the counter top.
And forgets? Or does not cover that in his story?
Just take the extra 5 bullets out of the box when he leaves and then it never would have been queried.
-
And forgets? Or does not cover that in his story?
Just take the extra 5 bullets out of the box when he leaves and then it never would have been queried.
He probably just didn't think about it.
-
He probably just didn't think about it.
well I understand the police did ask him about it quite early on but he does not seem to have come up with a cover story so far.
-
well I understand the police did ask him about it quite early on but he does not seem to have come up with a cover story so far.
To be fair, he doesn't need to - he can maintain that he took ALL of the bullets from the box on the counter, as he is stating he is innocent, he doesn't have to say how the magazine was filled after that.
-
To be fair, he doesn't need to - he can maintain that he took ALL of the bullets from the box on the counter, as he is stating he is innocent, he doesn't have to say how the magazine was filled after that.
No I agree - but if the 5 bullets did come from somewhere else there should be no chance they had his DNA on if they are tested now. So if all 25 casings had his DNA on it would prove guilt .
-
No I agree - but if the 5 bullets did come from somewhere else there should be no chance they had his DNA on if they are tested now. So if all 25 casings had his DNA on it would prove guilt .
The number don't seem to add up though do they, Jan? Is it bugging you? I remember Scips explantation and he did seem to explain it quite well that Jeremy's story couldn't be completely true about the bullets because there was 5 bullets less in Jeremy's story.
Problem is his post was about 4000 pages long.
-
The number don't seem to add up though do they, Jan? Is it bugging you? I remember Scips explantation and he did seem to explain it quite well that Jeremy's story couldn't be completely true about the bullets because there was 5 bullets less in Jeremy's story.
Problem is his post was about 4000 pages long.
I know that's why it does not get absorbed .
I don't think anyone has explained the missing bullets - its not a matter of Jeremys story not adding up . It would appear that whoever the killer was there were 5 bullets used that were not from the box of 50 - so they must have come from somewhere else . The fact is we don't know that Neville did not put the gun away and the killer took some ammunition from the cupboard when they got the gun . But what I am trying to say is in would help if the casings were DNA tested .
Jeremy after all never said the 25 bullets came from the box in the kitchen did he?
He just explained what he did before he left the farm.
-
I know that's why it does not get absorbed .
I don't think anyone has explained the missing bullets - its not a matter of Jeremys story not adding up . It would appear that whoever the killer was there were 5 bullets used that were not from the box of 50 - so they must have come from somewhere else . The fact is we don't know that Neville did not put the gun away and the killer took some ammunition from the cupboard when they got the gun . But what I am trying to say is in would help if the casings were DNA tested .
Jeremy after all never said the 25 bullets came from the box in the kitchen did he?
He just explained what he did before he left the farm.
How could he say that? If he admitted to knowing that, it would make him guilty.
-
How could he say that? If he admitted to knowing that, it would make him guilty.
Yes I know that - I am not stupid :o what I am is replying to is the comments that the 5 bullets that are missing make his story not add up - I am not aware how that is the case
-
Yes I know that - I am not stupid :o what I am is replying to is the comments that the 5 bullets that are missing make his story not add up - I am not aware how that is the case
I didn't say you were stupid, I am answering your comment. The fact that it doesn't add up is that Jeremy clearly made a mistake when he used bullets from another box to initially load the rifle, then a new box to refill it. That's the only way it could have happened.
-
I know that's why it does not get absorbed .
I don't think anyone has explained the missing bullets - its not a matter of Jeremys story not adding up . It would appear that whoever the killer was there were 5 bullets used that were not from the box of 50 - so they must have come from somewhere else . The fact is we don't know that Neville did not put the gun away and the killer took some ammunition from the cupboard when they got the gun . But what I am trying to say is in would help if the casings were DNA tested .
Jeremy after all never said the 25 bullets came from the box in the kitchen did he?
He just explained what he did before he left the farm.
It seems pretty clear to me, that in a 'Jeremy is guilty' scenario, Jeremy accessed the gun cupboard.
It would be likely that he retrieved the rifle, moderator and ammunition from the gun cupboard, before later returning the moderator.
The ammunition on the counter could have been placed there after everybody was murdered, hence the blood on the counter near the bullets.
Therefore the bullets on the counter and the bullets used don't need to add up to a whole box.
It's often been suggested that Jeremy chased Neville downstairs to the kitchen, I wonder if we've got it back to front and it was Neville chasing after JB when he had run out of bullets?
-
It seems pretty clear to me, that in a 'Jeremy is guilty' scenario, Jeremy accessed the gun cupboard.
It would be likely that he retrieved the rifle, moderator and ammunition from the gun cupboard, before later returning the moderator.
The ammunition on the counter could have been placed there after everybody was murdered, hence the blood on the counter near the bullets.
Therefore the bullets on the counter and the bullets used don't need to add up to a whole box.
It's often been suggested that Jeremy chased Neville downstairs to the kitchen, I wonder if we've got it back to front and it was Neville chasing after JB when he had run out of bullets?
Yes, I said the same thing a few days ago, it makes more sense and accounts for the problem of Nevill getting past an armed Jeremy in the bedroom.
-
I know that's why it does not get absorbed .
I don't think anyone has explained the missing bullets - its not a matter of Jeremys story not adding up . It would appear that whoever the killer was there were 5 bullets used that were not from the box of 50 - so they must have come from somewhere else . The fact is we don't know that Neville did not put the gun away and the killer took some ammunition from the cupboard when they got the gun . But what I am trying to say is in would help if the casings were DNA tested .
Jeremy after all never said the 25 bullets came from the box in the kitchen did he?
He just explained what he did before he left the farm.
Very true, Jan and it just proves we should never make assumpions, it is quite possible, as you say, that those 5 bullets were taken from somewhere other than the box on the work surface. Just because things appear straight forward doesn't mean they are.
We don't know if Jeremy left the gun out as he said he did, took the gun out and hid it somewhere for easy access, maybe before entering the farmhouse or something else happened.
I have never been able to believe that he climbed through that window in the pitch black without being armed ready to attack or defend himself if necessary.
-
Very true, Jan and it just proves we should never make assumpions, it is quite possible, as you say, that those 5 bullets were taken from somewhere other than the box on the work surface. Just because things appear straight forward doesn't mean they are.
We don't know if Jeremy left the gun out as he said he did, took the gun out and hid it somewhere for easy access, maybe before entering the farmhouse or something else happened.
I have never been able to believe that he climbed through that window in the pitch black without being armed ready to attack or defend himself if necessary.
Imagine the scene if Neville had been on the other side of the window,waiting, on hearing a noise ? Anyone entering the farmhouse in whatever way wouldn't have known if all occupants had been asleep.
Nobody would take that chance whoever they were. Neville would have protected his family.
-
Imagine the scene if Neville had been on the other side of the window,waiting, on hearing a noise ? Anyone entering the farmhouse in whatever way wouldn't have known if all occupants had been asleep.
Nobody would take that chance whoever they were. Neville would have protected his family.
That's why Jeremy entered in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping. His plan wasn't fool proof - but he planned it and his story afterwards the bes tthat he could do, sadly appears he had luck on his side that night - but his luck ran out not long after.
-
That's why Jeremy entered in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping. His plan wasn't fool proof - but he planned it and his story afterwards the bes tthat he could do, sadly appears he had luck on his side that night - but his luck ran out not long after.
I wouldn't have mentioned the word " luck " where 5 people were slaughtered.
-
I wouldn't have mentioned the word " luck " where 5 people were slaughtered.
Luck doesn't have to be a positive thing.
-
Luck doesn't have to be a positive thing.
Said in the context that it was,it appeared positive speaking of Jeremy's timing,so luck was the wrong word.
You'd have rattled me if I'd used the word luck which concerned 5 murders. I'd never have heard the last of it,would I ?
-
Said in the context that it was,it appeared positive speaking of Jeremy's timing,so luck was the wrong word.
You'd have rattled me if I'd used the word luck which concerned 5 murders. I'd never have heard the last of it,would I ?
Which is exactly what you're trying to do to me! ;D
-
That's why Jeremy entered in the middle of the night, when people are sleeping. His plan wasn't fool proof - but he planned it and his story afterwards the bes tthat he could do, sadly appears he had luck on his side that night - but his luck ran out not long after.
Psychopaths are risk takers so if |Jeremy Bamber is a psychopath he would probably have enjoyed climbing through the window but it would have been foolish even for a psycho not to protect themselves just in case. :-\
-
Which is exactly what you're trying to do to me! ;D
Do as you would be done by my friend.Not nice is it ?
-
Imagine the scene if Neville had been on the other side of the window,waiting, on hearing a noise ? Anyone entering the farmhouse in whatever way wouldn't have known if all occupants had been asleep.
Nobody would take that chance whoever they were. Neville would have protected his family.
The trouble is, Lookout, when people are packed, so tightly, into these convenient little boxes in the way you've placed them, there's no room left in which they can manoeuvre and it frequently comes as a shock to learn that people are capable of acting very differently. The only control we have over their action is in our own imaginings.
-
Psychopaths are risk takers so if |Jeremy Bamber is a psychopath he would probably have enjoyed climbing through the window but it would have been foolish even for a psycho not to protect themselves just in case. :-\
Protect himself from what though? He broke into the house in the middle of the night, I'm sure he hid his weapon close by. If he was heard climbing through the window, all he had to do was speak and he could come up with any excuse for why he is there. It's not like his parents could have phone the police from their bedroom, the phone had been removed. All he had to do is get insdie and get to wherever he put the weapon - then sadly those inside were at his mercy.
Do as you would be done by my friend.Not nice is it ?
When I need a lecture on decency when it comes to the victims in this case, it certainly will not be from you, Lookout.
-
Protect himself from what though? He broke into the house in the middle of the night, I'm sure he hid his weapon close by. If he was heard climbing through the window, all he had to do was speak and he could come up with any excuse for why he is there. It's not like his parents could have phone the police from their bedroom, the phone had been removed. All he had to do is get insdie and get to wherever he put the weapon - then sadly those inside were at his mercy.
When I need a lecture on decency when it comes to the victims in this case, it certainly will not be from you, Lookout.
Double standards aren't nice either are they ? They make you wriggle out of things !!
-
Double standards aren't nice either are they ? They make you wriggle out of things !!
No you're just trying to twist what I said to cause a scene. Jeremy did need luck on his side that night. It doesn't matter what you say, you might not agree with it. But who cares?
I think/hope no one here (other than yourself) would think that I've been anything but respectful to the victims of the crimes with my posts.
You have posted disgusting things about June in the past, Lookout. Don't lecture me on decency when you rarely display ANY yourself.
-
Protect himself from what though? He broke into the house in the middle of the night, I'm sure he hid his weapon close by. If he was heard climbing through the window, all he had to do was speak and he could come up with any excuse for why he is there. It's not like his parents could have phone the police from their bedroom, the phone had been removed. All he had to do is get insdie and get to wherever he put the weapon - then sadly those inside were at his mercy.
When I need a lecture on decency when it comes to the victims in this case, it certainly will not be from you, Lookout.
He actually boasted about other occasions on which he'd been able to get in though the window. Nobody heard him then and presumably the dogs didn't alert the family by barking. Why would this occasion have been any different?
-
Protect himself from what though? He broke into the house in the middle of the night, I'm sure he hid his weapon close by. If he was heard climbing through the window, all he had to do was speak and he could come up with any excuse for why he is there. It's not like his parents could have phone the police from their bedroom, the phone had been removed. All he had to do is get insdie and get to wherever he put the weapon - then sadly those inside were at his mercy.
That is why I said I feel he would have hidden the rifle outside the farmhouse and entered with the loaded rifle to hand just in case he was caught out entering through the window. Once having made the decision to carry out the crime he would not have wanted to have to make up some tale about why he was climbing through the window in the middle of the night and jettison the plan, he would have wanted to carry out the crime as quickly as possible, attack being the best form of defence in this situation. 8)
-
That is why I said I feel he would have hidden the rifle outside the farmhouse and entered with the loaded rifle to hand just in case he was caught out entering through the window. Once having made the decision to carry out the crime he would not have wanted to have to make up some tale about why he was climbing through the window in the middle of the night and jettison the plan, he would have wanted to carry out the crime as quickly as possible, attack being the best form of defence in this situation. 8)
Hiding the weapon outside the farm isn't a terrible idea.
-
Getting through the window with it could have been trickier.
-
He actually boasted about other occasions on which he'd been able to get in though the window. Nobody heard him then and presumably the dogs didn't alert the family by barking. Why would this occasion have been any different?
If I remember rightly he and other younger members of the family apparently used the windows as access when no one was at home and the doors were locked. It is a little different, I think to enter the house at 2 or 3am in the morning having travelled by bike or by foot and maybe dressed in an unusual manner, although I would question he wore a wet suit, .....would take a bit of explaining imo.
-
Getting through the window with it could have been trickier.
True. Whatever happened that night I find the idea of JB travelling across pitch black uneven ground after midnight and climbing into the unlit farmhouse a bit far fetched but that is what the police believed so possibly it was true. I still wonder about the dogs barking, a dog in an outbuilding on a farm is usually a watchdog expected to bark at unexpected sounds. I understand the dog knew JB but would it not have barked hearing his footsteps at such an unexpected time? Don't know enough about dogs to answer that question myself.
We are told on good authority his car remained outside his house all night therefore he didn't drive but I still wonder.
-
True. Whatever happened that night I find the idea of JB travelling across pitch black uneven ground after midnight and climbing into the unlit farmhouse a bit far fetched but that is what the police believed so possibly it was true. I still wonder about the dogs barking, a dog in an outbuilding on a farm is usually a watchdog expected to bark at unexpected sounds. I understand the dog knew JB but would it not have barked hearing his footsteps at such an unexpected time? Don't know enough about dogs to answer that question myself.
We are told on good authority his car remained outside his house all night therefore he didn't drive but I still wonder.
Maybe (like Caroline suggested) he returned his car home, then went by foot to the 'last trailer', delivering it to WHF and only leaving after the murders.
Of course it's also notable that all members of the house hold were in bed, perhaps JB was kipping on the sofa for the night.
-
Maybe (like Caroline suggested) he returned his car home, then went by foot to the 'last trailer', delivering it to WHF and only leaving after the murders.
Of course it's also notable that all members of the house hold were in bed, perhaps JB was kipping on the sofa for the night.
We don't know if Neville or Sheila were in bed.
-
We don't know if Neville or Sheila were in bed.
Well yes, to be pedantic, but they were at least ready for bed. My suggestion was that JB may have opted to stay the night at WHF.
-
Maybe (like Caroline suggested) he returned his car home, then went by foot to the 'last trailer', delivering it to WHF and only leaving after the murders.
Of course it's also notable that all members of the house hold were in bed, perhaps JB was kipping on the sofa for the night.
Hi Hartley, good thought it is a possibility that he may have stayed the night there. We don't know what his habits were during harvesting, for all we know he may have been in the habit of staying over during the late nights and early mornings.
I also wonder about the video player he was pretty quick to remove it and take it away from WHF, he said it was his so why was it there?..... just a thought. :-\
-
Do we believe the family that Neville would always put the guns away at night ?
I can understand the ammunition not being put away - but would he put all the guns away ? There was no lock on the door so would it be that necessary?
I am not sure if they asked jean or Barbara if that was the case?
I agree there is a chance Jeremy could have left the gun outside somewhere to collect on the way in. He could have had a duplicate key - and then put the original key in the door and left through the window. Although I don't think the window would lock from the outside and I am not sure physically he could get through the window he was alleged to have used on the night.
But back to the thread - IF DNA testing of the cases is possible it COULD provide some answer .Because of the 5 bullets he allegedly did not handle . Unless he used gloves.
-
But back to the thread - IF DNA testing of the cases is possible it COULD provide some answer .Because of the 5 bullets he allegedly did not handle . Unless he used gloves.
I'm not really sure how that could help.
If JB's DNA was found on the bullets, then he could say he had handled when they were purchased, or at some point since then.
If his DNA wasn't found, then as you say he could have worn gloves.
Or maybe the bullets were just tipped out and not touched at all, therefore no DNA traceable.
In any event, do they even still exist?
-
I'm not really sure how that could help.
If JB's DNA was found on the bullets, then he could say he had handled when they were purchased, or at some point since then.
If his DNA wasn't found, then as you say he could have worn gloves.
Or maybe the bullets were just tipped out and not touched at all, therefore no DNA traceable.
In any event, do they even still exist?
I am not sure if they do still exist . Mike did have a list of everything that was destroyed.
There are lots of ifs and buts - perhaps JB did not buy the ammunition? Did AP leave his ammunition there?
Thinking about it if they DNA tested the silencer, if the casings were available you think they would have done them at the same time?
-
I am not sure if they do still exist . Mike did have a list of everything that was destroyed.
There are lots of ifs and buts - perhaps JB did not buy the ammunition? Did AP leave his ammunition there?
Thinking about it if they DNA tested the silencer, if the casings were available you think they would have done them at the same time?
It all seems useless thought to DNA test ammunition - Jeremy was at WHF often, he handled the weapons, he admits to handling the murder weapon that night...it could all be explained away.
-
I am not sure if they do still exist . Mike did have a list of everything that was destroyed.
There are lots of ifs and buts - perhaps JB did not buy the ammunition? Did AP leave his ammunition there?
Thinking about it if they DNA tested the silencer, if the casings were available you think they would have done them at the same time?
Yeah but Mike is hardly a reliable source. :P
-
Do we believe the family that Neville would always put the guns away at night ?
I can understand the ammunition not being put away - but would he put all the guns away ? There was no lock on the door so would it be that necessary?
I am not sure if they asked jean or Barbara if that was the case?
I agree there is a chance Jeremy could have left the gun outside somewhere to collect on the way in. He could have had a duplicate key - and then put the original key in the door and left through the window. Although I don't think the window would lock from the outside and I am not sure physically he could get through the window he was alleged to have used on the night.
But back to the thread - IF DNA testing of the cases is possible it COULD provide some answer .Because of the 5 bullets he allegedly did not handle . Unless he used gloves.
Jan, I rarely believe that ANY of us ALWAYS do. Mostly or nearly always is as good as it gets.
As you say, DNA testing "COULD provide some answer," however, I still think there could be several explanations.
-
Do we believe the family that Neville would always put the guns away at night ?
I can understand the ammunition not being put away - but would he put all the guns away ? There was no lock on the door so would it be that necessary?
I am not sure if they asked jean or Barbara if that was the case?
I agree there is a chance Jeremy could have left the gun outside somewhere to collect on the way in. He could have had a duplicate key - and then put the original key in the door and left through the window. Although I don't think the window would lock from the outside and I am not sure physically he could get through the window he was alleged to have used on the night.
But back to the thread - IF DNA testing of the cases is possible it COULD provide some answer .Because of the 5 bullets he allegedly did not handle . Unless he used gloves.
Have read other reports in the past claiming the opposite and that he was quite careless with safety of the guns. Hard to know what to believe jan but he was an intelligent man therefore I would guess he was safety conscious.
-
Have read other reports in the past claiming the opposite and that he was quite careless with safety of the guns. Hard to know what to believe jan but he was an intelligent man therefore I would guess he was safety conscious.
the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
-
the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
That's right, Caroline. Rarely did he ALWAYS do and equally rarely did he NEVER do. Margins of error have to be allowed for.
-
That's right, Caroline. Rarely did he ALWAYS do and equally rarely did he NEVER do. Margins of error have to be allowed for.
Especially as NONE of us know ANY of the people involved to any personal degree.
-
Well yes, to be pedantic, but they were at least ready for bed. My suggestion was that JB may have opted to stay the night at WHF.
I think it's possible.
-
I think it's possible.
I thought the neighbours said they heard him arrive home?
-
I think it's possible.
I also think it's possible, however, he was heard leaving the farm in his car by the Foukes so how would that tie in with him staying the night? Even if he took his car home and then brought in the last trailer how would he explain where his car was, or maybe he took a chance no one would notice?
-
I thought the neighbours said they heard him arrive home?
Can you remember what time they said they heard him arrived home jan?
-
the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
Agreed.
-
I thought the neighbours said they heard him arrive home?
yes i read that too and didnt he phone jm too so unlikely i think he was at whf then
-
I thought the neighbours said they heard him arrive home?
They may have, when he dropped his car off.
-
I also think it's possible, however, he was heard leaving the farm in his car by the Foukes so how would that tie in with him staying the night? Even if he took his car home and then brought in the last trailer how would he explain where his car was, or maybe he took a chance no one would notice?
This could be a fallacy - It could have been another night Doris Foakes was referring to or she may not have heard his car at all - again recalling another night but saying it was the night of the murders. These things do happen.
http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm
-
I also think it's possible, however, he was heard leaving the farm in his car by the Foukes so how would that tie in with him staying the night? Even if he took his car home and then brought in the last trailer how would he explain where his car was, or maybe he took a chance no one would notice?
Jeremy 'could' have forced an argument over bringing back the last trailer, he could have stormed out (remember Nevill was in a bad mood when BW called - as though he'd had an argument). We know he told Len Foakes that Nevill would be sorting out the final load just before driving off (Doris Foakes hears his car leave). He could have dropped off his car, called Julie before making his way back to WHF. Whether he brought the last trailer back or Nevill did, he could have come back saying he felt guilty and wanted to help. It being late - he decides to stay the night.
-
Jeremy 'could' have forced an argument over bringing back the last trailer, he could have stormed out (remember Nevill was in a bad mood when BW called - as though he'd had an argument). We know he told Len Foakes that Nevill would be sorting out the final load just before driving off (Doris Foakes hears his car leave). He could have dropped off his car, called Julie before making his way back to WHF. Whether he brought the last trailer back or Nevill did, he could have come back saying he felt guilty and wanted to help. It being late - he decides to stay the night.
:-\
-
This could be a fallacy - It could have been another night Doris Foakes was referring to or she may not have heard his car at all - again recalling another night but saying it was the night of the murders. These things do happen.
http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20One/fisher&tversky.htm
That's true Steph and we often believe we have heard what we expect to hear, so it can't be taken as gospel.
-
Jeremy 'could' have forced an argument over bringing back the last trailer, he could have stormed out (remember Nevill was in a bad mood when BW called - as though he'd had an argument). We know he told Len Foakes that Nevill would be sorting out the final load just before driving off (Doris Foakes hears his car leave). He could have dropped off his car, called Julie before making his way back to WHF. Whether he brought the last trailer back or Nevill did, he could have come back saying he felt guilty and wanted to help. It being late - he decides to stay the night.
It is a possibility, I don't find that explanation as far fetched as Jeremy toiling along rough and muddy pathways in the dark before crawling through a window not having any real idea who was were or what was going on or not and risking waking the whole house up if the dog decided to bark it's head off. Killing everyone then without a care in the world riding or walking or staggering back over the rough ground in the pitch black before turning up back at WHF at 3.45 as cool as a cucumber. Apart from anything after harvesting all day and running around all night in the dark, committing 5 horrendous murders by the time he turned up to meet the police at the farm, he must have been absolutely knackered.
-
It is a possibility, I don't find that explanation as far fetched as Jeremy toiling along rough and muddy pathways in the dark before crawling through a window not having any real idea who was were or what was going on or not and maybe waking the whole house up if the dog decided to bark it's head off.
Already being in the house is a massive advantage.
-
I also think it's possible, however, he was heard leaving the farm in his car by the Foukes so how would that tie in with him staying the night? Even if he took his car home and then brought in the last trailer how would he explain where his car was, or maybe he took a chance no one would notice?
Maggie whilst I have not dismissed the idea of JB staying over at WHF is it feasible when he lived so close. I just don't know :-\
-
Already being in the house is a massive advantage.
it changes the whole scenario to me and make the almost impossible much more feasible.
-
It is a possibility, I don't find that explanation as far fetched as Jeremy toiling along rough and muddy pathways in the dark before crawling through a window not having any real idea who was were or what was going on or not and risking waking the whole house up if the dog decided to bark it's head off. Killing everyone then without a care in the world riding or walking or staggering back over the rough ground in the pitch black before turning up back at WHF at 3.45 as cool as a cucumber. Apart from anything after harvesting all day he must have been absolutely knackered.
Maggie. Would Ralph not think it strange Jeremy was staying over unless he was in the habit of doing so nah not sitting well with me but I agree it would give him a tremendous advantage to murder his family already being in the house but why record the programmes why not just watch them.
-
Maggie whilst I have not dismissed the idea of JB staying over at WHF is it feasible when he lived so close. I just don't know :-\
I don't know if it's feasible or not Susie, it may be something which happened at harvest time and usually Sheila wasn't there so he would stay in her room but obviously this time there was no spare room so he might have sat in the lounge and watched his programmes waiting for the house to settle down for the night before creeping upstairs and the rest is history. :-\
-
Maggie. Would Ralph not think it strange Jeremy was staying over unless he was in the habit of doing so nah not sitting well with me but I agree it would give him a tremendous advantage to murder his family already being in the house but why record the programmes why not just watch them.
Our posts crossed suse, just said it may have been his habit at harvest time to stay over as it would be an early start, am sure June cooked a big breakfast and they all got going by 6am or maybe earlier?
-
It is a possibility, I don't find that explanation as far fetched as Jeremy toiling along rough and muddy pathways in the dark before crawling through a window not having any real idea who was were or what was going on or not and risking waking the whole house up if the dog decided to bark it's head off. Killing everyone then without a care in the world riding or walking or staggering back over the rough ground in the pitch black before turning up back at WHF at 3.45 as cool as a cucumber. Apart from anything after harvesting all day he must have been absolutely knackered.
Physically knackered maybe but not necessarily mentally knackered - psychopaths don't need much sleep etc...
-
Our posts crossed suse, just said it may have been his habit at harvest time to stay over as it would be an early start, am sure June cooked a big breakfast and they all got going by 6am or maybe earlier?
Given that he was their son, why would it be odd for him to stay over? I used to stay at my mum and dads quite a lot when my dad was alive - I didn't even need to ask permission! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Physically knackered maybe but not necessarily mentally knackered - psychopaths don't need much sleep etc...
I know but was thinking of all that rushing about with the adrenaline running and am feeling quite knackered myself Steph. :) I know it's not funny but it would be easy to see it as a farce if it weren't so tragic and that is one reason it doesn't ring true to me. :-\
-
Given that he was their son, why would it be odd for him to stay over? I used to stay at my mum and dads quite a lot when my dad was alive - I didn't even need to ask permission! ;D ;D ;D ;D
I agree it was his family home although he had no designated bedroom anymore I would imagine he would always be welcome.
-
Our posts crossed suse, just said it may have been his habit at harvest time to stay over as it would be an early start, am sure June cooked a big breakfast and they all got going by 6am or maybe earlier?
Maggie I remember we discussed this before and Jane J said they started at 8 a.m but you could be right who am I say otherwise. Did he not have bacon in his fridge. I know in this area they don't start too early have to make sure the crop his dry but they work till well into the night.
-
If he went back then at about 9 or 10 ish he allegedly called Julie - so he must have called her from WHF then ? Or again she was not telling the truth. Or he went home - called her then went back to WHF ?
who knows.
-
If he went back then at about 9 or 10 ish he allegedly called Julie - so he must have called her from WHF then ? Or again she was not telling the truth. Or he went home - called her then went back to WHF ?
who knows.
Either way.
-
If he went back then at about 9 or 10 ish he allegedly called Julie - so he must have called her from WHF then ? Or again she was not telling the truth. Or he went home - called her then went back to WHF ?
who knows.
Jan we can all have our own ideas but none of us will ever know exactly what happened
-
Maggie I remember we discussed this before and Jane J said they started at 8 a.m but you could be right who am I say otherwise. Did he not have bacon in his fridge. I know in this area they don't start too early have to make sure the crop his dry but they work till well into the night.
They certainly work late round here suse, it's only hay and silage as it's all dairy farming but have seen them still bringing it in under lights at 11 pm.... depends on the weather and if they are trying to beat the rain coming in. ^-^
-
If he went back then at about 9 or 10 ish he allegedly called Julie - so he must have called her from WHF then ? Or again she was not telling the truth. Or he went home - called her then went back to WHF ?
who knows.
Who knows indeed jan, it's all guess work but must admit it makes far more sense to me not that it changes anything.
-
They certainly work late round here steph, it's only hay and silage as it's all dairy farming but have seen them still bringing it in under lights at 11 pm.... depends on the weather and if they are trying to beat the rain coming in. ^-^
They start early and work late here.
-
They certainly work late round here suse, it's only hay and silage as it's all dairy farming but have seen them still bringing it in under lights at 11 pm.... depends on the weather and if they are trying to beat the rain coming in. ^-^
Maggie they work late round here as well but have not known them to start before 8 a.m think the crop maybe slightly damp early morning oh heck I will never make a farmer ;D
-
Maggie they work late round here as well but have not known them to start before 8 a.m think the crop maybe slightly damp early morning oh heck I will never make a farmer ;D
Nor me suse, it's my idea of hell ;D :'( :'(
I know at silage making they work their socks of day and night and take on any local help they can get, however WHF was arable so they would be harvesting their crops which may be different.
-
They start early and work late here.
All the farmers I know use every moment of daylight from sunrise onwards and the sun rises VERY early in August. Farm implements often have banks of lights so they can carry on working as long as necessary.
-
All the farmers I know use every moment of daylight from sunrise onwards and the sun rises VERY early in August. Farm implements often have banks of lights so they can carry on working as long as necessary.
That's how it is here too and this is VERY rural.
-
All the farmers I know use every moment of daylight from sunrise onwards and the sun rises VERY early in August. Farm implements often have banks of lights so they can carry on working as long as necessary.
Sorry Jane I must have been mistaken I felt sure you said they started at 8 a.m.when we discussed this before,
-
Sorry Jane I must have been mistaken I felt sure you said they started at 8 a.m.when we discussed this before,
Think you'll find it was Tyler who said it from her own experience. From my experience they start MUCH earlier. There's an old saying "Make hay whilst the sun shines" and they do because they never know when it might stop shining.
-
Think you'll find it was Tyler who said it from her own experience. From my experience they start MUCH earlier. There's an old saying "Make hay whilst the sun shines" and they do because they never know when it might stop shining.
Jane you could well be right takes me all my time to remember last month never mind last year or before ;D
-
Nor me suse, it's my idea of hell ;D :'( :'(
I know at silage making they work their socks of day and night and take on any local help they can get, however WHF was arable so they would be harvesting their crops which may be different.
Maggie you have got it right my girl it is silage round this way crops are different and have a limited time to get them in Well done Maggie right again Gold Star for you my friend ;D
-
Maggie you have got it right my girl it is silage round this way crops are different and have a limited time to get them in Well done Maggie right again Gold Star for you my friend ;D
Dont know anything about crops Suse as I am a city bird by birth although now I live in deepest somerset, my Mum was in the land army in the war on an arable farm :'( :)).
I agree with you that hay and such like cannot be stored damp so they have to make sure it's dry from the dew first. I would think cereals are the same but turnips and stuff like that may be different.
Maybe we should take up farming after all. :))
-
8am for a rural farmer? I think 8am is the time they have their first break after being up working for a few hours. ;D
-
8am for a rural farmer? I think 8am is the time they have their first break after being up working for a few hours. ;D
hahaha Mat guess you have not visited The Highlands never start till 8 a.m but that could be because they don't finish till 4 a.m. hahaha
-
hahaha Mat guess you have not visited The Highlands never start till 8 a.m but that could be because they don't finish till 4 a.m. hahaha
Guess, I haven't. They finish at 4am? Get home and eat I guess, in bed for about 4:30am? Up at 7:30am and start at 8am?!
They aren't farmers, they are robots. ;D
-
Dont know anything about crops Suse as I am a city bird by birth tho now I live in deepest somerset, my Mum was in the land army in the war on an arable farm :'( :)).
I agree with you that hay and such like cannot be stored damp so they have to make sure it's dry from the dew first. I would think cereals are the same but turnips and stuff like that may be different.
Maybe we should take up farming after all. :))
I live in a rural area, they start very early, they don't just get up and go straight to the field. They have to eat, and prepare machinery and give instructions to other workers etc.
-
Guess, I haven't. They finish at 4am? Get home and eat I guess, in bed for about 4:30am? Up at 7:30am and start at 8am?!
They aren't farmers, they are robots. ;D
Hahaha Mat you could be right have to be careful what I say I am living on a Dairy Farm ;D ;D ;D
-
my dad used to work from 5am to 5pm with a nap at lunchtime with one weekend off in two. Dairy farming.
-
my dad used to work from 5am to 5pm with a nap at lunchtime with one weekend off in two. Dairy farming.
Its certainly hard work and looks really miserable in the winter months, Jan. I don't think I would have made it as a farmer somehow. :)
-
Its certainly hard work and looks really miserable in the winter months, Jan. I don't think I would have made it as a farmer somehow. :)
Maggie the cattleman on this farm is out 4 a.m. every morning breaks at 9 a.m. back on at 2 p.m. till 5 p.m. then checks the cattle at 9 p.m. he works 7 days a week with one weekend off every month a really hard life when all the equipment freezes up in the severe frost but nice in summer out in the fields at 4 a.m. bringing in his cows ;D
-
I don't know if it's feasible or not Susie, it may be something which happened at harvest time and usually Sheila wasn't there so he would stay in her room but obviously this time there was no spare room so he might have sat in the lounge and watched his programmes waiting for the house to settle down for the night before creeping upstairs and the rest is history. :-\
JB's bedroom was opposite the room where the twins slept.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37702;image)
-
See the second paragraph:
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1621.0;attach=19740;image)
-
The bed in 'Jeremy's Room' was made up but undisturbed.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1623.0;attach=20027;image)
-
JB's bedroom was opposite the room where the twins slept.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=37702;image)
I know but I thought it had become just a storage room?
-
The bed in 'Jeremy's Room' was made up but undisturbed.
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1623.0;attach=20027;image)
I wondered about that room but remembered I had read at some point that Jeremy's bedroom had become a store room and assumed there wasn't a bed in there.
The fact there was a bed made up is interesting and points to the possibility Jeremy did stay there from time to time although that night he didn't go to bed.
-
8am for a rural farmer? I think 8am is the time they have their first break after being up working for a few hours. ;D
Quite right Matt, this is why I cannot believe Mikes theory that Jeremy had no idea his family had been killed? With all the commotion outside and the dog barking and sounding distressed, his Dad had not appeared to see what the hell was going on? Did he think Dad and mum was having a lie in?
-
Quite right Matt, this is why I cannot believe Mikes theory that Jeremy had no idea his family had been killed? With all the commotion outside and the dog barking and sounding distressed, his Dad had not appeared to see what the hell was going on? Did he think Dad and mum was having a lie in?
According to Bewes he was worried - he asked the police to go in as soon as they got there . And later on did he not beg them to go in saying they are all the family I Have?
So he obviously was getting increasingly worried about what had happened.
-
According to Bewes he was worried - he asked the police to go in as soon as they got there . And later on did he not beg them to go in saying they are all the family I Have?
So he obviously was getting increasingly worried about what had happened.
I did say Mikes theory, this is Mikes post
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
-
I did say Mikes theory, this is Mikes post
Hang on a minute, he told PS 'Oliver' Saxby, at the scene, upon the news that all his family had been shot dead inside the farmhouse, that 'he thought the police had shot all the victims 'dead' after they entered the farmhouse', which is consistent with my belief...
If my memory serves me right. Jeremy did shorty after being told they were all dead while sitting in the police car he accused the police of killing them all, then whoever Jeremy told that to asked why he thought that and Jeremy's reply to that was "you said everything would be OK"
I believe I read this in colp interview notes while they were going over notebooks.
-
According to Bewes he was worried - he asked the police to go in as soon as they got there . And later on did he not beg them to go in saying they are all the family I Have?
So he obviously was getting increasingly worried about what had happened.
He had told police officers his sister was armed. He was a 25 year old man who was familiar with guns - I don't believe for one second that he didn't know the police would not have stormed the house unarmed until they knew t was safe to do so.
-
He had told police officers his sister was armed. He was a 25 year old man who was familiar with guns - I don't believe for one second that he didn't know the police would not have stormed the house unarmed until they knew t was safe to do so.
He never really said what was going through his head at the time though did he ? If he was innocent perhaps he just thought she was threatening herself not anyone else.
I am only saying what Bewes said . And as far as I know they did not call armed back up for a while?
So they were obviously not feeling too threatened?
-
He never really said what was going through his head at the time though did he ? If he was innocent perhaps he just thought she was threatening herself not anyone else.
I am only saying what Bewes said . And as far as I know they did not call armed back up for a while?
So they were obviously not feeling too threatened?
He couldn't say what was going through his head. However, the procedures to follow when a suspect is armed whether the unarmed police feel threatened or not,
-
I bet he was scared of getting shot himself.
-
He couldn't say what was going through his head. However, the procedures to follow when a suspect is armed whether the unarmed police feel threatened or not,
At what stage was armed back up called? - you would have thought those first police officers COULD in theory have been in a lot of danger.
I remember a shooting case near me where the police would not help the victim or even let the ambulance attend - I think the poor woman died in her neighbours arms even thought the neighbour kept telling the police the assailant had left the scene.
-
At what stage was armed back up called? - you would have thought those first police officers COULD in theory have been in a lot of danger.
I remember a shooting case near me where the police would not help the victim or even let the ambulance attend - I think the poor woman died in her neighbours arms even thought the neighbour kept telling the police the assailant had left the scene.
I imagine after they saw no sign of life, they is no way they would have risked trying to enter.
-
I imagine after they saw no sign of life, they is no way they would have risked trying to enter.
Of course he knew they weren't going to storm in. I am sure he told them to "please go inside, they are the only family I have" etc likely came after they made it clear they were going to call backup as they were unarmed so unable to go in.
-
Of course he knew they weren't going to storm in. I am sure he told them to "please go inside, they are the only family I have" etc likely came after they made it clear they were going to call backup as they were unarmed so unable to go in.
Spot on!
-
I imagine after they saw no sign of life, they is no way they would have risked trying to enter.
Well they were allegedly still shouting out the Sheila when they went in so they cant have been that convinced everyone was dead.
Mind you after trying to talk to someone for hours on a loud hailer you think they might have had a clue.
-
Well they were allegedly still shouting out the Sheila when they went in so they cant have been that convinced everyone was dead.
Mind you after trying to talk to someone for hours on a loud hailer you think they might have had a clue.
Precisely, which is why they didn't just steam on in.
-
It certainly took the raid team long enough in establishing that all occupants were dead ! What DID keep them ?
-
Spot on!
He knew he had shot Sheila twice - does anyone ever think about that? How impossible all your theories are?
-
He knew he had shot Sheila twice - does anyone ever think about that? How impossible all your theories are?
Yes, Alias. We know that YOU this that is makes it impossible, but a lot of people certainly disagree wth you. We're not wrong because we disagree with you no matter how many times you go over the same point.
-
Just seems to defy reason to me, skip your hateful tone.
-
He knew he had shot Sheila twice - does anyone ever think about that? How impossible all your theories are?
Being as you mention it every time, how can one forget? However, as we keep repeating, after shooting her twice, he had no chice but to go ahead. What else could he do, call the cops and admit to it?
-
Being as you mention it every time, how can one forget? However, as we keep repeating, after shooting her twice, he had no chice but to go ahead. What else could he do, call the cops and admit to it?
I am here ever so rarely! So.
-
Being as you mention it every time, how can one forget? However, as we keep repeating, after shooting her twice, he had no chice but to go ahead. What else could he do, call the cops and admit to it?
It is an impossible scenario to me. Have to pass.
As you point out I keep repeating myself, but that is the logic I see in this: WHAT person is so stupid to shoot a victim twice, then claim it was suicide? Why does no one but me see the absurdity in this?
-
It is an impossible scenario to me. Have to pass.
As you point out I keep repeating myself, but that is the logic I see in this: WHAT person is so stupid to shoot a victim twice, then claim it was suicide? Why does no one but me see the absurdity in this?
But HE didn't claim it was suicide - he simply said his father called and said "Sheila has gone crazy, she's got the gun". I think the absurdity, it to believe that Sheila was capable of anything after the first shot. We differ on the same point but for different and opposite reasons.
-
on 15th Aug why were they worried about prints if they thought it was murder suicide?
I think by then, they were considering other options.
-
But HE didn't claim it was suicide - he simply said his father called and said "Sheila has gone crazy, she's got the gun". I think the absurdity, it to believe that Sheila was capable of anything after the first shot. We differ on the same point but for different and opposite reasons.
of course he claimed it was suicide - he staged the scene as suicide - that's exactly what he did .
-
of course he claimed it was suicide - he staged the scene as suicide - that's exactly what he did .
I don't believe he did. There was no need. He'd given the police enough information for them to reach that conclusion and they informed him that it was suicide. He was hardly going to tell them that he'd staged it, was he?
-
Just seems to defy reason to me, skip your hateful tone.
There is a recent poll on the two shots.
Everyone agreed Bamber had no choice but to fire the second shot. After the first shot did not kill Sheila.
-
It is an impossible scenario to me. Have to pass.
As you point out I keep repeating myself, but that is the logic I see in this: WHAT person is so stupid to shoot a victim twice, then claim it was suicide? Why does no one but me see the absurdity in this?
It's easy enough to pop in occasionally and say what you have said repeatedly when you were here regularly, that being your belief that we're wrong in our thinking. It seems like the harder part is to offer something -ANYTHING?- by way of alternative.
We have discussed this on many occasions -with and without your company- and you may be interested to know that, like you, none of us believe that he PLANNED to shoot her twice and have it look like suicide, however, we can no more stay there than could Jeremy when his first shot failed to kill her. I think it WOULD have thrown him, but not for a moment do I think he made himself a cup of tea whilst he worked out his next move.
He had options, albeit limited. He could have left her to bleed to death, which she undoubtedly would have done, but I don't believe sadism had any part in this. He COULD have re-staged the whole thing to look like a burglary gone wrong........................BUT what would a burglar have considered SO worth having that it was worth slaughtering a whole family -not to mention two SLEEPING children- to get their hands on? Then there's the problem of what he CAN take which is valuable enough to be worth killing for, small enough to be transportable, perhaps on a bike and where will he hide it when he gets it home? He doesn't HAVE all the time in the world to think about what his next move is -in fact, he probably only had seconds- but given that it wasn't how he planned it to happen, he has no other alternative than to make the best of a bad job. THAT was to shoot her again and rely on an alleged call from his father to his home in Goldhanger at silly o'clock to put enough distance between him and WHF.
-
It's easy enough to pop in occasionally and say what you have said repeatedly when you were here regularly, that being your belief that we're wrong in our thinking. It seems like the harder part is to offer something -ANYTHING?- by way of alternative.
We have discussed this on many occasions -with and without your company- and you may be interested to know that, like you, none of us believe that he PLANNED to shoot her twice and have it look like suicide, however, we can no more stay there than could Jeremy when his first shot failed to kill her. I think it WOULD have thrown him, but not for a moment do I think he made himself a cup of tea whilst he worked out his next move.
He had options, albeit limited. He could have left her to bleed to death, which she undoubtedly would have done, but I don't believe sadism had any part in this. He COULD have re-staged the whole thing to look like a burglary gone wrong........................BUT what would a burglar have considered SO worth having that it was worth slaughtering a whole family -not to mention two SLEEPING children- to get their hands on? Then there's the problem of what he CAN take which is valuable enough to be worth killing for, small enough to be transportable, perhaps on a bike and where will he hide it when he gets it home? He doesn't HAVE all the time in the world to think about what his next move is -in fact, he probably only had seconds- but given that it wasn't how he planned it to happen, he has no other alternative than to make the best of a bad job. THAT was to shoot her again and rely on an alleged call from his father to his home in Goldhanger at silly o'clock to put enough distance between him and WHF.
You were very negative on my excellent poll on this. Suggesting I was taking drugs, saying it was a 'f--king rubbish poll, and calling me names. Perhaps you were having another bad day.
It is probably best to just direct Alias to this poll, which has both supporters and guilters saying Bamber had to fire the second shot. It saves time.
Alias will resurface every few months and just say the exact same thing.
-
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7149.0.html
For Alias.
-
It's easy enough to pop in occasionally and say what you have said repeatedly when you were here regularly, that being your belief that we're wrong in our thinking. It seems like the harder part is to offer something -ANYTHING?- by way of alternative.
We have discussed this on many occasions -with and without your company- and you may be interested to know that, like you, none of us believe that he PLANNED to shoot her twice and have it look like suicide, however, we can no more stay there than could Jeremy when his first shot failed to kill her. I think it WOULD have thrown him, but not for a moment do I think he made himself a cup of tea whilst he worked out his next move.
He had options, albeit limited. He could have left her to bleed to death, which she undoubtedly would have done, but I don't believe sadism had any part in this. He COULD have re-staged the whole thing to look like a burglary gone wrong........................BUT what would a burglar have considered SO worth having that it was worth slaughtering a whole family -not to mention two SLEEPING children- to get their hands on? Then there's the problem of what he CAN take which is valuable enough to be worth killing for, small enough to be transportable, perhaps on a bike and where will he hide it when he gets it home? He doesn't HAVE all the time in the world to think about what his next move is -in fact, he probably only had seconds- but given that it wasn't how he planned it to happen, he has no other alternative than to make the best of a bad job. THAT was to shoot her again and rely on an alleged call from his father to his home in Goldhanger at silly o'clock to put enough distance between him and WHF.
It's worth noting that Vanezis says suicides with multiple shots, whilst unusual, do occur.
I don't follow the argument that somebody wouldn't have staged her suicide with two shots, clearly it wasn't the intention, but what else could the murderer have done when the first shot didn't work? It also seems a little coincidental that there were only two bullets remaining.
Maybe there was only one bullet left and the killer had to go and fetch another one, stashing the silencer in the gun cupboard whilst he was at it. :-\
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1191.0;attach=6168;image)
-
It's worth noting that Vanezis says suicides with multiple shots, whilst unusual, do occur.
I don't follow the argument that somebody wouldn't have staged her suicide with two shots, clearly it wasn't the intention, but what else could the murderer have done when the first shot didn't work? It also seems a little coincidental that there were only two bullets remaining.
Maybe there was only one bullet left and the killer had to go and fetch another one, stashing the silencer in the gun cupboard whilst he was at it. :-\
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1191.0;attach=6168;image)
I totally agree, what other choice would they have? They had killed 4 people and wounded a fifth, too late for a change of mind.
-
It's worth noting that Vanezis says suicides with multiple shots, whilst unusual, do occur.
I don't follow the argument that somebody wouldn't have staged her suicide with two shots, clearly it wasn't the intention, but what else could the murderer have done when the first shot didn't work? It also seems a little coincidental that there were only two bullets remaining.
Maybe there was only one bullet left and the killer had to go and fetch another one, stashing the silencer in the gun cupboard whilst he was at it. :-\
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1191.0;attach=6168;image)
PRE-CISELY Hartley. I -and others- have pointed out this fact to Alias on sooooo many occasions. We KNOW it wasn't ideal. We KNOW it wasn't what he'd have planned. We KNOW he hadn't allowed for the possibility, but it ended up being, no more or less, what it was and simply stating that he wouldn't have planned a two shot suicide doesn't alter what it had become.
It may also be worth noting that recently, although Vanezis originally said she could have moved after the first shot but would have needed to hold her head up, he now says, categorically, that she didn't move. I find it difficult to believe that with a broken neck and needing to hold her head in position, she could have lifted and manipulated the rifle into the position required for the second shot.
-
The second shot closely followed the first because it was a semi-automatic rifle which was comparatively new. Both shots/wounds had been pretty close to each other,allowing the force/movement of the first close shot to shift onto a second one.
-
The second shot closely followed the first because it was a semi-automatic rifle which was comparatively new. Both shots/wounds had been pretty close to each other,allowing the force/movement of the first close shot to shift onto a second one.
It has been said here, by gun experts, that the second shot required the same trigger finger action as did the first shot. It was a standard issue rifle not a machine gun.
-
It has been said here, by gun experts, that the second shot required the same trigger finger action as did the first shot. It was a standard issue rifle not a machine gun.
Yes, a semi-automatic just means that the next round is automatically loaded without the need to manually eject the case.
Two shots would require two trigger pulls.
-
It has been said here, by gun experts, that the second shot required the same trigger finger action as did the first shot. It was a standard issue rifle not a machine gun.
Yes.And ? This is what I was trying to explain,but be my guest and twist it to your heart's content !
-
Yes.And ? This is what I was trying to explain,but be my guest and twist it to your heart's content !
It didn't need explaining, Lookout. If I, as a total gun virgin, was aware of it, so too, was everyone else.
-
It's worth noting that Vanezis says suicides with multiple shots, whilst unusual, do occur.
I don't follow the argument that somebody wouldn't have staged her suicide with two shots, clearly it wasn't the intention, but what else could the murderer have done when the first shot didn't work? It also seems a little coincidental that there were only two bullets remaining.
Maybe there was only one bullet left and the killer had to go and fetch another one, stashing the silencer in the gun cupboard whilst he was at it. :-\
I went looking for an autopsy photo of someone who hade shot themselves in the neck with a rifle twice in order to silence those who said it cannot be done. I actually found a poor sod who shot himself in the neck four times! with a .22 rifle! :-\
-
I went looking for an autopsy photo of someone who hade shot themselves in the neck with a rifle twice in order to silence those who said it cannot be done. I actually found a poor sod who shot himself in the neck four times! with a .22 rifle! :-\
And, before some leap on your band wagon, the variables attached to this case, to differentiate them from Sheila, are................................?
-
Aww,he really made sure,poor chap.
-
And, before some leap on your band wagon, the variables attached to this case, to differentiate them from Sheila, are................................?
It's a multiple shot suicide to the neck/chin with the same type of weapon. I was just trying prove that it can be done!
-
I went looking for an autopsy photo of someone who hade shot themselves in the neck with a rifle twice in order to silence those who said it cannot be done. I actually found a poor sod who shot himself in the neck four times! with a .22 rifle! :-\
But it doesn't say that he shot himself with a .22 rifle David ;). This is the description
"Suicidal gunshot wounds occasionally have more than one entrance wound. In this case, a suicide victim was witnessed by numerous people to place the small-caliber weapon under his chin and discharge the weapon. After each of the first three shots, he looked at the weapon, placed it back under his chin, and fired again, for a total of four shots. At autopsy, only one bullet was found to have entered the brain."
http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f10/firearms-gunshot-wound-deaths-part-ii-100691/
-
I went looking for an autopsy photo of someone who hade shot themselves in the neck with a rifle twice in order to silence those who said it cannot be done. I actually found a poor sod who shot himself in the neck four times! with a .22 rifle! :-\
wonder what order they were in because he was obviously conscious after three of the shots.
That's were forensics gets dangerous - a lot of it is still based on the opinion of the person doing the investigation based on their own experience and research.
-
But it doesn't say that he shot himself with a .22 rifle David ;). This is the description
"Suicidal gunshot wounds occasionally have more than one entrance wound. In this case, a suicide victim was witnessed by numerous people to place the small-caliber weapon under his chin and discharge the weapon. After each of the first three shots, he looked at the weapon, placed it back under his chin, and fired again, for a total of four shots. At autopsy, only one bullet was found to have entered the brain."
http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f10/firearms-gunshot-wound-deaths-part-ii-100691/
A 22 rifle is a small calibre weapon ? the bullets are small? that's why they could not get prints?
-
But it doesn't say that he shot himself with a .22 rifle David ;). This is the description
"Suicidal gunshot wounds occasionally have more than one entrance wound. In this case, a suicide victim was witnessed by numerous people to place the small-caliber weapon under his chin and discharge the weapon. After each of the first three shots, he looked at the weapon, placed it back under his chin, and fired again, for a total of four shots. At autopsy, only one bullet was found to have entered the brain."
http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f10/firearms-gunshot-wound-deaths-part-ii-100691/
One of the variables I asked about, Caroline. A small calibre obviously being easier to manipulate than a .22 rifle. Did he have a broken neck? He was clearly adept with a gun because he knew where to hit for greatest effect WITHOUT killing himself, before the final shot.
-
A 22 rifle is a small calibre weapon ? the bullets are small? that's why they could not get prints?
I know it is, but the text doesn't mention anything about a 'rifle' - it could have been a handgun. There is a presumption that it was the same kind of weapon but that's not what it says - or don't you think clarity is important?
-
It's a multiple shot suicide to the neck/chin with the same type of weapon. I was just trying prove that it can be done!
Would not a semi-automatic deliver 2 shots for one ?
-
I know it is, but the text doesn't mention anything about a 'rifle' - it could have been a handgun. There is a presumption that it was the same kind of weapon but that's not what it says - or don't you think clarity is important?
Caroline, I'd assumed it was a hand gun. I can't get my head round ANYONE manipulating a rifle to shoot themselves four times.
-
I know it is, but the text doesn't mention anything about a 'rifle' - it could have been a handgun. There is a presumption that it was the same kind of weapon but that's not what it says - or don't you think clarity is important?
So you are thinking a hand gun with the same size bullets would be less powerful and therefore more likely to use 4 attempts? That sounds like a question for skippy :)
-
Caroline, I'd assumed it was a hand gun. I can't get my head round ANYONE manipulating a rifle to shoot themselves four times.
Exactly - if it's not 'like for like' it's not relevant.
-
So you are thinking a hand gun with the same size bullets would be less powerful and therefore more likely to use 4 attempts? That sounds like a question for skippy :)
No, I'm not thinking that at all but had a guilty supporter posted incorrect info, would you be so keen to defend it? Also, given that we don't know the circumstances of this guys suicide, it's not relevant.
-
So you are thinking a hand gun with the same size bullets would be less powerful and therefore more likely to use 4 attempts? That sounds like a question for skippy :)
There are lots of different types of .22 bullets. I don't know, but I'd guess that some vary in effectiveness. :-\
I'd have said (another guess) that a rifle and hand gun would be as powerful as each other, but a rifle is more accurate at distance.
-
Would not a semi-automatic deliver 2 shots for one ?
Lookout, someone who knows about such things has said here several times now, because you have made the same statement several times, that it -a semi automatic- requires exactly the same trigger action as a non semi automatic, ie one shot, one bullet. It doesn't matter how many times you ask the question or make the point, the answer won't change.
-
Would not a semi-automatic deliver 2 shots for one ?
A semi automatic re chambers the next bullet so all you have to do is pull the trigger
(http://cdn.theatlanticwire.com/img/upload/2013/01/08/bushmaster.gif)
-
A semi automatic re chambers the next bullet so all you have to do is pull the trigger
(http://cdn.theatlanticwire.com/img/upload/2013/01/08/bushmaster.gif)
Point being that you HAVE to pull the trigger for each and every shot.
-
Point being that you HAVE to pull the trigger for each and every shot.
Yeah that is what I said.
A fully automatic you would need to hold the trigger down and it won't stop
-
A semi automatic re chambers the next bullet so all you have to do is pull the trigger
(http://cdn.theatlanticwire.com/img/upload/2013/01/08/bushmaster.gif)
Thankyou David.That's just about all I wanted to know. So therefore it's not impossible for the slightest touch to the trigger to deliver a second shot within seconds of the first.
-
Yeah that is what I said.
A fully automatic you would need to hold the trigger down and it won't stop
I had a car which worked in a similar way. It had no clutch but I had to put it in gear manually. It was called a Freetronic.
-
Thankyou David.That's just about all I wanted to know. So therefore it's not impossible for the slightest touch to the trigger to deliver a second shot within seconds of the first.
If one HAS to pull the trigger for each and every shot, why, as a matter of safety, should it be that the slightest touch could result in the firing of another, and perhaps inappropriate, bullet?
-
So you are thinking a hand gun with the same size bullets would be less powerful and therefore more likely to use 4 attempts? That sounds like a question for skippy :)
The website I got the photo from said it was .22 rifle. Besides who shoots themselves under the chin with a handgun? You would aim to the side of the head above the ear. I am sure someone in the past has used a handgun to shoot themselves in the neck but it would be a very odd decision to make
-
The website I got the photo from said it was .22 rifle. Besides who shoots themselves under the chin with a handgun? You would aim to the side of the head above the ear. I am sure someone in the past has used a handgun to shoot themselves in the neck but it would be a very odd decision to make
I doubt very much that anything has happened which hasn't previously but such doesn't make it the blue print for future happenings.
-
The website I got the photo from said it was .22 rifle. Besides who shoots themselves under the chin with a handgun? You would aim to the side of the head above the ear. I am sure someone in the past has used a handgun to shoot themselves in the neck but it would be a very odd decision to make
Shooting yourself with a rifle or a hand gun seems like an odd decision to me. :-\
-
Shooting yourself with a rifle or a hand gun seems like an odd decision to me. :-\
Sadly many people do it :(
However if I elaborate what I was trying to get across, If someone had a handgun and was going to shoot themselves. Deciding to shoot under the chin and not to the side of head would be an odd decision.
-
Sadly many people do it :(
However if I elaborate what I was trying to get across, If someone had a handgun and was going to shoot themselves. Deciding to shoot under the chin and not to the side of head would be an odd decision.
I understood your meaning. :)
-
The website I got the photo from said it was .22 rifle. Besides who shoots themselves under the chin with a handgun? You would aim to the side of the head above the ear. I am sure someone in the past has used a handgun to shoot themselves in the neck but it would be a very odd decision to make
Which website? Also, I don't think any one of us can determine where someone would shoot themselves, I think it's very much down to personal preference - so to speak.
-
How did it take 4 shots ?
-
How did it take 4 shots ?
You know I never take anything at face value so I feel certain that there's far more to this story than simply listing it as a statistic implies.
-
You know I never take anything at face value so I feel certain that there's far more to this story than simply listing it as a statistic implies.
When David posts the link, we may find out more.
-
When David posts the link, we may find out more.
You did post the link (documenting reality) I don't recommend people visit it BTW
But the description you posted is from this book
http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-61779-058-4_13 (http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-61779-058-4_13)
-
You did post the link (documenting reality) I don't recommend people visit it BTW
But the description you posted is from this book
http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-61779-058-4_13 (http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-1-61779-058-4_13)
No the description was from the website, it was the description that went with the picture - and it doesn't mention a .22 rifle. You said the following
The website I got the photo from said it was .22 rifle. Besides who shoots themselves under the chin with a handgun? You would aim to the side of the head above the ear. I am sure someone in the past has used a handgun to shoot themselves in the neck but it would be a very odd decision to make
This is a screen shot from the website, no mention of a .22 rifle. ;D
-
No the description was from the website, it was the description that went with the picture - and it doesn't mention a .22 rifle. You said the following
This is a screen shot from the website, no mention of a .22 rifle. ;D
I bet you it was a rifle because if it was a handgun he would aim to the side of the head ;D
Besides rifle or not it proves it can be done 8)
-
I bet you it was a rifle because if it was a handgun he would aim to the side of the head ;D
Besides rifle or not it proves it can be done 8)
Well, we'll never know, all we know is it was a 'low calibre weapon' and I don't think it was denied that it was possible. However, in your example only one shot would have been fatal, both shots would have killed Sheila - the first just wasn't immediately fatal.
-
One of the variables I asked about, Caroline. A small calibre obviously being easier to manipulate than a .22 rifle. Did he have a broken neck? He was clearly adept with a gun because he knew where to hit for greatest effect WITHOUT killing himself, before the final shot.
A .22 rifle is considered small calibre Jane.
-
There are lots of different types of .22 bullets. I don't know, but I'd guess that some vary in effectiveness. :-\
I'd have said (another guess) that a rifle and hand gun would be as powerful as each other, but a rifle is more accurate at distance.
That is a fair summary.
-
If one HAS to pull the trigger for each and every shot, why, as a matter of safety, should it be that the slightest touch could result in the firing of another, and perhaps inappropriate, bullet?
It requires minimal finger pressure on the trigger to fire the weapon. With the safety catch off it is easy to fire by accident.
-
Sadly many people do it :(
However if I elaborate what I was trying to get across, If someone had a handgun and was going to shoot themselves. Deciding to shoot under the chin and not to the side of head would be an odd decision.
With a handgun the more common method is into the mouth, upwards.
-
With a handgun the more common method is into the mouth, upwards.
That might be the case but as the article doesn't mention what the weapon was, I don't think we can assume and as this guy seemed to be in public view a hand gun would seem more likely? However, we just don't know the circumstances.
-
That is why I said I feel he would have hidden the rifle outside the farmhouse and entered with the loaded rifle to hand just in case he was caught out entering through the window. Once having made the decision to carry out the crime he would not have wanted to have to make up some tale about why he was climbing through the window in the middle of the night and jettison the plan, he would have wanted to carry out the crime as quickly as possible, attack being the best form of defence in this situation. 8)
good point maggie i agree how does the coalshed sound he had the key for it that morning.
-
Even handing a key to the police could have sealed his fate and signed his own death warrant so far as EP were concerned because they'd have gone as far as getting his print off it,so it shows how naive JB was. ::) And he was supposed to have murdered the family ? That is a tall story.
-
Even handing a key to the police could have sealed his fate and signed his own death warrant so far as EP were concerned because they'd have gone as far as getting his print off it,so it shows how naive JB was. ::) And he was supposed to have murdered the family ? That is a tall story.
after being told his whole family were dead jb decides to hand over the key to the coalshed.why .it would be the last thing on my mind had it been me.
-
after being told his whole family were dead jb decides to hand over the key to the coalshed.why .it would be the last thing on my mind had it been me.
So what's with the coal shed thing, I don't recall where it is documented?
-
So what's with the coal shed thing, I don't recall where it is documented?
Where was a coal shed?
-
Where was a coal shed?
I think Sami means that there was supposed to be a key in the coal shed, but it was for the old door. Nothing stopping someone switching the keys though.
-
Where was a coal shed?
The attached outbuilding to the left of the rear door that the police broke down (blue door).
A dog was in there I think. :-\
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4062;image)
-
I think Sami means that there was supposed to be a key in the coal shed, but it was for the old door. Nothing stopping someone switching the keys though.
No use having the key if the door is bolted from the inside.
-
No use having the key if the door is bolted from the inside.
As they all seemed to have been.
-
The attached outbuilding to the left of the rear door that the police broke down (blue door).
A dog was in there I think. :-\
(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=887.0;attach=4062;image)
is it documented that the dog was there .crispy was found in the master bedroom and there was a dog in the barn.i doubt any thing with 4 legs was in the coalshed.i will look for the doc about the key unless someone knows where it is and can post it.
-
Jeremy must be very dumb shooting his sister twice in the neck - someone did, then calling the police saying she did it. Plis English people, I do not get it.
-
Jeremy must be very dumb shooting his sister twice in the neck - someone did, then calling the police saying she did it. Plis English people, I do not get it.
Xxx xxx xxxxx xxxxxx?!!!!!!!!!!!! NO, he didn't plan it but stuff happens that we don't plan for and all we can do is go with it. He wouldn't have had time to replan. He'd have been momentarily thrown. How was he going to turn this into a burglary BIG enough for the perp to slaughter an entire family but leave the house with NOTHING? He certainly didn't have the time to sit and smoke a Hamlet cigar and enjoy a snifter whilst he contemplated his next move.
-
Jeremy must be very dumb shooting his sister twice in the neck - someone did, then calling the police saying she did it. Plis English people, I do not get it.
What was he going to do after shooting her once and she didn't die? He couldn't have known that the first shot would have killed her eventually - he couldn't risk her living and being able to tell who shot everyone. So after shooting her once - what else could he have done? I'm not sure what it is you don't get? He couldn't turn back time and undo what he had started!
-
Jeremy would have been intelligent enough to realise that one shot to the neck would eventually prove to be fatal. He wouldn't have hung around,nor would he have fired another shot when he'd allegedly planned a suicide. Even he would have known that two shots would have been questionable.
-
Jeremy would have been intelligent enough to realise that one shot to the neck would eventually prove to be fatal. He wouldn't have hung around,nor would he have fired another shot when he'd allegedly planned a suicide. Even he would have known that two shots would have been questionable.
And yet you asking people to believe Sheila shot herself twice? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
And yet you asking people to believe Sheila shot herself twice? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Yes,Sheila would----------that's the whole point !! ::)
-
Jeremy would have been intelligent enough to realise that one shot to the neck would eventually prove to be fatal. He wouldn't have hung around,nor would he have fired another shot when he'd allegedly planned a suicide. Even he would have known that two shots would have been questionable.
Are you suggesting that he'd have been callous enough to leave her to slowly, either bleed to death or choke on her own blood? Yes, a second shot was always going to be questionable -hence it was eventually decided that Sheila couldn't have done it herself- but it was the lesser of two evils.
-
Are you suggesting that he'd have been callous enough to leave her to slowly, either bleed to death or choke on her own blood? Yes, a second shot was always going to be questionable -hence it was eventually decided that Sheila couldn't have done it herself- but it was the lesser of two evils.
Why couldn't Sheila have fired that second shot ? Why would it have been impossible for one shot to have been followed by a second ?
If Jeremy had been " callous " enough to have left his sister dying,why would it have bothered him any more killing two little boys ? Because you say he's guilty,what you've said doesn't make sense.
-
Why couldn't Sheila have fired that second shot ? Why would it have been impossible for one shot to have been followed by a second ?
If Jeremy had been " callous " enough to have left his sister dying,why would it have bothered him any more killing two little boys ? Because you say he's guilty,what you've said doesn't make sense.
How might it have been possible for Sheila, having suffered a shattered spine, have managed to re-position the gun in order to make certain of getting it right second time round? It's perfectly possible that after the first shot the gun would have moved. It's also possible, that after the first injury, she'd have had problems lifting her arms.
He shot the boys DEAD. He didn't leave them to bleed to death.
-
Why couldn't Sheila have fired that second shot ? Why would it have been impossible for one shot to have been followed by a second ?
If Jeremy had been " callous " enough to have left his sister dying,why would it have bothered him any more killing two little boys ? Because you say he's guilty,what you've said doesn't make sense.
There has already been closure on this. My poll saw everyone agreeing Bamber had no option but to shoot Sheila a second time.
So whether Sheila could have physically fired a second shot into herself is neither here or there. One thing is for sure, Bamber was physically capable of firing a second shot.
-
There has already been closure on this. My poll saw everyone agreeing Bamber had no option but to shoot Sheila a second time.
So whether Sheila could have physically fired a second shot into herself is neither here or there. One thing is for sure, Bamber was physically capable of firing a second shot.
He may well have been capable,as would anyone else have been including Sheila,but he didn't !
-
Yes,Sheila would----------that's the whole point !! ::)
So according to you and Alias, a two shot suicide would be unbelievable but you believe it? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
There has already been closure on this. My poll saw everyone agreeing Bamber had no option but to shoot Sheila a second time.
So whether Sheila could have physically fired a second shot into herself is neither here or there. One thing is for sure, Bamber was physically capable of firing a second shot.
If you believe you've closed anything, why are you participating in things which are of no concern to you? Leave the discussion to those who don't believe you achieved that which you lay claim to.
-
Why couldn't Sheila have fired that second shot ? Why would it have been impossible for one shot to have been followed by a second ?
If Jeremy had been " callous " enough to have left his sister dying,why would it have bothered him any more killing two little boys ? Because you say he's guilty,what you've said doesn't make sense.
It's not only impossible for her to have fired the second shot, it's impossible for her to have fired the FIRST - it was delivered at a 45 degree angle! She was seriously injured after the first shot so she was in no shape to reposition the gun and fire again.
It would have bothered him because he's have been worried that she may have survived long enough to tell police who killed everyone!
-
It's not only impossible for her to have fired the second shot, it's impossible for her to have fired the FIRST - it was delivered at a 45 degree angle! She was seriously injured after the first shot so she was in no shape to reposition the gun and fire again.
It would have bothered him because he's have been worried that she may have survived long enough to tell police who killed everyone!
How do you imagine that Jeremy would have shot Sheila ? By standing on his head to get the right angle ?
Sheila could only have done it in a lying down position, with the second shot head leant against the bedside table for the bullet to have gone upwards.
She wouldn't have repositioned that much before the second shot as it was swiftly after the first. Shuffled with the impact of the first shot I'd have said as opposed to repositioning.
-
How do you imagine that Jeremy would have shot Sheila ? By standing on his head to get the right angle ?
Sheila could only have done it in a lying down position, with the second shot head leant against the bedside table for the bullet to have gone upwards.
She wouldn't have repositioned that much before the second shot as it was swiftly after the first. Shuffled with the impact of the first shot I'd have said as opposed to repositioning.
He'd have managed it with much more ease than she'd have managed it herself using a weapon of inappropriate length.
-
He'd have managed it with much more ease than she'd have managed it herself using a weapon of inappropriate length.
That " inappropriate length " was the length of her body in a supine position.
-
That " inappropriate length " was the length of her body in a supine position.
It would have been quite impossible for her to have shot herself at a 45 degree angle with that weapon.
-
It would have been quite impossible for her to have shot herself at a 45 degree angle with that weapon.
Lying down ? Course it wouldn't !
-
Lying down ? Course it wouldn't !
Sheila was 5' 8" ? Pretty long when lying down. This was why she appeared " awkward " in the pics.
-
Lying down ? Course it wouldn't !
I wasn't aware that serious consideration had been given to her standing up when the first shot was fired.
-
I wasn't aware that serious consideration had been given to her standing up when the first shot was fired.
The second shot would have been more akin to her having been in a standing position given the way of the bullet.
-
The second shot would have been more akin to her having been in a standing position given the way of the bullet.
Standing as in on her feet?
-
Standing as in on her feet?
How does one usually stand ?
-
How does one usually stand ?
With difficulty -and probably needing to hold onto something - IF such was possible with a shattered spine.
-
How does one usually stand ?
Well I just wanted you on record as saying you meant on her feet, because when someone challeneged you on how impossible that was you would say you meant "Kneeling!".
No way was Sheila standing upright for the second shot. Where is the blood from the first one? Wasn't she bleeding?
How did she managed to stand up after that first shot?!
With difficulty -and probably needing to hold onto something - IF such was possible with a shattered spine.
Would be a miracle.
-
The second shot would have been more akin to her having been in a standing position given the way of the bullet.
Sorry Lookout, I thought you were a nurse not a ballistics expert and NONE of them support your (yet another) 'dragged out of thin air' claim.
-
Well I just wanted you on record as saying you meant on her feet, because when someone challeneged you on how impossible that was you would say you meant "Kneeling!".
No way was Sheila standing upright for the second shot. Where is the blood from the first one? Wasn't she bleeding?
How did she managed to stand up after that first shot?!
Would be a miracle.
If she were standing, how did she manage to fall to the floor, flat on her back (without banging her head) and land with the gun straight across her body? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
If she were standing, how did she manage to fall to the floor, flat on her back (without banging her head) and land with the gun straight across her body? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
You beat me to it, Caroline. I was just about to ask the exact same question but I'd wasted time by practising with a fish slice held in both hands :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
-
If she were standing, how did she manage to fall to the floor, flat on her back (without banging her head) and land with the gun straight across her body? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Do we know whether she had a bang to her head or not ? No. If nothing was reported about a covered wound,then I wouldn't expect anything to have been said about a bruised skull.
-
Do we know whether she had a bang to her head or not ? No. If nothing was reported about a covered wound,then I wouldn't expect anything to have been said about a bruised skull.
yes we do know and no she didn't. But you can pretend she did if you like and the covered wound was reported, it was an old one. No one puts a plater on a dead woman's injury!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
She wasn't standing Lookout - THAT is for SURE!!
-
Do we know whether she had a bang to her head or not ? No. If nothing was reported about a covered wound,then I wouldn't expect anything to have been said about a bruised skull.
The pathologist seemed not to think the wound was either big/serious enough to be worthy of more than passing comment. What are you trying to suggest it was.
-
yes we do know and no she didn't. But you can pretend she did if you like and the covered wound was reported, it was an old one. No one puts a plater on a dead woman's injury!! ;D ;D ;D ;D
She wasn't standing Lookout - THAT is for SURE!!
Well doesn't that make life easier if she was standing ? ::)
-
The pathologist seemed not to think the wound was either big/serious enough to be worthy of more than passing comment. What are you trying to suggest it was.
Why not, it all adds to the drama ::) ::)
-
Well doesn't that make life easier if she was standing ? ::)
She wasn't standing whether she shot herself or Bamber shot her.
-
She wasn't standing whether she shot herself or Bamber shot her.
I didn't intimate that she was standing,or hadn't you noticed ?
-
The second shot would have been more akin to her having been in a standing position given the way of the bullet.
This came as near as dammit to saying she was standing.
-
This came as near as dammit to saying she was standing.
No ! I said " would " and I was being facetious. ::) WAS as a replacement to " would " is definite.
-
No ! I said " would " and I was being facetious. ::) WAS as a replacement to " would " is definite.
The use of "would" WOULD have been correct had the second shot not occurred.
-
So according to you and Alias, a two shot suicide would be unbelievable but you believe it? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
I have a problem with Sheila's abilities after the first shot.
The fact is we don't know enough about the actual injuries to Sheila's vertebrae and whether she may have been able to function to some level or not at all, depending on the severity of the fractures to her upper spine.
I would guess whatever the spinal damage she would be confused and disoriented from the trauma to her body which would make it impossible to function outside of that confusion. It's hard to know if the rifle was within her reach whether she would have another go at killing herself, a suicide who means it would strain every sinew to achieve their own death but I don't believe she would have been able to reason how to achieve the angle and position of the second shot. She would have struggled even with all her senses in tact and it is not likely that was the case. This is one of the reasons which make me believe she didn't shoot herself.
-
I have a problem with Sheila's abilities after the first shot.
The fact is we don't know enough about the actual injuries to Sheila's vertebrae and whether she may have been able to function to some level or not at all, depending on the severity of the fractures to her upper spine.
I would guess whatever the spinal damage she would be confused and disoriented from the trauma to her body which would make it impossible to function outside of that confusion. It's hard to know if the rifle was within her reach whether she would have another go at killing herself, a suicide who means it would strain every sinew to achieve their own death but I don't believe she would have been able to reason how to achieve the angle and position of the second shot. She would have struggled even with all her senses in tact and it is not likely that was the case. This is one of the reasons which make me believe she didn't shoot herself.
I couldn't agree more, Maggie. None of Jeremy's supporters can come up with a reasoned explanation for how Sheila would have managed to shoot herself twice. Rather they're so insistent that she, not Jeremy, is responsible for the massacre, they're all but putting the gun in her hand, her finger on the trigger and forcing her to fire it. I think it's for this reason that they haven't stopped to wonder what, if any, movement was possible after the first shot, and what degree of lucidity she'd have had to manipulate the weapon a second time.
-
Except that Vanesiz had said that Sheila may have even walked around after the first shot ??
-
Except that Vanesiz had said that Sheila may have even walked around after the first shot ??
He admitted to CAL that he'd previously said that but he said he now believes she never moved after the first shot.
-
He admitted to CAL that he'd previously said that but he said he now believes she never moved after the first shot.
A convenient afterthought. However,it would tie-in with what I'd said about one shot swiftly followed by a second--------by her own hand.
I had doubted him from the beginning anyway.
-
A convenient afterthought. However,it would tie-in with what I'd said about one shot swiftly followed by a second--------by her own hand.
I had doubted him from the beginning anyway.
I don't doubt it, Lookout. You've managed to fit it conveniently into your belief that Jeremy's the only one who isn't lying.
-
I have to say I read it the same as you, even after I'd read it a second time.
And then we all debated it.
Spoke about why the theory wasn't possible. E.G
The actively bleeding wound. ( I said this )
The damage to the spinal cord. ( You said this )
The pain and confusion after the first shot. (Maggie said this)
That Sheila would have had to fall backwards, didn't have damage to the back of her head. (Caroline)
And then - the theory was never meant that way. :o
Or am I just dreaming all that conversation?
-
And then we all debated it.
Spoke about why the theory wasn't possible. E.G
The actively bleeding wound. ( I said this )
The damage to the spinal cord. ( You said this )
The pain and confusion after the first shot. (Maggie said this)
That Sheila would have had to fall backwards, didn't have damage to the back of her head. (Caroline)
And then - the theory was never meant that way. :o
Or am I just dreaming all that conversation?
No. I think that sums it up well, Mat.
-
The second shot would have been more akin to her having been in a standing position given the way of the bullet.
.
-
Except that Vanesiz had said that Sheila may have even walked around after the first shot ??
True enough lookout and it does depend on the degree of her injury. Imo, I don't believe she would have been able to do more than stagger, surely she would have been in a state of extreme shock? While she wouldn't have felt any pain I would guess her body would have reacted by shutting down all but vital organs and directing blood flow to the Heart, liver, kidneys etc.. Her blood pressure must have plummeted which means trying to stand up and walk would have caused her to lose consciousness.
:-\ Also the blood flow doesn't indicate she was ever standing after she was wounded.
-
True enough lookout and it does depend on the degree of her injury. Imo, I don't believe she would have been able to do more than stagger, surely she would have been in a state of extreme shock? While she wouldn't have felt any pain I would guess her body would have reacted by shutting down all but vital organs and directing blood flow to the Heart, liver, kidneys etc.. Her blood pressure must have plummeted which means trying to stand up and walk would have caused her to lose consciousness.
:-\ Also the blood flow doesn't indicate she was ever standing after she was wounded.
Maggie, he said that because he was told that she had committed suicide. He didn't get to look at the scene and had to go on what he was told and make sense of what he was left with.
-
Maggie, he said that because he was told that she had committed suicide. He didn't get to look at the scene and had to go on what he was told and make sense of what he was left with.
Yes, I am just thinking through how it possibly was for Sheila.
It's only my opinion based on the way I would expect the body to react in such circumstances but Vanezis would have had the information on the severity of the first shot, how badly her vertebrae were damaged for example.
I had a friend who walked around for a few days with 3 broken vertebrae in her lumbar region. In the end her leg turned navy blue and the doctors finally listened to her.
She was a student nurse, back then if you were breathing and could stand up you were fit for work.
She was in great pain but was functioning, however she hadn't been shot in the throat so her body was far less traumatised, her condition wasn't at that time life threatening as Sheila's obviously was.
All I'm trying to say is that depending on the severity of her spinal injury Sheila may have been able to stand up and stagger but the trauma to her body by being shot would probably have caused her to lose consciousness again quite quickly in any case.
Just my thoughts on this. :-\
-
Yes, I am just thinking through how it possibly was for Sheila.
It's only my opinion based on the way I would expect the body to react in such circumstances but Vanezis would have had the information on the severity of the first shot, how badly her vertebrae were damaged for example.
I had a friend who walked around for a few days with 3 broken vertebrae in her lumbar region. In the end her leg turned navy blue and the doctors finally listened to her.
She was a student nurse, back then if you were breathing and could stand up you were fit for work.
She was in great pain but was functioning, however she hadn't been shot in the throat so her body was far less traumatised, her condition wasn't at that time life threatening as Sheila's obviously was.
All I'm trying to say is that depending on the severity of her spinal injury Sheila may have been able to stand up and stagger but the trauma to her body by being shot would probably have caused her to lose consciousness again quite quickly in any case.
Just my thoughts on this. :-\
Vanezis sounded very emphatic when he told CAL that his revised opinion was that after the first shot "she never moved."
-
Vanezis sounded very emphatic when he told CAL that his revised opinion was that after the first shot "she never moved."
I know that is what he said Jane and I am not disputing that, however I was pointing out there are degrees of injury and how the body reacts, I find it interesting but I accept others may not.
-
I know that is what he said Jane and I am not disputing that, however I was pointing out there are degrees of injury and how the body reacts, I find it interesting but I accept others may not.
You right about degrees of...............Maggie. It's all about a scale of 1- 10 but one person's interpretation of where it falls on that scale, isn't guaranteed to be the same as another's.
-
Well Vanezis or whatever his name is ought to make his bloomin mind up as far as i am concerned. It annoys the hell out of me how many people change there stories in this case.
-
You right about degrees of...............Maggie. It's all about a scale of 1- 10 but one person's interpretation of where it falls on that scale, isn't guaranteed to be the same as another's.
I would think we need to take Vanezis word for it as he is the one who knew the effects of both gunshot wounds.
-
Well Vanezis or whatever his name is ought to make his bloomin mind up as far as i am concerned. It annoys the hell out of me how many people change there stories in this case.
So I guess you'd hate it if:-
A) The police et al admitted they'd screwed Jeremy over
B) Jeremy confessed to having done it.
-
Well Vanezis or whatever his name is ought to make his bloomin mind up as far as i am concerned. It annoys the hell out of me how many people change there stories in this case.
Professionals too !!
-
Professionals too !!
Human as opposed to robots.
-
Human as opposed to robots.
This was rather a LARGE change of mind for someone who was used to dealing with such crimes don't you think ?
-
This was rather a LARGE change of mind for someone who was used to dealing with such crimes don't you think ?
Superficially, it may seem so, but as we have no idea what he was privy to at the time, NOR what he's learned since through other cases we're not really in a position to judge. However, it occurs to me that you mightn't be as quick to judge him had what he said to CAL provided conclusive proof that Sheila was the culprit. I suspect that under THOSE conditions his "rather a LARGE change of mind" probably would have been overlooked to the point of not even being mentioned.
-
Superficially, it may seem so, but as we have no idea what he was privy to at the time, NOR what he's learned since through other cases we're not really in a position to judge. However, it occurs to me that you mightn't be as quick to judge him had what he said to CAL provided conclusive proof that Sheila was the culprit. I suspect that under THOSE conditions his "rather a LARGE change of mind" probably would have been overlooked to the point of not even being mentioned.
This was a massive murder case where there was no room for errors,no matter what as a man's life was in the balance. There was a twelve month " gap " in order to get things right,but because we're here discussing the case,it would have seemed that there were quite a few errors,even after a lengthy gap. It was never a fair trial in any sense of the word.
-
Superficially, it may seem so, but as we have no idea what he was privy to at the time, NOR what he's learned since through other cases we're not really in a position to judge. However, it occurs to me that you mightn't be as quick to judge him had what he said to CAL provided conclusive proof that Sheila was the culprit. I suspect that under THOSE conditions his "rather a LARGE change of mind" probably would have been overlooked to the point of not even being mentioned.
I haven't read CALS book, but I do not understand why he decided to change what he originally thought. First we have to accept his findings then we dont, then we do again. its all very iffy.
-
I haven't read CALS book, but I do not understand why he decided to change what he originally thought. First we have to accept his findings then we dont, then we do again. its all very iffy.
WHY? Is it "iffy" when you change YOUR mind? You may have had a long held belief, then something occurs to make you see the whole thing in a different light. There's no law that says one isn't allowed to do this. Doing so doesn't make one's reasons questionable.
-
I haven't read CALS book, but I do not understand why he decided to change what he originally thought. First we have to accept his findings then we dont, then we do again. its all very iffy.
Can you make an informed decision when you don't have all of the facts?
-
Can you make an informed decision when you don't have all of the facts?
I would love there to be some conclusive evidence in this case but there isn't.
None of us have all of the facts, we can only make informed guesses.
-
There is a mountain of undisputed facts and evidence on the case. Online, in Youtube and in books. I mean the whole 2002 appeal is online.
-
That " mountain " was built from a molehill !!
-
That " mountain " was built from a molehill !!
Where is the FORENSIC evidence against Sheila?
-
Where is the FORENSIC evidence against Sheila?
For starters,the blood on the Bible ( prints )
-
For starters,the blood on the Bible ( prints )
Even if we KNEW it was her blood, how does that prove she killed anyone?
-
Even if we KNEW it was her blood, how does that prove she killed anyone?
It would if that blood had been tested,as if not her blood,it would have been someone else's on her hand/s. So why wasn't it tested and investigated ? It was all part of the scene at the time ?
-
It would if that blood had been tested,as if not her blood,it would have been someone else's on her hand/s. So why wasn't it tested and investigated ? It was all part of the scene at the time ?
So there STILL isn't ANY forensic evidence to link Sheila to the murders, just another 'if' and a 'but'!
-
So there STILL isn't ANY forensic evidence to link Sheila to the murders, just another 'if' and a 'but'!
About as much as there was from Jeremy,then ?
-
About as much as there was from Jeremy,then ?
But you're willing to argue the case for Sheila's guilt WITHOUT ANY forensic evidence yet bleat on about how there is no forensic evidence to connect Jeremy? ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
But you're willing to argue the case for Sheila's guilt WITHOUT ANY forensic evidence yet bleat on about how there is no forensic evidence to connect Jeremy? ;D ;D ;D ;D
Where is the forensic evidence connecting Jeremy anyway ?
-
Where is the forensic evidence connecting Jeremy anyway ?
You've been told that a thousand times! Time for you to make the case for Sheila - forensic evidence that links Sheila?
-
You've been told that a thousand times! Time for you to make the case for Sheila - forensic evidence that links Sheila?
But I've NEVER seen or been convinced about this forensic evidence against Jeremy,so I can only gather that you're just playing for time when you state that there is----------hoping that the question will go away.
-
But I've NEVER seen or been convinced about this forensic evidence against Jeremy,so I can only gather that you're just playing for time when you state that there is----------hoping that the question will go away.
But you'll undoubtedly be jumping for joy IF Jeremy's conviction was overturned and the circumstantial evidence -which will quite suddenly become acceptable- convicted Sheila.
-
But you'll undoubtedly be jumping for joy IF Jeremy's conviction was overturned and the circumstantial evidence -which will quite suddenly become acceptable- convicted Sheila.
" Jumping for joy "? I'm not neurotic either and just take things in my stride.
-
" Jumping for joy "? I'm not neurotic either and just take things in my stride.
Which side stepped what I said. If Jeremy's conviction -based on circumstantial evidence which you claim to abhor because it isn't forensic- was overturned and Sheila was then convicted on circumstantial evidence, I doubt you'd be shouting as loudly on her behalf.
-
But I've NEVER seen or been convinced about this forensic evidence against Jeremy,so I can only gather that you're just playing for time when you state that there is----------hoping that the question will go away.
Because you don't understand the difference between forensic and circumstantial - you proved that this morning when I asked you what forensic evidence shows Sheila was guilty and you answered with a list of circumstantial reasons.
-
Because you don't understand the difference between forensic and circumstantial - you proved that this morning when I asked you what forensic evidence shows Sheila was guilty and you answered with a list of circumstantial reasons.
I gave you forensic--------the Bible the blue socks too,which nobody bothered to investigate. I DO know the difference between forensic and circumstantial !!
Stop exaggerating with your " list of circumstantial reasons ".Where ?
-
I gave you forensic--------the Bible the blue socks too,which nobody bothered to investigate. I DO know the difference between forensic and circumstantial !!
Stop exaggerating with your " list of circumstantial reasons ".Where ?
If they weren't investiagated, that means we don't know who's blood was on them. If we do not know who's blood is on those items then how can you say they are pieces of forensic evidence to prove Sheila's guilt.
Not taking a leap of faith and filling in the blanks with your own thoughts again are you?
-
If they weren't investiagated, that means we don't know who's blood was on them. If we do not know who's blood is on those items then how can you say they are pieces of forensic evidence to prove Sheila's guilt.
Not taking a leap of faith and filling in the blanks with your own thoughts again are you?
Well it couldn't have been Jeremy's blood or we'd have known about it !!
-
Well it couldn't have been Jeremy's blood or we'd have known about it !!
If they weren't investigated it hardly matters WHOSE blood it was, however, not for the life of me can I think why there'd be any cause to think it was Jeremy's.
-
If they weren't investigated it hardly matters WHOSE blood it was, however, not for the life of me can I think why there'd be any cause to think it was Jeremy's.
It mattered a lot who the blood belonged to and as for me mentioning Jeremy,on most threads he's had the blame for everything else.
-
It mattered a lot who the blood belonged to and as for me mentioning Jeremy,on most threads he's had the blame for everything else.
But if it wasn't investigated, it was NOBODIES blood!!!! I really don't believe the case would unravel because of blood on a sock. Your view of Jeremy is somewhat emotional. It isn't unlikely that he'll be blamed on most threads which mention him. he was, after all, convicted of the crime, and most here believe the conviction to be sound.
-
But if it wasn't investigated, it was NOBODIES blood!!!! I really don't believe the case would unravel because of blood on a sock. Your view of Jeremy is somewhat emotional. It isn't unlikely that he'll be blamed on most threads which mention him. he was, after all, convicted of the crime, and most here believe the conviction to be sound.
All I can say is that you're in for a rude awakening.
-
All I can say is that you're in for a rude awakening.
Rubbish! ;D ;D ;D
-
Rubbish! ;D ;D ;D
Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?
-
Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?
You can say it with confidence but confidence doesn't go hand in hand with being right. I was once confidently assert that the earth was flat. Thank God some had the humility and sense to change their minds.
-
Ohhhh,you can say what you like. The difference is,I can say things with confidence,can you ?
You can say and pretend what you like. I am 100% confident that Jeremy Bamber will never get out because he murdered 5 members of his family out of complete and utter greed!
-
You can say it with confidence but confidence doesn't go hand in hand with being right. I was once confidently assert that the earth was flat. Thank God some had the humility and sense to change their minds.
The very mention of earth being a planet tells us that it isn't flat ? Something we all know from childhood ? That's an easy one.
-
The very mention of earth being a planet tells us that it isn't flat ? Something we all know from childhood ? That's an easy one.
And for once you believe the right thing but I'm surprised with you 'intuition' that you don't actually believe it's flat! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Well it couldn't have been Jeremy's blood or we'd have known about it !!
You've just been complaining it wasn't tested. So how do YOU know is wasn;t Jeremy's blood. If it wasn't tested as you claim, then you do not know that. Stop posting erroneous things.
-
You've just been complaining it wasn't tested. So how do YOU know is wasn;t Jeremy's blood. If it wasn't tested as you claim, then you do not know that. Stop posting erroneous things.
Like I said,we'd have known about it,especially for the benefit of those who can't wait to say " I told you so ".
-
Like I said,we'd have known about it,especially for the benefit of those who can't wait to say " I told you so ".
So they were tested, but have been suppressed?
-
So they were tested, but have been suppressed?
It was June's blood on the socks.
-
It was June's blood on the socks.
We've already discussed June being shot first whilst laid down in bed and then stumbling out of bed and around that side.
-
We've already discussed June being shot first whilst laid down in bed and then stumbling out of bed and around that side.
::) I know that.I was talking about the blood and who it'd belonged to.
-
::) I know that.I was talking about the blood and who it'd belonged to.
So now can you explain how this blood, belonging to June on the socks. Is forensic evidence that SHEILA is guilty. Because on the previous page you told Caroline, the socks and the bible were forensic evidence to prove that Sheila is guilty.
I gave you forensic--------the Bible the blue socks too,which nobody bothered to investigate. I DO know the difference between forensic and circumstantial !!
Stop exaggerating with your " list of circumstantial reasons ".Where ?
-
It was June's blood on the socks.
Possibly probably but as they weren't tested -or perhaps you think the results are being withheld?- if the blood was June's, who was wounded and, therefore, bled. we won't know one way or t'other.
-
So now can you explain how this blood, belonging to June on the socks. Is forensic evidence that SHEILA is guilty. Because on the previous page you told Caroline, the socks and the bible were forensic evidence to prove that Sheila is guilty.
I'm still waiting foe some forensic proof that Sheila is responsible?
-
I'm still waiting foe some forensic proof that Sheila is responsible?
The same as I'm still waiting for proof of forensic evidence that says JB is guilty--------beyond reasonable doubt ?? ???
Sheila's " pedigree " wasn't exactly encouraging to start with.
-
I'm still waiting foe some forensic proof that Sheila is responsible?
So far you've been given socks that had Junes blood on them and a bible that wasn't tested as forensic evidence proving Sheila's guilt.
You buying?
-
So far you've been given socks that had Junes blood on them and a bible that wasn't tested as forensic evidence proving Sheila's guilt.
You buying?
I'm laughing! ;D ;D ;D ;D