Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: John on February 08, 2016, 03:55:PM
-
No new arguments, just the same old excuses so has the Jeremy Bamber case come to the end of the road?
-
No new arguments, just the same old excuses so has the Jeremy Bamber case come to the end of the road?
It's certainly becoming very tired. Whatever doesn't move forward, eventually dies.
-
Not really John as there's nothing " fresh/new " to debate. Because certain documents aren't yet coming forthwith we've just about saturated what we" know" of,individually, as in personal views.
-
It's certainly becoming very tired. Whatever doesn't move forward, eventually dies.
There was a time when new information was available but more recently it appears to have dried up. The gibberish coming from the Campaign Team since its incorporation leads me to the conclusion the end cannot be far away. All the claims and boasts have turned to dust but then this was always going to happen in a case where no evidence of his innocence exists.
-
Not really John as there's nothing " fresh/new " to debate. Because certain documents aren't yet coming forthwith we've just about saturated what we" know" of,individually, as in personal views.
Jeremy has been provided with numerous documents recently but as predicted, none of it can prove anything.
-
I think this is about funds,or lack of them to pay who has to be paid before any tests,etc commence as charges are pretty high for what is needed in order to continue. There's only so much which can be done for free.
-
There was a time when new information was available but more recently it appears to have dried up. The gibberish coming from the Campaign Team since its incorporation leads me to the conclusion the end cannot be far away. All the claims and boasts have turned to dust but then this was always going to happen in a case where no evidence of his innocence exists.
Exactly WHAT as those embarrassingly AWFUL vlogs trying to achieve other than a xxx xxx xxxxxx saying that Jeremy is innocent and with enough money it can be proved. Still, I suppose it's feeding jeremy the oxygen he needs to keep his name in the media.
-
if its all so tired what are you still doing here.
-
if its all so tired what are you still doing here.
There are certainly times when I wonder, Nugs. However, the choice of whether I stay or not, is mine.
-
Exactly WHAT as those embarrassingly AWFUL vlogs trying to achieve other than a bottle blonde saying that Jeremy is innocent and with enough money it can be proved. Still, I suppose it's feeding jeremy the oxygen he needs to keep his name in the media.
" xxxxxx xxxxx " or not she's obviously thought long and hard about the case to know what she's set out to do,otherwise you wouldn't give it airing time. She appears honest enough and at least doesn't come over as being hard-faced in any way,even though not as forceful as I'd like, although perhaps forceful isn't the right description.Assertive would be the word I'm looking for.
Nobody goes into anything like this blindfold and there are possibly things which she knows about that we don't for the time being and would have prompted her to form the company that she and her husband have formed.
-
" xxx xxx xxxxx" or not she's obviously thought long and hard about the case to know what she's set out to do,otherwise you wouldn't give it airing time. She appears honest enough and at least doesn't come over as being hard-faced in any way,even though not as forceful as I'd like, although perhaps forceful isn't the right description.Assertive would be the word I'm looking for.
Nobody goes into anything like this blindfold and there are possibly things which she knows about that we don't for the time being and would have prompted her to form the company that she and her husband have formed.
I'll agree that she comes over as honest, but she doesn't come over as confident and lacks assertiveness and charisma. I find it difficult to take her seriously.
-
I'll agree that she comes over as honest, but she doesn't come over as confident and lacks assertiveness and charisma. I find it difficult to take her seriously.
Whether you take her seriously or not, she's to be believed and that's the main thing.
-
Whether you take her seriously or not, she's to be believed and that's the main thing.
She isn't believable, that's the point. She doesn't sound sure enough of herself to be believable. I think only those who already believe Jeremy to be innocent will find her so, which is preaching to the converted.
-
She isn't believable, that's the point. She doesn't sound sure enough of herself to be believable. I think only those who already believe Jeremy to be innocent will find her so, which is preaching to the converted.
She's sure enough of herself and what she has to say,just not confident with being " on show ".
-
Public speaking doesn't come easy at the best of times and far less so with something such as this,trying to convert.
-
Public speaking doesn't come easy at the best of times and far less so with something such as this,trying to convert.
Then it maybe better if, instead of putting herself forward as a professional presenter, she gave the job to a supporter who is well versed in public speaking.
-
Then it maybe better if, instead of putting herself forward as a professional presenter, she gave the job to a supporter who is well versed in public speaking.
She comes across as someone who doesn't know too much about the case. She knows enough to get up there and spout a few things but has to keep it within the area that she has read/rehearsed because if she was to get too far from that I think she'd drown.
As for your question John. I think that it has been the end of the road for a while, but there will always be a couple of people repeating the same arguements usually along the lines of.
1. Why won't the police release this or that.
2. Alot is happening behind the scenes but it isn't being released
3. Jeremy will be out by Christmas.
-
Jeremy has been provided with numerous documents recently but as predicted, none of it can prove anything.
In 1996 physical evidence concerning the Bamber case was destroyed by Essex Police without reason and even illegally, now why would that happen?
That keeps me from sleeping at night and makes me never forget this case.
-
Probably the most disgusting part of the case,Alias,and destroyed,missing or withheld evidence is STILL going on.
-
Probably the most disgusting part of the case,Alias,and destroyed,missing or withheld evidence is STILL going on.
And if you believe that ....... ;D ;D ;D
-
In 1996 physical evidence concerning the Bamber case was destroyed by Essex Police without reason and even illegally, now why would that happen?
That keeps me from sleeping at night and makes me never forget this case.
Me to Alias me to x
-
Probably the most disgusting part of the case,Alias,and destroyed,missing or withheld evidence is STILL going on.
I agree Lookout and that's why people should never give up fighting for the truth
-
In 1996 physical evidence concerning the Bamber case was destroyed by Essex Police without reason and even illegally, now why would that happen?
That keeps me from sleeping at night and makes me never forget this case.
A bit like the blood soaked carpets then which Jeremy insisted be burned?
-
I was just thinking the same Mat. If there was any evidence that Jeremy was innocent they might just have a point but he was a criminal long before he killed his family. Growing and dealing in cannabis, burglary and robbery leaves little doubt that Jeremy Bamber was set upon a path of self destruction.
No one has ever discussed how this MUST have impacted on how Nevill felt about his position as a magistrate.
-
A bit like the blood soaked carpets then which Jeremy insisted be burned?
I believe it was the police who'd suggested burning the carpets,etc so as not to upset those on entering the farmhouse,but carry on believing that Jeremy was " telling police what to do "---------just as if !
-
I was just thinking the same Mat. If there was any evidence that Jeremy was innocent they might just have a point but he was a criminal long before he killed his family. Growing and dealing in cannabis, burglary and robbery leaves little doubt that Jeremy Bamber was set upon a path of self destruction.
So just because he grew a bit of a plant ( not a farm of the stuff ) sold cannabis ( no stash found £££'s ) and robbed £1,000 doesn't make him a big time criminal nor a murderer.
-
I believe it was the police who'd suggested burning the carpets,etc so as not to upset those on entering the farmhouse,but carry on believing that Jeremy was " telling police what to do "---------just as if !
Hi lookout I seem to think it was the police who asked Jeremy's permission to burn the carpets but not too sure thought I read it in Colin's book will go and look.
-
Hi lookout I seem to think it was the police who asked Jeremy's permission to burn the carpets but not too sure thought I read it in Colin's book will go and look.
Hi Susan, I rather think that's what happened too.
-
Hi Susan, I rather think that's what happened too.
Whoops lookout think we may have got that wrong just reading Colin's book and Jeremy said he wanted the beautiful carpet burnt much to AE's horror and the police guy said yes when we have done all our tests think they cut out pieces to test the blood stains. Hang our heads in shame :'( :'( :'(
-
Whoops lookout think we may have got that wrong just reading Colin's book and Jeremy said he wanted the beautiful carpet burnt much to AE's horror and the police guy said yes when we have done all our tests think they cut out pieces to test the blood stains. Hang our heads in shame :'( :'( :'(
Even so,Susan,the police were in agreeance or they'd have said no. The way John put it was as though Jeremy had " ordered " the police to burn it.
-
Even so,Susan,the police were in agreeance or they'd have said no. The way John put it was as though Jeremy had " ordered " the police to burn it.
They agreed TO JEREMY'S REQUEST once they'd done their tests....................but it was still THEIR fault, according to you.
-
They agreed TO JEREMY'S REQUEST once they'd done their tests....................but it was still THEIR fault, according to you.
Did I say it was THEIR fault ? NO,you did.
-
Even so,Susan,the police were in agreeance or they'd have said no. The way John put it was as though Jeremy had " ordered " the police to burn it.
"Even so, Susan, the police were in agreement or they'd have said no"??? It seems that even when it was pointed out that it was at Jeremy's instigation, you couldn't have made it clearer that you believe the responsibility for final decision for the disposal lay with the police.
-
same thing really susan. It wasnt his idea it was the police.
Actually, Notsure, it seems it was Jeremy who "told the police he wanted the beautiful carpet burned" which they agreed to once they finished testing it.
-
"Even so, Susan, the police were in agreement or they'd have said no"??? It seems that even when it was pointed out that it was at Jeremy's instigation, you couldn't have made it clearer that you believe the responsibility for final decision for the disposal lay with the police.
do we seriously believe that jeremy would have had the forsight to say he wanted the carpets burned. Was colin there when this alleged conversation took place.
Sometimes we dont seem to be able to give an inch and get so there is no considering anyone elses point of view.
-
Actually, Notsure, it seems it was Jeremy who "told the police he wanted the beautiful carpet burned" which they agreed to once they finished testing it.
Blood saturated,beautiful ??
-
Hi Susan, I rather think that's what happened too.
I would have had everything dumped or burned that was left in that house
Absolutely everything
Unlike Anne Eaton hanging on to the bloody lampshade
Uck
-
I would have had everything dumped or burned that was left in that house
Absolutely everything
Unlike Anne Eaton hanging on to the bloody lampshade
Uck
And Jeremy, hanging on the the more valuable items - not for sentimental value, but to SELL. His mother and fathers clothes were ceremoniously chucked in a trailer in a heap. Nice!
-
do we seriously believe that jeremy would have had the forsight to say he wanted the carpets burned. Was colin there when this alleged conversation took place.
Sometimes we dont seem to be able to give an inch and get so there is no considering anyone elses point of view.
OK. Lets look at this sensibly. Firstly, not for one moment do I think it was a case of foresight. It was more about opportunity presenting itself. We have a blood stained carpet -a rather lovely one, by all accounts- which belongs to the owner of the house. The police need it to run some tests but it isn't theirs to dispose of as they think fit, nor, do I imagine that they have the facilities to do so. For all they know, the owner may wish to have the carpet professionally cleaned. In this case, it seemed that the owner asked them to dispose of it and they agreed to do so when they'd finished with it. It wasn't for them to tell the owner that it was a perfectly good carpet which he could get cleaned. I can't see how ANY of this possible explanation is in any way irrational.
-
do we seriously believe that jeremy would have had the forsight to say he wanted the carpets burned. Was colin there when this alleged conversation took place.
Sometimes we dont seem to be able to give an inch and get so there is no considering anyone elses point of view.
I have considered the innocent argument, I argued all of the points you have brought up and more. The I found myself making excuses for things that made no sense.
-
OK. Lets look at this sensibly. Firstly, not for one moment do I think it was a case of foresight. It was more about opportunity presenting itself. We have a blood stained carpet -a rather lovely one, by all accounts- which belongs to the owner of the house. The police need it to run some tests but it isn't theirs to dispose of as they think fit, nor, do I imagine that they have the facilities to do so. For all they know, the owner may wish to have the carpet professionally cleaned. In this case, it seemed that the owner asked them to dispose of it and they agreed to do so when they'd finished with it. It wasn't for them to tell the owner that it was a perfectly good carpet which he could get cleaned. I can't see how ANY of this possible explanation is in any way irrational.p
trouble i have with this jane is that i dont really know what is the truth. I rely on statements and the police records we have on here and i was conviced i had read somewhere that it was the police that had instigated the disposal of carpets etc from the house but of course i could be wrong.
I am beginning to feel jb did do some very unusual things though. The argument about him driving really slowly keeps going through my mind. He didnt know for sure anyone had actually been shot so why didnt he just drive right on up to the house and let himself in or knock the door.
-
OK. Lets look at this sensibly. Firstly, not for one moment do I think it was a case of foresight. It was more about opportunity presenting itself. We have a blood stained carpet -a rather lovely one, by all accounts- which belongs to the owner of the house. The police need it to run some tests but it isn't theirs to dispose of as they think fit, nor, do I imagine that they have the facilities to do so. For all they know, the owner may wish to have the carpet professionally cleaned. In this case, it seemed that the owner asked them to dispose of it and they agreed to do so when they'd finished with it. It wasn't for them to tell the owner that it was a perfectly good carpet which he could get cleaned. I can't see how ANY of this possible explanation is in any way irrational.p
trouble i have with this jane is that i dont really know what is the truth. I rely on statements and the police records we have on here and i was conviced i had read somewhere that it was the police that had instigated the disposal of carpets etc from the house but of course i could be wrong.
I am beginning to feel jb did do some very unusual things though. The argument about him driving really slowly keeps going through my mind. He didnt know for sure anyone had actually been shot so why didnt he just drive right on up to the house and let himself in or knock the door.
-
trouble i have with this jane is that i dont really know what is the truth. I rely on statements and the police records we have on here and i was conviced i had read somewhere that it was the police that had instigated the disposal of carpets etc from the house but of course i could be wrong.
I am beginning to feel jb did do some very unusual things though. The argument about him driving really slowly keeps going through my mind. He didnt know for sure anyone had actually been shot so why didnt he just drive right on up to the house and let himself in or knock the door.
This is what I would have done to be honest, if it was my Dad I would have just gone there, even though the police were coming. But he didn't, he wanted to arrive their with the police. To be honest I would have gone inside whilst the police were standing telling me to wait. If the door was locked, I would have gone in through the window - the way he knew how.
-
trouble i have with this jane is that i dont really know what is the truth. I rely on statements and the police records we have on here and i was conviced i had read somewhere that it was the police that had instigated the disposal of carpets etc from the house but of course i could be wrong.
I am beginning to feel jb did do some very unusual things though. The argument about him driving really slowly keeps going through my mind. He didnt know for sure anyone had actually been shot so why didnt he just drive right on up to the house and let himself in or knock the door.
Thank you for admitting it.
-
Trouble is,Notsure,how would it have looked if Jeremy had got there before the police and started knocking like Hell on the front door ? Those who say he's guilty would have said it was a way of covering up knowing they were all dead. Even as things stood,he still got the blame.
-
trouble i have with this jane is that i dont really know what is the truth. I rely on statements and the police records we have on here and i was conviced i had read somewhere that it was the police that had instigated the disposal of carpets etc from the house but of course i could be wrong.
I am beginning to feel jb did do some very unusual things though. The argument about him driving really slowly keeps going through my mind. He didnt know for sure anyone had actually been shot so why didnt he just drive right on up to the house and let himself in or knock the door.
I appreciate that it's probably more difficult when you're not sure, Notsure! However, it's not rocket science when every day logic is applied. Jeremy certainly DID do some questionable things.
-
Trouble is,Notsure,how would it have looked if Jeremy had got there before the police and started knocking like Hell on the front door ? Those who say he's guilty would have said it was a way of covering up knowing they were all dead. Even as things stood,he still got the blame.
Anyone who thinks along those lines when their family is allegedly in danger of their lives must have a very distorted and suspicious mind set.
-
Anyone who thinks along those lines when their family is allegedly in danger of their lives must have a very distorted and suspicious mind set.
No,I just know how peoples minds work.
-
Thank you for admitting it.
Quite a brave and honest thing to do really.
-
Trouble is,Notsure,how would it have looked if Jeremy had got there before the police and started knocking like Hell on the front door ? Those who say he's guilty would have said it was a way of covering up knowing they were all dead. Even as things stood,he still got the blame.
He shouldn't have been thinking what others would say IF he received a genuine call!
-
And Jeremy, hanging on the the more valuable items - not for sentimental value, but to SELL. His mother and fathers clothes were ceremoniously chucked in a trailer in a heap. Nice!
There's always a dilemma when a loved one dies as to what to do with their possessions. One hears of parents keeping their child's room exactly as it was before he or she died years after the event and if that's what they want who can gainsay? For my part I compromised with a neighbour who rallied round to help and he took stuff to the Charity Shop in aid of cancer research. Some things I couldn't bear to part with and still have with me to this day: a fur coat, a blue jacket and jumpers, the kind of things you see on Marks and Spencers mannequins, which every time I walk round that store evokes memories of my late mother.
As for the Jeremy Bamber case moving on, well here are two (no doubt) well-meaning individuals, and I was quite sure they would get round eventually to something over a cup of coffee, even if it's only the lie detector test. https://youtu.be/lqMEfS8nb1s
-
There's always a dilemma when a loved one dies as to what to do with their possessions. One hears of parents keeping their child's room exactly as it was before he or she died years after the event and if that's what they want who can gainsay? For my part I compromised with a neighbour who rallied round to help and he took stuff to the Charity Shop in aid of cancer research. Some things I couldn't bear to part with and still have with me to this day: a fur coat, a blue jacket and jumpers, the kind of things you see on Marks and Spencers mannequins, which every time I walk round that store evokes memories of my late mother.
As for the Jeremy Bamber case moving on, well here are two (no doubt) well-meaning individuals, and I was quite sure they would get round eventually to something over a cup of coffee, even if it's only the lie detector test. https://youtu.be/lqMEfS8nb1s
You kept things that remind you of your mum, I understand that perfectly. When my dad died in 2009, I kept his favourite suit and it still hangs in my wardrobe. I kept his watch and the pipe that he never put down. I gave his clothes to the epilepsy society - dealing with his things is one of the hardest things I have ever done but my mum couldn't face it.
I would never have heaped his things into a trailer or sold anything he loved.
As for the polygraph - Jeremy had no stress when he took it. He'd already been convicted, it's not like he was waiting to go to court. He had nothing to lose. The guy who took the test is hardly going to say that 'yes' Jeremy could fake it, he's going to tell them what they want to hear. We also don't know that he's not a psychopath but I guess you can convince yourself of anything if you really try.
-
There's always a dilemma when a loved one dies as to what to do with their possessions. One hears of parents keeping their child's room exactly as it was before he or she died years after the event and if that's what they want who can gainsay? For my part I compromised with a neighbour who rallied round to help and he took stuff to the Charity Shop in aid of cancer research. Some things I couldn't bear to part with and still have with me to this day: a fur coat, a blue jacket and jumpers, the kind of things you see on Marks and Spencers mannequins, which every time I walk round that store evokes memories of my late mother.
As for the Jeremy Bamber case moving on, well here are two (no doubt) well-meaning individuals, and I was quite sure they would get round eventually to something over a cup of coffee, even if it's only the lie detector test. https://youtu.be/lqMEfS8nb1s
I have a complete set of Malcolm's clothes, down to socks and shoes. They're probably the first things I'd reach for if the house caught fire.
Forgive me for not being able to cope with the "two (no doubt) well meaning individuals". Wherever it was they were heading, they were prevented by so many "ums" it made concentrating impossible. Stimulating conversation, it wasn't.
-
As for the polygraph - Jeremy had no stress when he took it. He'd already been convicted, it's not like he was waiting to go to court. He had nothing to lose. The guy who took the test is hardly going to say that 'yes' Jeremy could fake it, he's going to tell them what they want to hear. We also don't know that he's not a psychopath but I guess you can convince yourself of anything if you really try.
Trouble I have with this though Caroline is he did have a lot to lose didn't he. Ok so suppose he was guilty, how is taking a polygraph not going to be stressful after saying for 25 years that you are innocent . He was asking to take the polygraph since the late 80's so I dont buy that one at all.
As far as the psychopathy is concerned I think it is a bit of an insult to all the professionals that have actually seen him to say that he is. Ok I know we can go over the bit where some people are saying he didnt have this test or that test but he was tested and properly and they found nothing wrong. If Jeremy is guilty and did it for the money he wouldn't need to be a phyco would he.
-
As for the polygraph - Jeremy had no stress when he took it. He'd already been convicted, it's not like he was waiting to go to court. He had nothing to lose. The guy who took the test is hardly going to say that 'yes' Jeremy could fake it, he's going to tell them what they want to hear. We also don't know that he's not a psychopath but I guess you can convince yourself of anything if you really try.
Trouble I have with this though Caroline is he did have a lot to lose didn't he. Ok so suppose he was guilty, how is taking a polygraph not going to be stressful after saying for 25 years that you are innocent . He was asking to take the polygraph since the late 80's so I dont buy that one at all.
As far as the psychopathy is concerned I think it is a bit of an insult to all the professionals that have actually seen him to say that he is. Ok I know we can go over the bit where some people are saying he didnt have this test or that test but he was tested and properly and they found nothing wrong. If Jeremy is guilty and did it for the money he wouldn't need to be a phyco would he.
It might also be considered an insult to the intelligence of those professionals who have deemed him to be such. We know how hard it is to diagnose psychopathy. It isn't conveniently written across foreheads and is just as likely to be a charming, good looking, urbane and cultured individual who can pull wool over the most knowledgeable eyes, as a slobbish, uneducated one.
I don't understand the reasoning behind your belief that a crime committed for money means the perpetrator has no need to be psychopathic. Perhaps you're forgetting that in order to get his hands on THIS money, five people, including two infants, were required to die.
-
It might also be considered an insult to the intelligence of those professionals who have deemed him to be such. We know how hard it is to diagnose psychopathy. It isn't conveniently written across foreheads and is just as likely to be a charming, good looking, urbane and cultured individual who can pull wool over the most knowledgeable eyes, as a slobbish, uneducated one.
I don't understand the reasoning behind your belief that a crime committed for money means the perpetrator has no need to be psychopathic. Perhaps you're forgetting that in order to get his hands on THIS money, five people, including two infants, were required to die.
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
-
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
My, my. That's a very assured statement for one so unsure. I wonder how you know that for certain?
"Bloody monsters who don't give a damn about another person's life" goes a very long way to describing a psychopath. Whether their motive be sex or money, that they're prepared to kill without a second thought is a good indication of psychopathy. You said it yourself (and given that I doubt he knelt by their bodies and asked for forgiveness) what else could he be?..........................however, people are free to believe what they choose.
-
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
Hi notsure, the fact is people who 'don't give a damn about another person's life' have many of the attributes of a psychopth.
If a prisoner is a 'Psychopath' he would more than likely be described as suffering from an Anti Social Personality Disorder however, that is a matter for the prison and it is unlikely to be discussed outside the prison service, it would not necessarily be public knowledge.
There are many offenders with many kinds of personality disorders within the prison system and from what I have been told such psychological statements/diagnosis are only used for rehabilitation purposes, beyond that it doesn't appear to be much of an issue.
-
Hi notsure, the fact is people who 'don't give a damn about another person's life' have many of the attributes of a psychopth.
If a prisoner is a 'Psychopath' he would more than likely be described as suffering from an Anti Social Personality Disorder however, that is a matter for the prison and it is unlikely to be discussed outside the prison service, it would not necessarily be public knowledge.
There are many offenders with many kinds of personality disorders within the prison system and from what I have been told such psychological statements/diagnosis are only used for rehabilitation purposes, beyond that it doesn't appear to be much of an issue.
Maggie, such information would only be given out on a need to know basis. Not only does the general public NOT have a "need to know", it doesn't have a right to know, either.
-
Maggie, such information would only be given out on a need to know basis. Not only does the general public NOT have a "need to know", it doesn't have a right to know, either.
That is right Jane, we are not privy to such information.
-
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
so why dont those professionals that have assessed him say he is one. What difference would it make to them.
I suppose what I am saying is that none of US know he is or isnt one, its just our opinion but somehow our opinion seems to turn to fact sometimes.
-
so why dont those professionals that have assessed him say he is one. What difference would it make to them.
I suppose what I am saying is that none of US know he is or isnt one, its just our opinion but somehow our opinion seems to turn to fact sometimes.
Because it isn't any business of the outside world, prisons are geared to cope with ALL sorts of personality disorders, and it doesn't make his victims any less dead. How many other prisoners have their physical, mental and psychological status revealed to the public?
-
plenty of them micheal stone was one.
barry geordge was another.
-
so why dont those professionals that have assessed him say he is one. What difference would it make to them.
I suppose what I am saying is that none of US know he is or isnt one, its just our opinion but somehow our opinion seems to turn to fact sometimes.
Apparently,there are many who say that JB isn't a psychopath.
-
plenty of them micheal stone was one.
barry geordge was another.
I make that two.
-
there was a whole bullshit public of stones mental health problems.
they will realese this data if it goes agianst the defendant.
-
Because it isn't any business of the outside world, prisons are geared to cope with ALL sorts of personality disorders, and it doesn't make his victims any less dead. How many other prisoners have their physical, mental and psychological status revealed to the public?
I think where they're banged up gives you the answer-------Ashworth,Broadmoor,Rampton.
-
I think where they're banged up gives you the answer-------Ashworth,Broadmoor,Rampton.
Yes, but being "criminally insane" is a different ball game from being psychopathic.
-
Yes, but being "criminally insane" is a different ball game from being psychopathic.
They could well be that too,who knows ? If you read about some of them you could possibly find out.
-
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
Are you talking about the 27 assessments claim on the OS? They aren't testing him for psychopathy.
-
They could well be that too,who knows ? If you read about some of them you could possibly find out.
Last time I looked, this was the Jeremy Bamber Forum.
-
As for the polygraph - Jeremy had no stress when he took it. He'd already been convicted, it's not like he was waiting to go to court. He had nothing to lose. The guy who took the test is hardly going to say that 'yes' Jeremy could fake it, he's going to tell them what they want to hear. We also don't know that he's not a psychopath but I guess you can convince yourself of anything if you really try.
Trouble I have with this though Caroline is he did have a lot to lose didn't he. Ok so suppose he was guilty, how is taking a polygraph not going to be stressful after saying for 25 years that you are innocent . He was asking to take the polygraph since the late 80's so I dont buy that one at all.
As far as the psychopathy is concerned I think it is a bit of an insult to all the professionals that have actually seen him to say that he is. Ok I know we can go over the bit where some people are saying he didnt have this test or that test but he was tested and properly and they found nothing wrong. If Jeremy is guilty and did it for the money he wouldn't need to be a phyco would he.
He had nothing to lose, how many people do you see on JK who put their hand up and admit they lied when they fail the PG and Psychopaths don't feel stress in the same way you or I would. You think it's an insult to the professionals? Huh? Don't you think professionals should be questioned? Or are you willing to accept anything they tell you? Professionals think Jeremy is guilty so isn't your questioning of them an insult? If you have seen half of the stuff written about the family that I have on here, you would know what an insult was/is!
I think Jeremy is a psychopath because no one could kill two innocent children if they weren't!
-
Well none of those professionals that say he is have seen him have they? come on Jane, we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth.
No I dont believe every murderer has to be a Physcopath, I am sure they cant all be. People murder because they are bloody monsters who dont give a damm about another persons life. (This is a pretty good description of a psychopath) there are many reasons why someone kills, they dont all have to be physcopaths do they. On here its like we have to agree hes one because if he did kill them what else could he be.?
Professional detectives say that Jeremy is guilty so let me turn YOUR words right back at you "we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have convicted him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth."
-
so why dont those professionals that have assessed him say he is one. What difference would it make to them.
I suppose what I am saying is that none of US know he is or isnt one, its just our opinion but somehow our opinion seems to turn to fact sometimes.
But we CAN have an opinion and mine is that he IS a psychopath.
-
Professional detectives say that Jeremy is guilty so let me turn YOUR words right back at you "we are all adults here, we have to believe that those professionals that have tested him know best. We cant just allow our feelings for the man to distort the truth."
professnoil detectives say a lot of people are guilty who are later proved inocoencent.
-
professnoil detectives say a lot of people are guilty who are later proved inocoencent.
And they also say people are guilty of one crime only to find out that they're guilty of many more.
-
professnoil detectives say a lot of people are guilty who are later proved inocoencent.
The same is TRUE of any profession. Professionals are HUMAN - and while most will do an effective job, some will make mistakes, some aren't up to the job in the first place and some just can't be arsed.
-
He had nothing to lose, how many people do you see on JK who put their hand up and admit they lied when they fail the PG and Psychopaths don't feel stress in the same way you or I would. You think it's an insult to the professionals? Huh? Don't you think professionals should be questioned? Or are you willing to accept anything they tell you? Professionals think Jeremy is guilty so isn't your questioning of them an insult? If you have seen half of the stuff written about the family that I have on here, you would know what an insult was/is!
I think Jeremy is a psychopath because no one could kill two innocent children if they weren't!
well guilters seem to decide which professionals should be questioned and completely accept others when it suits them. I dont want to insult those professionals that think jeremy is a physcopath but its a bit rich to decide that without ever having assessed him and basing thier findings on what theyve been told or read in books or heard on tv.
i would think he was a physcopath too if i was completely convinced of his guilt but im not , thats my problem.having said that im merely stating that not every murderer is a physcopath.
-
Trouble is,Notsure,how would it have looked if Jeremy had got there before the police and started knocking like Hell on the front door ? Those who say he's guilty would have said it was a way of covering up knowing they were all dead. Even as things stood,he still got the blame.
well in a way in my mind it would have gone in his favour. He wouldnt have had time to shoot them all dead after he called police. His car would have still been warm and it would only have been a few minutes earlier.all the same evidence would have still been there so nothing else would have changed would it.
By saying how would it have looked is like saying jeremy gave some thought about wether or not to go in and considered how it would havd looked and that is worrying. Dont you agree?
-
well guilters seem to decide which professionals should be questioned and completely accept others when it suits them. I dont want to insult those professionals that think jeremy is a physcopath but its a bit rich to decide that without ever having assessed him and basing thier findings on what theyve been told or read in books or heard on tv.
i would think he was a physcopath too if i was completely convinced of his guilt but im not , thats my problem.having said that im merely stating that not every murderer is a physcopath.
Your words are also true of the other side. Picking and choosing who to believe and what evidence is acceptable based on whether said person believes in guilt of innocence.
I am convinced of his guilt and think he's a psychopath however, I have made it abundantly clear that not all killers are psychopaths and not all psychopaths are killers.
-
well guilters seem to decide which professionals should be questioned and completely accept others when it suits them. I dont want to insult those professionals that think jeremy is a physcopath but its a bit rich to decide that without ever having assessed him and basing thier findings on what theyve been told or read in books or heard on tv.
i would think he was a physcopath too if i was completely convinced of his guilt but im not , thats my problem.having said that im merely stating that not every murderer is a physcopath.
And most psychopaths AREN'T murderers. Which means that although someone -ANYONE is a psychopath- unless they commit some crime they're as much at liberty as the rest of us to live their lives.
I'm uncertain as to why you have such a problem with experts having different views. These days NO two experts seem capable of agreeing about anything so it's highly unlikely that you'd find agreement on something as nebulous as someone's psychology.
-
well in a way in my mind it would have gone in his favour. He wouldnt have had time to shoot them all dead after he called police. His car would have still been warm and it would only have been a few minutes earlier.all the same evidence would have still been there so nothing else would have changed would it.
By saying how would it have looked is like saying jeremy gave some thought about wether or not to go in and considered how it would havd looked and that is worrying. Dont you agree?
Exactly!
-
well in a way in my mind it would have gone in his favour. He wouldnt have had time to shoot them all dead after he called police. His car would have still been warm and it would only have been a few minutes earlier.all the same evidence would have still been there so nothing else would have changed would it.
By saying how would it have looked is like saying jeremy gave some thought about wether or not to go in and considered how it would havd looked and that is worrying. Dont you agree?
By George, I think you've got it ^-^ ^-^
-
By George, I think you've got it ^-^ ^-^
haha yes got that bit!
-
well in a way in my mind it would have gone in his favour. He wouldnt have had time to shoot them all dead after he called police. His car would have still been warm and it would only have been a few minutes earlier.all the same evidence would have still been there so nothing else would have changed would it.
By saying how would it have looked is like saying jeremy gave some thought about wether or not to go in and considered how it would havd looked and that is worrying. Dont you agree?
It's pointless speculating since he didn't get there first and was told to wait for the police anyway.
-
well in a way in my mind it would have gone in his favour. He wouldnt have had time to shoot them all dead after he called police. His car would have still been warm and it would only have been a few minutes earlier.all the same evidence would have still been there so nothing else would have changed would it.
By saying how would it have looked is like saying jeremy gave some thought about wether or not to go in and considered how it would havd looked and that is worrying. Dont you agree?
Jeremy DID want to go in and speak to his father but the police wouldn't allow him to. Don't you think he'd have made more of it if he'd have done it ? After all,JB said,allegedly," he should have been an actor ",because there are all sorts of ways he could have " acted " rather than have sat silently in the car------doing nothing ??
-
Jeremy DID want to go in and speak to his father but the police wouldn't allow him to. Don't you think he'd have made more of it if he'd have done it ? After all,JB said,allegedly," he should have been an actor ",because there are all sorts of ways he could have " acted " rather than have sat silently in the car------doing nothing ??
Since when?
-
Since when?
He asked the police to go in, didn't he? After being outside for some considerable time. I don't remember him saying that HE wanted to go in and speak to anyone.
-
He asked the police to go in, didn't he? After being outside for some considerable time. I don't remember him saying that HE wanted to go in and speak to anyone.
After he found out they were all dead, he kept asking to speak to his father - "And the Oscar goes to ........" ::)
-
Oh bloomin heck i just dunno i give up tonight. Going to watch a film instead. Night all x
-
Jeremy DID want to go in and speak to his father but the police wouldn't allow him to. Don't you think he'd have made more of it if he'd have done it ? After all,JB said,allegedly," he should have been an actor ",because there are all sorts of ways he could have " acted " rather than have sat silently in the car------doing nothing ??
Less is frequently more, Lookout, and just enough is always good enough.
-
Less is frequently more, Lookout, and just enough is always good enough.
Whatever you say yourself.
-
Whatever you say yourself.
On those occasions I'm right, yes.
-
It's pointless speculating since he didn't get there first and was told to wait for the police anyway.
what bothers me is they told him to wait for them and later used the fact he waited agianst him.
-
what bothers me is they told him to wait for them and later used the fact he waited agianst him.
Everything he did and said was used against him. He fell blindly into their web of deceit.
-
Everything he did and said was used against him. He fell blindly into their web of deceit.
Or you've fell blindly into his.
-
what bothers me is they told him to wait for them and later used the fact he waited agianst him.
No, they questioned why he was driving slow.
-
No, they questioned why he was driving slow.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)------oh dear,if he'd raced through the village he'd have been ticked off ! He couldn't do right for doing wrong,could he ?
They should have picked him up then there'd have been none of this. It's usual for police to take you.What if he'd been drinking and smoking weed ??
-
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)------oh dear,if he'd raced through the village he'd have been ticked off ! He couldn't do right for doing wrong,could he ?
They should have picked him up then there'd have been none of this. It's usual for police to take you.What if he'd been drinking and smoking weed ??
If he's innocent there is a chance he may have been stoned which could have been the reason, he was driving slowly and carefully :-X
-
If he's innocent there is a chance he may have been stoned which could have been the reason, he was driving slowly and carefully :-X
There could have been a chance that he had been,also a couple of cans to wind down before bed. He was probably disorientated on waking too and hung fire,hence why he didn't phone 999 straight away.
-
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)------oh dear,if he'd raced through the village he'd have been ticked off ! He couldn't do right for doing wrong,could he ?
They should have picked him up then there'd have been none of this. It's usual for police to take you.What if he'd been drinking and smoking weed ??
There could be a serious situation at his parents house and yet he's supposed to care about being stopped for speeding when USUALLY he drove fast anyway. He hadn't been drinking but if he had smoked some weed, he'd been asleep for several hours and was easily woken up by the phone. These are excuses and poor ones at that.
-
There could be a serious situation at his parents house and yet he's supposed to care about being stopped for speeding when USUALLY he drove fast anyway. He hadn't been drinking but if he had smoked some weed, he'd been asleep for several hours and was easily woken up by the phone. These are excuses and poor ones at that.
Not a poor excuse at all if he'd been full of cannabis-----------and driving too ??
-
Not a poor excuse at all if he'd been full of cannabis-----------and driving too ??
Is there NOTHING, in your estimation, that Jeremy was capable of getting wrong? You, and he, both seem to be of the opinion that it's always someone else's responsibility.
-
Not a poor excuse at all if he'd been full of cannabis-----------and driving too ??
How could he have been FULL of cannabis? He finished work late, said he went to bed around 11:00 and the so called phone call managed to wake him up! Now in a serious situation such as your parents being in danger from a deranged woman with a rifle - what would your first thoughts be at just after 3:30am - 'Oh, best drive carefully, I've had a joint'? ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
How could he have been FULL of cannabis? He finished work late, said he went to bed around 11:00 and the so called phone call managed to wake him up! Now in a serious situation such as your parents being in danger from a deranged woman with a rifle - what would your first thoughts be at just after 3:30am - 'Oh, best drive carefully, I've had a joint'? ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
OR "I don't want to get done for speeding." ^-^ ^-^ ^-^ ^-^
-
In actual fact,when someone's head is all over the place I'm surprised he could drive at all.
-
OR "I don't want to get done for speeding." ^-^ ^-^ ^-^ ^-^
That is exactly what I thought when I had an emergency at about 1am The police had been called and I had to drive about 5 miles on country roads, nothing around but all I could think was I had to stay within the speed limit as things were bad enough without getting stopped for speeding.
I also didn't want to get there, even though I knew I was behaving strangely it was almost like being in a daze which is how fear can affect you.
I'm not trying to prove anything just saying this was my experience in such a situation.
-
In actual fact,when someone's head is all over the place I'm surprised he could drive at all.
But he never gave his "head being all over the place" as any sort of explanation.
-
That is exactly what I thought when I had an emergency at about 1am The police had been called and I had to drive about 5 miles on country roads, nothing around but all I could think was I had to stay within the speed limit as things were bad enough without getting stopped for speeding.
I also didn't want to get there, even though I knew I was behaving strangely it was almost like being in a daze which is how fear can affect you.
I'm not trying to prove anything just saying this was my experience in such a situation.
It's the unknown,Maggie,as when you have a purpose and know what you're going to be met with,it's a different matter,even though you've still got to focus on whatever it is you're going to face.
-
That is exactly what I thought when I had an emergency at about 1am The police had been called and I had to drive about 5 miles on country roads, nothing around but all I could think was I had to stay within the speed limit as things were bad enough without getting stopped for speeding.
I also didn't want to get there, even though I knew I was behaving strangely it was almost like being in a daze which is how fear can affect you.
I'm not trying to prove anything just saying this was my experience in such a situation.
Once you knew about the situation, if you were responsible for doing so, did you wait 20 odd minutes before calling the police, or "phone a friend" to tell them something was wrong before calling them?
-
Who else could he phone but JM at that hour of the morning ? He was probably dithering at who he should call first------------we don't know !! He could no longer get hold of his father for advice,which shows that he was still reliant on others even in times of an emergency.
-
Once you knew about the situation, if you were responsible for doing so, did you wait 20 odd minutes before calling the police, or "phone a friend" to tell them something was wrong before calling them?
No, the police had already been called, I got up and got dressed and went out, I didn't tell anyone else I was going, it was a strange feeling but it was a different situation and I am not trying to say it was the same or prove anything. Looking back I do think it was a strange and surprising reaction but that is how it was. 8)
-
Who else could he phone but JM at that hour of the morning ? He was probably dithering at who he should call first------------we don't know !! He could no longer get hold of his father for advice,which shows that he was still reliant on others even in times of an emergency.
Sorry, Lookout. I CANNOT go with Jeremy the scaredy cat for any reason OTHER than he was deliberately trying to waste time. He managed 2 years in Australasia without Nevill by his side. If he'd called 999 he'd have been given all the assistance he required without getting someone out of bed who was MILES away from the scene -BEFORE calling police on a local phone number- and couldn't have done anything even if he'd asked.
-
But he never gave his "head being all over the place" as any sort of explanation.
That " phrase " wasn't known then and I doubt if he'd have known how to have described himself , or if he had have done it would have been used against him come the trial,that's for sure.
-
That " phrase " wasn't known then and I doubt if he'd have known how to have described himself , or if he had have done it would have been used against him come the trial,that's for sure.
OK. The phraseology would have been different, but given that you think he drove slowly because:-
A) He'd been drinking.
B) He'd done drugs.
C) He was scared of getting done for speeding...................
..................it's a miracle he bothered to turn up at all.
-
OK. The phraseology would have been different, but given that you think he drove slowly because:-
A) He'd been drinking.
B) He'd done drugs.
C) He was scared of getting done for speeding...................
..................it's a miracle he bothered to turn up at all.
Or he was scared of being confronted by a psychotic with a gun. Not a situation I would like to find myself in. Cannabis makes people paranoid even in normal circumstances.
-
Or he was scared of being confronted by a psychotic with a gun. Not a situation I would like to find myself in. Cannabis makes people paranoid even in normal circumstances.
His own thought processing wouldn't have been up to scratch if,as it's been said,he was smoking cannabis heavily.
-
His own thought processing wouldn't have been up to scratch if,as it's been said,he was smoking cannabis heavily.
If he'd been smoking cannabis he'd have been so laid back he wouldn't have given a second thought to driving.
-
If he'd been smoking cannabis he'd have been so laid back he wouldn't have given a second thought to driving.
And he certainly wouldn't have had the energy to kill anyone either.
-
Whereas,Sheila would have been suffering all kinds of withdrawals-------medication,cannabis and heroin.
-
And he certainly wouldn't have had the energy to kill anyone either.
He wouldn't have smoked it BEFORE the killing, but he MAY have used it to "chill out" afterwards.
-
He wouldn't have smoked it BEFORE the killing, but he MAY have used it to "chill out" afterwards.
He'd have started smoking the stuff the minute he got home,who are you trying to kid ? Being a heavy smoker as it alleges that he was he probably couldn't wait to start.
-
Whereas,Sheila would have been suffering all kinds of withdrawals-------medication,cannabis and heroin.
You're doing it again, aren't you? THIS is why you get accused of making it up as you go. There was NOTHING untoward found in Sheila's system other than TRACES of cannabis along with the meds she was on. THERE WAS NOTHING SAID ABOUT HEROIN.
-
He'd have started smoking the stuff the minute he got home,who are you trying to kid ? Being a heavy smoker as it alleges that he was he probably couldn't wait to start.
Then it would have doubled his desire to get at is as soon as he got home.
-
You're doing it again, aren't you? THIS is why you get accused of making it up as you go. There was NOTHING untoward found in Sheila's system other than TRACES of cannabis along with the meds she was on. THERE WAS NOTHING SAID ABOUT HEROIN.
" Nothing untoward "---------all the more reason why she must have had withdrawal symptoms. They couldn't see that in a blood test could they ?
-
Cocaine is what I meant to say.
-
" Nothing untoward "---------all the more reason why she must have had withdrawal symptoms. They couldn't see that in a blood test could they ?
Lookout, if it's possible to twist, you'll find a way of doing it. You have no evidence of anything you say regarding the amount of drugs she used.
-
" Nothing untoward "---------all the more reason why she must have had withdrawal symptoms. They couldn't see that in a blood test could they ?
No one mentioned any time of withdrawal symptoms with Sheila, not those who had seen her in the days previously, not her Mother on the phone that night. She said Sheila was quiet.
You have a fantasy of Sheila that isn't true. All your drug talk is erroneous.
-
No one mentioned any time of withdrawal symptoms with Sheila, not those who had seen her in the days previously, not her Mother on the phone that night. She said Sheila was quiet.
You have a fantasy of Sheila that isn't true. All your drug talk is erroneous.
Because nobody knew or would have known what to look for in anyone suffering withdrawal symptoms even though it was said that Sheila wasn't herself with not wanting to speak to her aunt on the phone. That would have been a hint to those who were familiar with withdrawals.
-
Because nobody knew or would have known what to look for in anyone suffering withdrawal symptoms even though it was said that Sheila wasn't herself with not wanting to speak to her aunt on the phone. That would have been a hint to those who were familiar with withdrawals.
Nobody knew, apart from you? You are smarter than everyone that was there and are able to pick up on something that NONE of them were able to even though you weren't there, you never met any of the people, you never saw them, you never witnessed their behaviour.
If not wanting to speak on the phone to someone is a sign of drug withdrawal then I think we have all been guilty of that at some point and that is the weakest and most pathetic argument as evidence I've heard. ;D
-
Because nobody knew or would have known what to look for in anyone suffering withdrawal symptoms even though it was said that Sheila wasn't herself with not wanting to speak to her aunt on the phone. That would have been a hint to those who were familiar with withdrawals.
And yet you'd have us believe that Jeremy was such a heavy user that he'd have had withdrawals if he'd managed to kill the family without a puff. Surely if he used that heavily SOMETHING would have been seriously awry with the furrows he ploughed causing comment from Nevill and farm workers alike.
-
And yet you'd have us believe that Jeremy was such a heavy user that he'd have had withdrawals if he'd managed to kill the family without a puff. Surely if he used that heavily SOMETHING would have been seriously awry with the furrows he ploughed causing comment from Nevill and farm workers alike.
It WASN'T me who said that Jeremy was a heavy user of cannabis,it's what's been written to blacken his character more than it already is,plus didn't AE examine the pupils of his eyes ? What was that about ??
-
He'd have started smoking the stuff the minute he got home,who are you trying to kid ? Being a heavy smoker as it alleges that he was he probably couldn't wait to start.
The above rather intimates you believe him to have been a heavy user. Personally I don't think he was. I think it was used to chill out in private and create an impression in public, but I'll bet he was always in control.
It WASN'T me who said that Jeremy was a heavy user of cannabis,it's what's been written to blacken his character more than it already is,plus didn't AE examine the pupils of his eyes ? What was that about ??
-
Cocaine is what I meant to say.
Rubbish! Making stuff up again? ;D ;D ;D
-
Or he was scared of being confronted by a psychotic with a gun. Not a situation I would like to find myself in. Cannabis makes people paranoid even in normal circumstances.
Scared and yet waited around 20 minutes before calling the police and then didn't bother to dial 999? ???
-
Scared and yet waited around 20 minutes before calling the police and then didn't bother to dial 999? ???
So ?
-
And he certainly wouldn't have had the energy to kill anyone either.
You really don't know anything about cannabis do you? You're just throwing it in there in the hope that it will stick! Jeremy was a heavy cannabis smoker, he's have to smoke a lot for it to have had that effect. No chance!
-
So ?
So it's bollocks!
-
Nobody knew, apart from you? You are smarter than everyone that was there and are able to pick up on something that NONE of them were able to even though you weren't there, you never met any of the people, you never saw them, you never witnessed their behaviour.
If not wanting to speak on the phone to someone is a sign of drug withdrawal then I think we have all been guilty of that at some point and that is the weakest and most pathetic argument as evidence I've heard. ;D
Something else Lookout is an expert in! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
How would your suspicious mind deal with the fact that he took 20 minutes to kill everyone ?? Including travelling back and forth, and struggling in through the window as well as out the same way ?
-
How would your suspicious mind deal with the fact that he took 20 minutes to kill everyone ?? Including travelling back and forth, and struggling in through the window as well as out the same way ?
Why would it take 20 mins to kill everyone? ???
-
So ?
SO?!!!!! When his father's allegedly woken him up at 3am and told him that his sister had gone mad and got hold of a gun? Lookout, I seriously hope that if you're ever in need of help at that time in the morning, the person on the other end of the phone reacts faster than Jeremy did.
-
SO?!!!!! When his father's allegedly woken him up at 3am and told him that his sister had gone mad and got hold of a gun? Lookout, I seriously hope that if you're ever in need of help at that time in the morning, the person on the other end of the phone reacts faster than Jeremy did.
Jeremy didn't - there wasn't a call ;) ;D ;D ;D
-
Jeremy didn't - there wasn't a call ;) ;D ;D ;D
^-^ ^-^ ^-^ ^-^ ^-^
-
How would your suspicious mind deal with the fact that he took 20 minutes to kill everyone ?? Including travelling back and forth, and struggling in through the window as well as out the same way ?
20 minutes? Bamber had longer than 20 minutes to kill the family. The person who had only 20 minutes in your scenario is SHEILA. So yeah, I can agree, 20 minutes is likely not possible.
-
20 minutes? Bamber had longer than 20 minutes to kill the family. The person who had only 20 minutes in your scenario is SHEILA. So yeah, I can agree, 20 minutes is likely not possible.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
20 minutes? Bamber had longer than 20 minutes to kill the family. The person who had only 20 minutes in your scenario is SHEILA. So yeah, I can agree, 20 minutes is likely not possible.
BS! Sheila had several hours.
-
Sheila didn't have time from Neville's 'mysterious' 3.36am/3.26am call to Bamber, to the time the police arrived on the scene, to do what she did. TAC.
-
A programme worth watching next Tuesday night " My Baby,Psychosis and Me " which will give an insight into the suffering which some women endure before and through their pregnancy.
It's a BBC programme so look out for it because I've forgotten the time it's on.
-
Sheila didn't have time from Neville's 'mysterious' 3.36am/3.26am call to Bamber, to the time the police arrived on the scene, to do what she did. TAC.
How long would it take? An hour would be plenty IMO.
-
BS! Sheila had several hours.
She had from the phonecall. Until the police arrived outside. I don't care about any of your opinion or theories as to why she had longer, so don't waste your time.
-
BS! Sheila had several hours.
Hoe did she have several hours? Oh I see, you mean she killed everyone while the police were outside? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D. How come the operator listening in, only heard the dog barking and the police and Jeremy - didn't hear a thing?
-
Going by the evidence it is 100% certain that Neville and Sheila died between 3.26am (the time Jeremy said Neville phoned the police) and 3.48, which I believe is the time people arrived at WHF.
It is 99.9% certain that June, Nicolas and Daniel died during this time. Neville would not wait for Sheila to fire 16 bullets into them before ringing the police.
Could someone as frail and uncoordinated as Sheila have done everthing 22 minutes ?
In no particular order here are the main things she did -
The kitchen fight:
The 2002 appeal says -
42. ' The examination of Nevill Bamber's body also revealed black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun'
A professional boxer would be proud to have committed those sorts of injuries. And he has 36 minutes. Neville was not a professional boxer. But still put up a tremendous fight according to the judge.
Time estimate, 15 minutes.
Chamering and loading the rifle, at least twice:
Sheila may have loaded twice or five times. It gets progressively harder to load each bullet. Either way it is not easy for someone with 'limited' experience with guns.
Each re loading meant going to the kitchen, possibly from upstairs in a big house.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Firing 26 bullets:
This meant travelling to three different locations, both up and downstairs in a big house.
To get close enough, aim and accurately fire so many torso and head shots would not be quick.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Checking everyone is dead:
There is no point Sheila committing suicide unless her nearest and dearest are joining her.
Checking may have been done continuously. Or just once. Either way it is still travelling into different rooms and going up and down stairs in a big house.
Sheila of course heated the rifle and burned Neville's back.
Time estimate, 10 minutes:
Washing and changing (optional):
Many supporters claim Sheila did this.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Getting and reading the bible
The bible was found next to her. If she read the passage quoted, that was a long passage.
Time estimate, 10 minutes
Writing a suicide note (optional):
If you believe Sheila did this, it is at least another ten minutes.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Put the silencer away and shoot herself:
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
These are generous time estimations. Sheila was in a crazy rage and not organised at all, to do some of the above in an organized and efficient way. Someone so un coordinated may have taken hours to do all of the above.
Anyway, the generous total time it would take for Sheila to do all the things she was supposed to have done, is 55/75 minutes, (two things are optional). Which is 33/53 minutes over the 22 minutes she had.
If we go by the time Bamber said Neville called him, 3.10am, the 55/75 minutes is 17/37minutes over the 38 minutes Sheila had to get everything done.
Supporters are in a no win situation. They could go against Bamber and the OS and claim Neville did not phone the police, but that still leaves a 17/37 minute shortfall.
-
Going by the evidence it is 100% certain that Neville and Sheila died between 3.26am (the time Jeremy said Neville phoned the police) and 3.48, which I believe is the time people arrived at WHF.
It is 99.9% certain that June, Nicolas and Daniel died during this time. Neville would not wait for Sheila to fire 16 bullets into them before ringing the police.
Could someone as frail and uncoordinated as Sheila have done everthing 22 minutes ?
In no particular order here are the main things she did -
The kitchen fight:
The 2002 appeal says -
42. ' The examination of Nevill Bamber's body also revealed black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun'
A professional boxer would be proud to have committed those sorts of injuries. And he has 36 minutes. Neville was not a professional boxer. But still put up a tremendous fight according to the judge.
Time estimate, 15 minutes.
Chamering and loading the rifle, at least twice:
Sheila may have loaded twice or five times. It gets progressively harder to load each bullet. Either way it is not easy for someone with 'limited' experience with guns.
Each re loading meant going to the kitchen, possibly from upstairs in a big house.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Firing 26 bullets:
This meant travelling to three different locations, both up and downstairs in a big house.
To get close enough, aim and accurately fire so many torso and head shots would not be quick.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Checking everyone is dead:
There is no point Sheila committing suicide unless her nearest and dearest are joining her.
Checking may have been done continuously. Or just once. Either way it is still travelling into different rooms and going up and down stairs in a big house.
Sheila of course heated the rifle and burned Neville's back.
Time estimate, 10 minutes:
Washing and changing (optional):
Many supporters claim Sheila did this.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Getting and reading the bible
The bible was found next to her. If she read the passage quoted, that was a long passage.
Time estimate, 10 minutes
Writing a suicide note (optional):
If you believe Sheila did this, it is at least another ten minutes.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Put the silencer away and shoot herself:
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
These are generous time estimations. Sheila was in a crazy rage and not organised at all, to do some of the above in an organized and efficient way. Someone so un coordinated may have taken hours to do all of the above.
Anyway, the generous total time it would take for Sheila to do all the things she was supposed to have done, is 55/75 minutes, (two things are optional). Which is 33/53 minutes over the 22 minutes she had.
If we go by the time Bamber said Neville called him, 3.10am, the 55/75 minutes is 17/37minutes over the 38 minutes Sheila had to get everything done.
Supporters are in a no win situation. They could go against Bamber and the OS and claim Neville did not phone the police, but that still leaves a 17/37 minute shortfall.
I am confused Adam, I thought you believed JB killed the family. How on earth was he able to kill everyone and run back to WHF and drive back again in that half an hour? I am so surprised at this statement I am wondering if I have misunderstood what you have posted. :o
-
The post is nothing to do with Bamber. It only mentions Sheila's name.
It is seeing how long it would take for Sheila to do everything. She had either a 22 or 38 minute window. Dependent on whether people believe Neville called the police.
It would take Sheila 55 minutes without the ritual washing and suicide note, 75 minutes if you include both.
Which leaves a shortfall of at least 17 minutes, at the most 53 minutes. Dependent on whether you believe Neville called the police.
-
I am confused Adam, I thought you believed JB killed the family. How on earth was he able to kill everyone and run back to WHF and drive back again in that half an hour? I am so surprised at this statement I am wondering if I have misunderstood what you have posted. :o
Maggie, had you not quoted Adam, I wouldn't have bothered to read his post :)) SURELY there's a HUGE discrepancy here!!!! If Nevill died between those times given by Adam, how was it possible for Jeremy to be making calls from his cottage? He'd have had to have peddled like Chris Hoyle to have got back from WHF to Goldhanger -and far too breathless to speak- divest himself of the clothes he'd been wearing and get back, cool as a cucumber, to WHF. No wonder he asked the police to pick him up. He probably would have felt too exhausted to drive......................I always said that Adam was supporters' greatest weapon ^-^
-
Maggie, had you not quoted Adam, I wouldn't have bothered to read what his post :)) SURELY there's a HUGE discrepancy here!!!! If Nevill died between those times given by Adam, how was it possible for Jeremy to be making calls from his cottage? He'd have had to have peddled like Chris Hoyle to have got back from WHF to Goldhanger -and far too breathless to speak- divest himself of the clothes he'd been wearing and get back, cool as a cucumber, to WHF. No wonder he asked the police to pick him up. He probably would have felt too exhausted to drive......................I always said that Adam was supporters' greatest weapon ^-^
What are you on ?
Where does my post mention Bamber ?
You do read my posts because you always reply. And changed stance.
You spend all day on here. Be helpful if you read posts properly.
I don't read you're posts, unless they relate to me. They are too meandering and add nothing new. I would read you're threads. But you never create any.
Supporting Bamber for 30 years because you didn't like what Julie was wearing. ;D
-
What are you on ?
Where does my post mention Bamber ?
You do read my posts because you always reply. And changed stance.
You spend all day on here. Be helpful if you read posts.
Supporting Bamber for 30 years because you didn't like what Julie was wearing. ;D
No need to act like a xxxxx, Adam, even if it is something you excel at. Oh, and I want's the only one to interpret your post the way I did.
-
No need to act like a xxxxx, Adam, even if it is something you excel at. Oh, and I want's the only one to interpret your post the way I did.
'Could someone as un cordinated as Sheila have done all this in 22 minutes ?' It's in the thread post.
If you and Maggie want to believe I am referring to Bamber. Whose name I did not mention, feel free.
-
Anyway, until April goaded me, post152 shows it was impossible for Sheila to do everything in a 22 or 38 minute time period.
Forensic or circumstantial evidence showing certain guilt ? Take you're pick. Perhaps a bit of both.
-
Going by the evidence it is 100% certain that Neville and Sheila died between 3.26am (the time Jeremy said Neville phoned the police) and 3.48, which I believe is the time people arrived at WHF.
If you want to make your point over, perhaps you should make it clear in the first line of your post OR should a poll be set up to ask how many posters bother to read your posts fully.
-
Anyway, until April goaded me, thread 152 shows it was impossible for Sheila to do everything in a 22 or 38 minute time period.
Forensic or circumstantial evidence showing certain guilt ? Take you're pick. Perhaps a bit of both.
There may be 152 threads but there's no guarantee that they're read. By the way, who's this April you keep referring to?
-
If you want to make your point over, perhaps you should make it clear in the first line of your post OR should a poll be set up to ask how many posters bother to read your posts fully.
So you just read the first sentence ?
Anyway, supporters now need to knock off between 17 to 53 minutes of the time it took Sheila to do everything. She only had a 22 or 38 minute window.
-
There may be 152 threads but there's no guarantee that they're read. By the way, who's this April you keep referring to?
Sorry, meant post 152.
-
Going by the evidence it is 100% certain that Neville and Sheila died between 3.26am (the time Jeremy said Neville phoned the police) and 3.48, which I believe is the time people arrived at WHF.
It is 99.9% certain that June, Nicolas and Daniel died during this time. Neville would not wait for Sheila to fire 16 bullets into them before ringing the police.
Could someone as frail and uncoordinated as Sheila have done everthing 22 minutes ?
In no particular order here are the main things she did -
The kitchen fight:
The 2002 appeal says -
42. ' The examination of Nevill Bamber's body also revealed black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun'
Much of the bruising was caused by the bullet wounds. 15 mins is an awfully long time.
I would say 5mins.
A professional boxer would be proud to have committed those sorts of injuries. And he has 36 minutes. Neville was not a professional boxer. But still put up a tremendous fight according to the judge.
Time estimate, 15 minutes.
Chamering and loading the rifle, at least twice:
Sheila may have loaded twice or five times. It gets progressively harder to load each bullet. Either way it is not easy for someone with 'limited' experience with guns.
Each re loading meant going to the kitchen, possibly from upstairs in a big house.
I have tried loading the magazine and yes it can be a bit fiddly but I could still load it fully in 1 minute. I'm also allowing a reload in the fight with Neville.
Including going and getting them, I'd say 2 or 3 mins.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Firing 26 bullets:
This meant travelling to three different locations, both up and downstairs in a big house.
To get close enough, aim and accurately fire so many torso and head shots would not be quick.
There is some overlap here, Neville is already included, as is going for reloads.
So I would say 2 or 3 mins.
Time estimate, 5 minutes:
Checking everyone is dead:
There is no point Sheila committing suicide unless her nearest and dearest are joining her.
Checking may have been done continuously. Or just once. Either way it is still travelling into different rooms and going up and down stairs in a big house.
Sheila of course heated the rifle and burned Neville's back.
I think you've just invented 10 minutes, it would be obvious whether people were dead.
I'm not allowing any time for this.
Time estimate, 10 minutes:
Washing and changing (optional):
Many supporters claim Sheila did this.
I'm not allowing any time for this.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Getting and reading the bible
The bible was found next to her. If she read the passage quoted, that was a long passage.
I'm not sure about this, 10 minutes is an age and she might not have even read it (in our make believe story).
To be generous, I'll give a couple of minutes, so 2 mins.
Time estimate, 10 minutes
Writing a suicide note (optional):
If you believe Sheila did this, it is at least another ten minutes.
Nah, not for me, I'm not allowing any time for this.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
Put the silencer away and shoot herself:
It's a fair sized house, but it's not exactly Buckingham Palace.
Ignoring the incapacitating wound to her neck and absence of blood, I'll give a couple of minutes for this.
2mins.
Time estimate, 10 minutes.
These are generous time estimations. Sheila was in a crazy rage and not organised at all, to do some of the above in an organized and efficient way. Someone so un coordinated may have taken hours to do all of the above.
Anyway, the generous total time it would take for Sheila to do all the things she was supposed to have done, is 55/75 minutes, (two things are optional). Which is 33/53 minutes over the 22 minutes she had.
If we go by the time Bamber said Neville called him, 3.10am, the 55/75 minutes is 17/37minutes over the 38 minutes Sheila had to get everything done.
Supporters are in a no win situation. They could go against Bamber and the OS and claim Neville did not phone the police, but that still leaves a 17/37 minute shortfall.
So I make it about 15 minutes, it seems like plenty of time. :-\
-
So I make it about 15 minutes, it seems like plenty of time. :-\
Excellent. A constructive response. Other posters just tried to undermine post 152.
It seems to you believe Sheila was super fast and clinical in her actions. Almost execution like.
You've removed the shower section. Which was optional and takes off ten minutes. However there is then no explanation why Sheila was completely mark free.
You must allow time for Sheila checking whether everyone was dead. Neville's back was burnt three times. The OS saying it was done by the rifle. June was also shot again when on the floor. Time estimate reinstated.
The bible was open a specific page. Which apparently is read before suicides. Bit weird that Sheila would get it, open it and then not read it. The only other explanation is that it was a plant. Time estimate reinstated.
The suicide note is optional. Supporters and the OS will have to retract on the suicide note claim to attempt to fit the 22/38 minutes Sheila had.
Taking the silencer off and putting it away. Then returning upstairs to pluck up the courage to shoot herself. Twice. Will take more than two minutes. Time estimate reinstated.
Neville's fight was after he returned upstairs from phoning Bamber (3.10) or the police (3.26). To then get shot 4 times, run downstairs, put up a massive fight, before being shot again will take 15 minutes. His first upstairs shots may have been minutes after his phone call. Time estimate reinstated.
-
In my view Hartley has taken off 20 minutes from the time it took Sheila to do everything.
By removing the shower and suicide note. These are both things supporters would be reluctant to retract on.
This still puts Sheila miles away from being able to do everything in her 22/38 minute time scale.
-
Excellent. A constructive response.
It seems Sheila was super fast and clinical in her actions. Almost execution like.
You've removed the shower section. Which was optional and takes off ten minutes. However there is then no explanation why Sheila was completely mark free.
You must allow time for Sheila checking whether everyone was dead. Neville's back was burnt three times. The OS saying it was done by the rifle. June was also shot again when on the floor. Time estimate reinstated.
The bible was open a specific page. Which apparently is read before suicides. Bit weird that Sheila would get it and not read it. Time estimate reinstated.
The suicide note is optional. Supporters and the OS will have to retract on this to fit the 22/38 minutes Sheila had.
Taking the silencer off and putting it away. Then returning upstairs to pluck up the courage to shoot herself. Twice. Will take more than two minutes.
It's obviously all make believe anyway, so I don't think I can start adding in Sheila having a shower or start explaining why think couldn't happen just to add time on.
Two minutes is a long time, I could certainly return the silencer in that time, but okay let's double it and say four minutes. As for Sheila deliberating about shooting herself, I can't really give a time, in my scenario which is going for the minimum time, she didn't hesitate. She may have taken time, but as I say I'm going for a minimum.
I'm not convinced that the bible was at a particular page, I think that's a bit of a myth. Obviously I think it was planted by Jeremy but in our story I'm still going for a minimum time so I'm going to say it was already on the floor from falling off the bed or side table earlier on. So I'm still not adding anything for this.
With the body checking, I'm not sure about the burn marks, I think the recent defence claim of it being burns from a heated rifle without moderator attached was a load of tosh and an attempt to manipulate the case (just my opinion). Sticking with my bias for a minimum time, I'm going to say the burns were caused at another time and so so am still not going to allow time for it.
So that takes me to 17 minutes, with a spare 5 minutes to shore up any low estimates.
-
It's obviously all make believe anyway, so I don't think I can start adding in Sheila having a shower or start explaining why think couldn't happen just to add time on.
Two minutes is a long time, I could certainly return the silencer in that time, but okay let's double it and say four minutes. As for Sheila deliberating about shooting herself, I can't really give a time, in my scenario which is going for the minimum time, she didn't hesitate. She may have taken time, but as I say I'm going for a minimum.
I'm not convinced that the bible was at a particular page, I think that's a bit of a myth. Obviously I think it was planted by Jeremy but in our story I'm still going for a minimum time so I'm going to say it was already on the floor from falling off the bed or side table earlier on. So I'm still not adding anything for this.
With the body checking, I'm not sure about the burn marks, I think the recent defence claim of it being burns from a heated rifle without moderator attached was a load of tosh and an attempt to manipulate the case (just my opinion). Sticking with my bias for a minimum time, I'm going to say the burns were caused at another time and so so am still not going to allow time for it.
So that takes me to 17 minutes, with a spare 5 minutes to shore up any low estimates.
The bible was at a certain page which relates to suicides. The 2002 court of appeal states this. Supporters will have to agree with you that the bible somehow fell on the floor at this page, landing on Sheila's blood. This will take off ten minutes. But supporters will never suggest this happened.
The OS and Bamber will have to retract on Neville's burn marks, to take off another ten minutes. Again this will never happen.
-
I am being generous in saying Sheila started shooting within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber or the police. Neville going upstairs and being shot straight away. However it could have been 5 minutes afterwards, or 10, or....
-
The bible was at a certain page which relates to suicides. The 2002 court of appeal states this. Supporters will have to agree with you that the bible somehow fell on the floor at this page, landing on Sheila's blood. This will take off ten minutes. But supporters will never do this.
The OS and Bamber will have to retract on Neville's burn marks, to take off another ten minutes. Again this will never happen.
I'm not acting as a supporter though, so I have no bias toward any retraction of one thing or another.
In my scenario, the bible simply fell, whatever page it was on was simply coincidental, you could probably open it on any page and attach meaning if you were of the mind to do so.
For arguments sake, in our made up story, I think my time estimate is plausible.
-
I'm not acting as a supporter though, so I have no bias toward any retraction of one thing or another.
In my scenario, the bible simply fell, whatever page it was on was simply coincidental, you could probably open it on any page and attach meaning if you were of the mind to do so.
For arguments sake, in our made up story, I think my time estimate is plausible.
It's great that I got a constructive response.
Hopefully supporters will also answer.
They will have to make huge retractions on several points to attempt to fit just one time scale - 38 minutes. The retractions will highlight Bamber's guilt. They will also have to admit Neville did not call the police.
Or agree that Sheila did all of these things, which again highlights guilt as she only had a 22/38 minute window. To do everything takes 75 minutes in my estimation.
-
It's great that I got a constructive response.
Hopefully supporters will also answer.
They will have to make huge retractions on several points to fit either time scale. Which will highlight Bamber's guilt.
Or agree that Sheila did all of these things, which again highlights guilt as she only had a 22/38 minute window. To do everything takes 75 minutes in my estimation.
I understand your intention and what you are trying to get across.
I think in our made up story, there is sufficient time for Sheila to carry out the actions, I have another 5-7 minutes to play with as well.
You have in this instance attempted to use time to indicate the guilt of Jeremy. Even speaking as a person who already believes Jeremy to be guilty, I don't believe you have been successful on this occasion.
-
Well fitting everything into the time scale supporters have to say (with gritted teeth) -
Neville did not call the police. This at least gives them 38 minutes to play with.
Sheila did not shower.
Sheila did not burn Neville's back or check for signs of life.
Sheila did not look for and read the bible. It just fell there !
The massacre started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
Sheila did not write a suicide note.
Sheila was quick in loading, chambering, taking off the silencer and shooting.
Sheila had no hesitation in shooting herself.
These take off 40 minutes, which makes it 35 minutes. So within the 38 minute time scale by 3 minutes. But Sheila was mightily efficient for a crazy woman.
These retractions will never be made by the supporters. They are in a pickle as it shows Bamber is guilty as Sheila didn't have enough time to do everything.
-
Well fitting everything in supporters have to say (with gritted teeth) -
Neville did not call the police. This at least gives them 38 minutes to play with.
Sheila did not shower.
Sheila did not burn Neville's back or check for signs of life.
Sheila did not look for and read the bible. It just fell there !
The massacre started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
Sheila did not write a suicide note.
Sheila was quick in loading, chambering, taking off the silencer and shooting.
Sheila had no hesitation in shooting herself.
Yes, although we don't have to omit all of those, we have another 5-7 minutes, so let's allow a couple of minutes for the bible and a couple of minutes hesitation.
I'll also allow a cursory glance to check for life whilst moving around, I'll add a minute.
The shower and suicide note are a bit daft anyway, so that leaves us with:
Sheila did not burn Neville's back.
The massacre started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
-
As well as the massacre having to start within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber, we also have to consider was Sheila in a hurry after everyone had died ? What was the rush for her ? In fact supporters claim she was still alive when police entered WHF.
The evidence shows this was not the case, but why would Sheila rush after everyone had been killed. She was not expecting the police, but everything had been done in super fast time, prior to their arrival. Sheila upstairs with a rifle on her.
-
As well as the massacre having to start within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber, we also have to consider was Sheila in a hurry ? What was the rush for her ? In fact supporters claim she was still alive when police entered WHF.
The evidence shows this was not the case, but why would Sheila rush after everyone had been killed.
We'll yes of course, but we're only looking at timescales. In our story, Sheila COULD have moved at the pace suggested, or she COULD have worked ten times slower.
We obviously know that Sheila was actually murdered.
-
We'll yes of course, but we're only looking at timescales. In our story, Sheila COULD have moved at the pace suggested, or she COULD have worked ten times slower.
We obviously know that Sheila was actually murdered.
Supporters have to make nine retractions (above) and say Sheila worked in super fast time, for no apparent reason. And that the shooting started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
But supporters won't make any comment as it's a no win situation.
-
Supporters have to make nine retractions (above) and say Sheila worked in super fast time, for no apparent reason. And that the shooting started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
But supporters won't make any comment.
I've got that down to two, shooting started immediately and the burn marks were caused by something else.
I don't think I've got her working super fast either, just not going slowly. She's supposed to be in a mad psychotic rage don't forget.
I think it shows that we can't use timescales in this way to infer Jeremy's guilt.
-
Supporters have to make nine retractions (above) and say Sheila worked in super fast time, for no apparent reason. And that the shooting started within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
But supporters won't make any comment.
I can't imagine why you need Sheila to have "worked in super fast time." She was in an isolated farmhouse where presumably, no one was anticipating what would happen. She could have done the whole thing at her leisure. We know she wasn't always on the best of terms with June. She "could" bearing in mind that this is only a made up story- have shot June whilst Nevill was using the downstairs shower, THEN realized she'd have to shoot him, too. You can't cause Jeremy's guilt by unknown time scales.
-
I can't imagine why you need Sheila to have "worked in super fast time." She was in an isolated farmhouse where presumably, no one was anticipating what would happen. She could have done the whole thing at her leisure. We know she wasn't always on the best of terms with June. She "could" bearing in mind that this is only a made up story- have shot June whilst Nevill was using the downstairs shower, THEN realized she'd have to shoot him, too. You can't cause Jeremy's guilt by unknown time scales.
Second time today, read the posts.
I said supporters have to say Sheila worked quickly and very efficiently. My post 175 also says Sheila would not be in a hurry.
-
'Could someone as un cordinated as Sheila have done all this in 22 minutes ?' It's in the thread post.
If you and Maggie want to believe I am referring to Bamber. Whose name I did not mention, feel free.
I agree whoever murdered the family I would guess it all happened very quickly with respect you don't hang around in such circumstances but your wording in that post is ambiguous, you were by default suggesting JB murdered them, so I was simply pointing out that on your 100% certainty of the time of death makes no sense unless Sheila carried out the shootings.
-
I can't imagine why you need Sheila to have "worked in super fast time." She was in an isolated farmhouse where presumably, no one was anticipating what would happen. She could have done the whole thing at her leisure. We know she wasn't always on the best of terms with June. She "could" bearing in mind that this is only a made up story- have shot June whilst Nevill was using the downstairs shower, THEN realized she'd have to shoot him, too. You can't cause Jeremy's guilt by unknown time scales.
Yes that's a good point, the children and June could have already been murdered by the time Neville got off the phone.
Plus what time did the police and Jeremy actually get to the house, they parked at the end of the lane which quite a distance away, did they have a chat for a while? They also returned to the car later to call backup.
Sheila, having been seen by Bews and Jeremy through the bedroom window, could have killed herself when they returned to the police car.
So I'm going to add another 20 minutes to my time frame. I've now got actions taking a minimum of 15-22 minutes carried out in a 58minute window.
-
Of course we can use common sense to say how long it would take Sheila to do everything she either certainly did, or allegedly, according to supporters did.
My time scale which included everything, took her 75 minutes. Supporters making 11 retractions knocks 40 minutes off. On the assumption that the shooting started a minute after Neville called Bamber, and Sheila worked very quickly.
Obviously 11 retractions would be a huge blow for Bamber. Just to fit a time scale. So they will keep to the 11 allegations.
-
Of course we can use common sense to say how long it would take Sheila to do everything she either certainly did, or allegedly, according to supporters did.
My time scale which included everything, took her 75 minutes. Supporters making 11 retractions knocks 40 minutes off. On the assumption that the shooting started a minute after Neville called Bamber, and Sheila worked very quickly.
Second time today, read the posts.
I said supporters have to say Sheila worked quickly and very efficiently. My post 175 also says Sheila would not be in a hurry.
I was working under the umbrella of your made up story which make everything possible. That's the joy of "made up".
-
By default supporters are highlighting Bamber's guilt.
So many allegations have been made about what Sheila did after the massacre, adding them all up means it would take her 75 minutes. They then alleged Neville called the police at 3.26, which reduced Sheila's window to 22 minutes.
-
Yes that's a good point, the children and June could have already been murdered by the time Neville got off the phone.
Plus what time did the police and Jeremy actually get to the house, they parked at the end of the lane which quite a distance away, did they have a chat for a while? They also returned to the car later to call backup.
Sheila, having been seen by Bews and Jeremy through the bedroom window, could have killed herself when they returned to the police car.
So I'm going to add another 20 minutes to my time frame. I've now got actions taking a minimum of 15-22 minutes carried out in a 58minute window.
In fact, after Bews gets back to the car at 4:09 nobody approached the house again until 4:52am.
So that's another 43 minutes that I've just gained. :)
-
In fact, after Bews gets back to the car at 4:09 nobody approached the house again until 4:52am.
So that's another 43 minutes that I've just gained. :)
I've now got actions taking 15-22 minutes carried out in a 1h 24m window.
-
By default supporters are highlighting Bamber's guilt.
So many allegations have been made about what Sheila did after the massacre, adding them all up means it would take her 75 minutes. They then alleged Neville called the police at 3.26, which reduced Sheila's window to 22 minutes.
Can you name those supporters who have stipulated a 75 minute time frame or is it something you've pulled out of thin air?
-
Can you name those supporters who have stipulated a 75 minute time frame or is it something you've pulled out of thin air?
Unfortunately Adam has proven beyond doubt that Sheila had enough time to carry out the murders, even taking the far fetched 75m time, she has another 9 minutes to go.
-
Unfortunately Adam has proved beyond doubt that Sheila had enough time to carry out the murders, even taking the far fetched 75m time, she has another 9 minutes to go.
Hartley, I have always said that Adam is supporters' greatest asset :)) :)) :))
-
Hartley, I have always said that Adam is supporters' greatest asset :)) :)) :))
;D
-
Hartley, I have always said that Adam is supporters' greatest asset :)) :)) :))
You were my greatest asset when you supported Bamber.
You didn't create any threads to counter my threads. Just argued against my posts and threads. Weakly, until giving up and changing stance.
Now you are a guilter you still don't create any threads. Or say anything worthwhile. Despite officially being online more than anyone else.
-
Unfortunately Adam has proven beyond doubt that Sheila had enough time to carry out the murders, even taking the far fetched 75m time, she has another 9 minutes to go.
I appreciate you are not as much as a guilter as me. And have discreetly tried to stick up for supporters on this issue. To provide the glimmer of light they have, that Bamber may be innocent.
However, for Sheila to do all of the certain things, and the supporters alleged things would take 75 minutes. Not 22 or 38 minutes.
All in post 152.
But supporters can make 6 retractions and take huge leaps of faith. I don't mind if they say the bible just fell next to Sheila, page open etc.
-
I appreciate you are not as much as a guilter as me. And have discreetly tried to stick up for supporters on this issue. To provide the glimmer of light they have, that Bamber may be innocent.
However, for Sheila to do all of the certain things, and the supporters alleged things would take 75 minutes. Not 22 or 38 minutes.
All in post 152.
But supporters can make 11 retractions. I don't mind if they say the bible just fell next to Sheila, page open etc.
We'll as per our earlier discussion, I'm not in agreement with your estimates, but even if we did stick to them Sheila had 1 hour and 24 minutes (starting at 3:26).
The police left the grounds of the house at 4:09 and didn't return until 4:52, so your arguments about time are flawed from the outset.
Yes Jeremy is guilty, but your arguments in this thread do not show that, however much you want them to.
-
These are the retractions supporters must provide -
Neville did not call the police. This at least gives them 38 minutes to play with.
Sheila did not shower and change.
Sheila did not burn Neville's back or check for signs of life.
Sheila did not look for and read the bible. It just fell there !
Sheila did not write a suicide note.
After the retractions, these are the leaps of faith the supporters must have -
Sheila was quick in loading, chambering, taking off the silencer and shooting.
Sheila had no hesitation in shooting herself.
Sheila did everything post massacre extremely quickly and efficiently. For some unknown reason.
The massacre commenced within a minute of Neville's call to Bamber.
-
Bamber's remaining two supporters, Mike and Lookout have to -
Say Sheila did not get and read the bible.
Say Sheila did not shower and change.
Say Sheila did not write a suicide note.
Say Neville did not call the police.
Say Sheila did not burn Neville's back.
This leaves them three minutes within the 38 minutes. Providing they take the giant leaps of faith just mentioned. However retracting on these former allegations is devastating for supporters.
Supporters, the ball is in you're court.
-
Bamber's remaining two supporters, Mike and Lookout have to -
Say Sheila did not get and read the bible.
Say Sheila did not shower and change.
Say Sheila did not write a suicide note.
Say Neville did not call the police.
Say Sheila did not burn Neville's back.
This leaves them three minutes within the 38 minutes. Providing they take the giant leaps of faith just mentioned. However retracting on these former allegations is devastating for supporters.
Supporters, the ball is in you're court.
We'll as per our earlier discussion, I'm not in agreement with your estimates, but even if we did stick to them Sheila had 1 hour and 24 minutes (starting at 3:26).
The police left the grounds of the house at 4:09 and didn't return until 4:52, so your arguments about time are flawed from the outset.
Yes Jeremy is guilty, but your arguments in this thread do not show that, however much you want them to.
-
We'll as per our earlier discussion, I'm not in agreement with your estimates, but even if we did stick to them Sheila had 1 hour and 24 minutes (starting at 3:26).
The police left the grounds of the house at 4:09 and didn't return until 4:52, so your arguments about time are flawed from the outset.
Yes Jeremy is guilty, but your arguments in this thread do not show that, however much you want them to.
Oh so the police were outside, but didn't notice the lights going on and off as Sheila had a shower, got changed, burned Neville's back, looked for a pen, paper and bible. A big move of the goal posts here.
Lookout and Mike must retract on the things Sheila is aleged to have done. This means the bible was planted, no suicide note was written and Sheila was clean due to not being involved. And Neville did not call the police.
But how an earth did Neville burn his own back. Three times ?
Once the retractions are made, supporters have to be extremely fortunate that the massacre started a minute after Neville phoned Bamber, and Sheila was very very quick in doing everything, which included shooting herself.
-
Oh so the police were outside, but didn't notice the lights going on and off as Sheila had a shower, got changed, burned Neville's back, looked for a pen, paper and bible. A big move of the goal posts.
Lookout and Mike must retract on the things Sheila is aleged to have done. This means the bible was planted and Sheila was clean due to not being involved. But how an earth did Neville burn his own back. Three times ?
The police were not at the house and the house could not be seen from the end of the lane where their vehicle was parked.
In our made up scenario, Sheila could have used the time between 4:09 and 4:52 had she not already died in the time frame I suggested as plausible earlier today.
Your argument is weak and flawed.
Sometimes you just have to concede that you are mistaken and then move on.
-
The police were not at the house and the house could not be seen from the end of the lane where their vehicle was parked.
In our made up scenario, Sheila could have used the time between 4:09 and 4:52 had she not already died in the time frame I suggested as plausible earlier today.
Your argument is weak and flawed.
Sometimes you just have to concede that you are mistaken and then move on.
Oh no. At first you tried to cut 75 minutes down to 38 or 22.
When that failed you are now saying Sheila was moving around WHF for nearly an hour after the police and Bamber arrived, switching lights off and on. And no one noticed.
However, you can retract the allegations supporters have made. Which cuts down the time by a lot. The problem here being that it shows there was a frame.
-
Oh no. At first you tried to cut 75 minutes down to 38 or 22.
When that failed you are now saying Sheila was moving around WHF for nearly an hour after the police and Bamber arrived, switching lights off and on. And no one noticed.
However, you can retract the allegations supporters have made. Which cuts down the time by a lot. The problem here being that it shows there was a frame.
No Adam, I gave my opinion that the time could be taken as 15-22 minutes, that remains the case, please refer to my earlier posts in this thread. The only things I haven't allowed for is inflicting burn marks to Neville, although I could if I wanted to.
I then noticed that the police backed off from the house and went to the end of the lane at 4:09 and didn't return until 4:52.
Rather than retract other people's claims, I feel I can actually assist them, with the alleged movement witnessed by Bews and Jeremy, they backed off from the house to call backup as they thought somebody was still alive.
In our made up scenario, Sheila may not have committed suicide until 4:52.
That gives over 1h 20m for Sheila to carry out her deeds. We can also gain another 10 mins by starting at Nevilles call to Jeremy at about 3:16.
This alone sinks your argument.
-
The lights situation at WHF is an important question.
If all lights were off, why ? They would have been on when Neville phoned Bamber and Sheila committed the massacre. So why would Sheila turn them all off before she finished doing everything ? According to supporters she still had loads to do.
And how could she read the bible with the lights off ?
If there were lights on, why didn't anyone see Sheila while she was having a shower and moving around WHF ?
-
Was the main bedroom light on or off ?
The last thing Sheila would do before shooting herself, would be to read the bible. Did she turn the lights on to do this, then turn them off ? If so, did no one notice ?
Or were the main bedroom lights permanently on ? Bews said in a documentary, all lights were off upon arrival.
-
Was the main bedroom light on or off ?
The last thing Sheila would do before shooting herself, would be to read the bible. Did she turn the lights on to do this, then turn them off ? If so, did no one notice ?
Or were the main bedroom lights permanently on ? Bews said in a documentary, all lights were off upon arrival.
There are conflicting accounts by different police officers regarding which lights were on or off.
Have a look at their statements.
-
I might do that.
Have a good night.
ADAM, you do my head in!! You blow your own trumpet continiously. I skip through your threads and posts as i find them completely condescending. .
what you do is desperately try and make supporters say you are right and that we agree with you. Not a chance in hell. In fact hell would freeze over before i agreed with you because you for some really sad reason it seems that is what you want more than anything.
-
Why was my post to Harters removed saying -
'I might do that. Have a good night'
Weird.
-
Why was my post to Harters removed saying -
'I might do that. Have a good night'
Weird.
I removed a few posts which were irrelevant to the discussion, yours happened to be one of them.
As at present I am the only mod and have many things to do away from the forum, I cannot always keep on to p of it all but we do try to keep the thrreads on topic as much as possible.
This helps members and guests reading about the case as it isn't interrupted with personal chats, arguments etc. It was not in anyway personal.
Hope that helps.