Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on May 09, 2011, 08:49:PM
-
The Secret Land deal - relatives did not want anyone to find out about?
At time of shootings and deaths of family, the Eaton's were at risk of losing the farm to Jeremy as part of Ralph Bambers estate - this secret land deal was not even included in Ralph Bambers estate, which raises a huge question mark over the Eatons, and the executor of the estate(s) Basil John Cock?
-
hmm the plot thickens.
-
Haven´t the families been fighting over land and money ever since?
Stray thought: I think it is strange that Ann Eaton moved into WHF with her family - and that very soon after the murders. It is also strange that she behaved as if she owned the place even before Jeremy was prosecuted. Almost as if he didn´t exist.
-
Haven´t the families been fighting over land and money ever since?
Stray thought: I think it is strange that Ann Eaton moved into WHF with her family - and that very soon after the murders. It is also strange that she behaved as if she owned the place even before Jeremy was prosecuted. Almost as if he didn´t exist.
Abs there would not be a thing in the world to make me want to move into WHF after the slaughter that took place, mind you I would crap myself if saw a spook.
-
I've read on here that Ann Eaton and her family didn't move into WHF for quite some time, but I understand that they actually moved in quicky, ostensibly to secure the tenancy? Her children suffered nightmares. I've always had a big problem with that.
-
It looks like a wonderful house in beautiful surroundings; but I don´t think I could live there either.
I read that prior owners died tragically too - a place full of negative energies, if you believe in that sort of thing.
And the kids´ nightmares, ugh, no wonder; they have known all along what went down there!
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
When is he supposed to have said that?
-
cant remember, i dont even remember where i read it, but i did read it somewhere.
-
It looks like a wonderful house in beautiful surroundings; but I don´t think I could live there either.
I read that prior owners died tragically too - a place full of negative energies, if you believe in that sort of thing.
And the kids´ nightmares, ugh, no wonder; they have known all along what went down there!
Ann Eaton gave Jeremy a guided tour of the house [don,t know why]. She apparently knew where everyone died. Did she choose the childrens bedroom to sleep in, or the master bedroom where June died. Could they not have rented the place out.
-
God, that's awful. And I do believe in negative energy, actually, and the fact that it can be dispersed. That beautiful farm house should have been demolished, but I guess it's listed. And the greedy rellies were too eager to get their mitts on it.
-
as AE gave jb a guided tour of the house she also had to show him who died in which room, why did she feel the need to do that if she thought he was guilty anyway? when it came to going into sheilas room she said his came out on stalks and he looked terrified.
-
What came out on stalks, Princess? I hope it was his eyes!
-
God, that's awful. And I do believe in negative energy, actually, and the fact that it can be dispersed. That beautiful farm house should have been demolished, but I guess it's listed. And the greedy rellies were too eager to get their mitts on it.
It should have been pulled down, but think about the money.Boutflours money.
If I had been in that situation I would have had the farm raized to the ground, but then again I am not a greedy person [not too much anyway]
-
What came out on stalks, Princess? I hope it was his eyes!
ooops!!! yes shona, his eyes, im doing that alot lately, missing words out :-[
-
I've read on here that Ann Eaton and her family didn't move into WHF for quite some time, but I understand that they actually moved in quicky, ostensibly to secure the tenancy? Her children suffered nightmares. I've always had a big problem with that.
No they didn't. They moved in just before the COLP investigation in 1991, following talks with the charity who owns the property and farmland.
-
Hallo, Hartley. There is so much conflicting stuff on here. I could kick myself for asking you this, but are you sure?
-
What came out on stalks, Princess? I hope it was his eyes!
ooops!!! yes shona, his eyes, im doing that alot lately, missing words out :-[
I get senior moments Andrea. Not that I am implying You are a senior person. Just had a birthday did,nt you. Spring chicken.
-
Hallo, Hartley. There is so much conflicting stuff on here. I could kick myself for asking you this, but are you sure?
i was always under the impression that the family moved in quickly too, bit of research needed me thinks ;)
-
Hallo, Hartley. There is so much conflicting stuff on here. I could kick myself for asking you this, but are you sure?
Yes absolutely certain. Mike also knows this to be the case.
-
i have cliff,im now the grand old age of 41 :'(
-
I knew I shouldn't have listened to Diane Keen!! It's interesting what she says about the lightshade, though.
-
about it being hard to replace shona? and wasnt ae interviewed at whf by diane keen?
-
Hallo, Hartley. There is so much conflicting stuff on here. I could kick myself for asking you this, but are you sure?
Yes absolutely certain. Mike also knows this to be the case.
Hartley, the fact that they moved in beggers belief. Again nice to see you crossing swords again.
-
God, that's awful. And I do believe in negative energy, actually, and the fact that it can be dispersed. That beautiful farm house should have been demolished, but I guess it's listed. And the greedy rellies were too eager to get their mitts on it.
No one wants to buy the house I grew up in in Iceland anymore.
It was brand new when I was born and my family moved into it. My parents divorced when I was one year old, my father committed suicide. My mother rented one floor of the house to a couple who had three children while living there; the two youngest were born with muscular dystrophy and became increasingly handicapped and both died as young teenagers.
My mother sold the house. The family that moved in hade some kids, the youngest three years old. One morning he got up earlier than the rest of the family. He played with a lighter and something caught fire. He hid in a kitchen cupboard. The family woke up to a blazing fire, but couldn´t find the little boy. He was later found dead in the cupboard.
After that no one would come near that house! The town bought it and it is now a............... kindergarten....!
One of those houses....... I liked it though! Guess I was lucky nothing happened to me! :-\
-
Yes, Andy, that's right. I'm going outside now, I might be some time............ not really, I'm just walking the dogs etc. I hope you're still here in half an hour. Hugs.
-
i have cliff,im now the grand old age of 41 :'(
I told you Spring chicken.
-
as AE gave jb a guided tour of the house she also had to show him who died in which room, why did she feel the need to do that if she thought he was guilty anyway? when it came to going into sheilas room she said his came out on stalks and he looked terrified.
She was probably checking his reactions. EP nicknamed her "Miss Marple."
-
Yes, Andy, that's right. I'm going outside now, I might be some time............ not really, I'm just walking the dogs etc. I hope you're still here in half an hour. Hugs.
i may be on and off during the night shona, depends how long i can stand the stench of my sons feet!!! oh my word theyre terrible :P
-
i have cliff,im now the grand old age of 41 :'(
I told you Spring chicken.
oh how i wish cliff :)
-
It was going to be turned into a bed & breakfast if they didn't.
Vaulty Manor opposite the caravan park was sold and the owners tastefully advertised it as a wedding venue once owned by a mass murderers family. The relatives didn't want the same happening with whf turning into a macabre tourist attraction.
That's what I understand anyway.
-
as AE gave jb a guided tour of the house she also had to show him who died in which room, why did she feel the need to do that if she thought he was guilty anyway? when it came to going into sheilas room she said his came out on stalks and he looked terrified.
She was probably checking his reactions. EP nicknamed her "Miss Marple."
She was trying to scare the shit out of him.Seems to have worked. How can she have casually walked around the house. This is where your dad died , this is where your mum died. this is where the twins died, Oh and Sheila was here with her mum.
Who,s heartless.
-
+1 cliff, couldnt agree more
-
+1 cliff, couldnt agree more
Take +1 for your 41st.
-
as AE gave jb a guided tour of the house she also had to show him who died in which room, why did she feel the need to do that if she thought he was guilty anyway? when it came to going into sheilas room she said his came out on stalks and he looked terrified.
She was probably checking his reactions. EP nicknamed her "Miss Marple."
She was trying to scare the shit out of him.Seems to have worked. How can she have casually walked around the house. This is where your dad died , this is where your mum died. this is where the twins died, Oh and Sheila was here with her mum.
Who,s heartless.
Odd behaviour! Also the fact that she removed so many things from the farmhouse - without asking anyone for permission.
When Jeremy, on that "guided tour", noticed and remarked that a lot of things were missing, paintings, china, things like that, AE would say, "Oh, but June always said she wanted me to have that."
There was another thing Jeremy supposedly noticed missing, and that was his Father's wallet. This is something I read, and have no idea if this is true. But he supposedly called the police and reported the wallet stolen, and which he claimed had contained several hundred pounds (how would Jeremy know that, BTW?). Have you heard about this incident?
-
Abs, what a heartless bitch I must have seemed, jumping in with my crap after your post about your house. I'm so sorry. What a terrible story. And you're such a sunny little duck.................
-
i have read something about a wallet yes, will have to look in one of the books and see if i can find more on it.
the familiy's behaviour is very odd, they didnt sound or seem that upsaet did they? they were only interested in the money, the very same thing they accused jb of. jb had to be perscribed tranqulisers from his dr.
-
And Andy (if only I could do the quote thing) bicarbonate of soda. Or amputation.
-
Abs, what a heartless bitch I must have seemed, jumping in with my crap after your post about your house. I'm so sorry. What a terrible story. And you're such a sunny little duck.................
Haha, yeah, you heartless bitch! Don´t worry, just kidding - I didn´t think about it! People are talking, and it just takes off in different directions. Happens all the time.
-
And Andy (if only I could do the quote thing) bicarbonate of soda. Or amputation.
amputation!!!!
-
where do you live now abs?
-
where do you live now abs?
Copenhagen, Denmark.
-
your english is excellent
-
your english is excellent
Thanks Andrea - but I know I make mistakes.
-
Is this the same secret land deal which was mentioned in COLP's Dickinson Report and in the 2002 Appeal Judgement?
-
Is this the same secret land deal which was mentioned in COLP's Dickinson Report and in the 2002 Appeal Judgement?
No, I don't think it can be as Mike told me the following:
"Jeremy told me about the argument which Ralph and Peter Eaton had just before the time of the shootings, over a loan connected with the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton lived on. This loan was monies which Ralph Bamber paid on behalf of the Eatons, to a university. Eaton and Ralph Bamber came to blows and Ralph ended up with a black eye..."
Jeremy knew about this episode, so it can't be the same as this latest secret land deal that's come to light.
-
It's a mighty coincidence then, two land deals at the same time between the same people, yet neither are mentioned in the same breath.
It doesn't really matter though even if there was a second deal, the first had already highlighted the Eatons finances.
-
When Jeremy, on that "guided tour", noticed and remarked that a lot of things were missing, paintings, china, things like that, AE would say, "Oh, but June always said she wanted me to have that."
So AE was nicking significant amounts of stuff from the house before the wills were read? Where does this info come from abs?
-
When Jeremy, on that "guided tour", noticed and remarked that a lot of things were missing, paintings, china, things like that, AE would say, "Oh, but June always said she wanted me to have that."
So AE was nicking significant amounts of stuff from the house before the wills were read? Where does this info come from abs?
I think it was David Shaw´s book.
-
was the david shaw thing actually made into a book? because ive looked ont the net for it and cant find a thing, only something called over the edge, and i think that was about athletes and roids abuse
-
was the david shaw thing actually made into a book? because ive looked ont the net for it and cant find a thing, only something called over the edge, and i think that was about athletes and roids abuse
I am reading it oof and on online. Don´t have the link right now, I have it on another computer. It is on the forum somewhere, don´t remember where.
-
i thought that was just extracts from each chapter?
-
was the david shaw thing actually made into a book? because ive looked ont the net for it and cant find a thing, only something called over the edge, and i think that was about athletes and roids abuse
It's on the Sleuthing for Justice site.
-
was the david shaw thing actually made into a book? because ive looked ont the net for it and cant find a thing, only something called over the edge, and i think that was about athletes and roids abuse
It's on the Sleuthing for Justice site.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jP4ZtW5Off0J:www.sleuthingforjustice.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php%3Ff%3D74%26t%3D2445+Barbara+Wi
-
thanks jon :)
-
i thought that was just extracts from each chapter?
I don´t know - it doesn´t seem so when reading it though. It is quite lengthy, but I am not sure the whole "book" is there.
It is slanted towards Jeremy-innocent; but I´ve gotten information I didn´t know about. I am not yet at the trial. Have read here that part is very interesting.
-
When Jeremy, on that "guided tour", noticed and remarked that a lot of things were missing, paintings, china, things like that, AE would say, "Oh, but June always said she wanted me to have that."
So AE was nicking significant amounts of stuff from the house before the wills were read? Where does this info come from abs?
Well the items were family heirlooms...Jeremy's best effort was to have everything packed off to Sothebys so you get an idea of what he thought of family treasures. It all fits into place quite nicely actually.
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
-
no he wasnt, hence they couldnt wait to stick him in it.
-
I wonder if anyone has a link to Barbara Wilson's full statement? I'd be grateful for a link to this if anyone has one. Thanks.
-
cant help you there keira, sorry, im not very computer savvy :)
anyway im off to bed, night x
-
cant help you there keira, sorry, im not very computer savvy :)
anyway im off to bed, night x
Night, Andrea!
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
Exactly John. Best create some evidence to frame him for 5 murders then,so he cannot claim any "family" inheritance! ;)
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
Exactly John. Best create some evidence to frame him for 5 murders then,so he cannot claim any "family" inheritance! ;)
But the phone call from Neville is what puts him in the frame, IMO. The relatives had nothing to do with that, or did they........
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
By law he was - the Bs and Es couldn´t just make their own laws.
It saddens me every time I see this attitude towards adopted children.
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
Exactly John. Best create some evidence to frame him for 5 murders then,so he cannot claim any "family" inheritance! ;)
But the phone call from Neville is what puts him in the frame, IMO. The relatives had nothing to do with that, or did they........
I agree the alleged phone call to JB is a sticking point,but not altogether impossible that Ralph was forced to make that call. If only the unidentified marks on Ralphs back could be explained? I dont mean to be gory,but I wish that we could take a look at them.
-
Regarding the alleged phone call from Ralph to JB.Could be that it simply was all part of JBs plan to frame Sheila.Or it is possible that Ralph was made to make that call.In that scenario its possible that somebody wanted JB at the farm in order to be killed aswell,or somebody wanted him at the farm to be caught there by the police and deemed as a suspect.The more I dig deeper into this family,the more I realise that anything - in fact - is possible.
-
Lady Chelmsey
The more you read the more you get suspicious of the family have you ever seen the video of David Boutflour coming out of court after JBs conviction saying
We are all losers here
I think he must of been followed by Julie Mugford
Really both losers with what they got out of JB s conviction
Apparently mugford agreed to identify the twins bodies because the relatives couldn't tell one from the other I have no idea if that is true but if it is it shows what a CLOSE family they were
-
Regarding the alleged phone call from Ralph to JB.Could be that it simply was all part of JBs plan to frame Sheila.Or it is possible that Ralph was made to make that call.In that scenario its possible that somebody wanted JB at the farm in order to be killed aswell,or somebody wanted him at the farm to be caught there by the police and deemed as a suspect.The more I dig deeper into this family,the more I realise that anything - in fact - is possible.
But probably not this scenario.
The killer stumbled upon a loaded gun left by JB, they would have had their own,if nothing to do with JB.
Big risk getting Neville to use the words that he used, in the phone call to Jeremy.
The killer left no signs of break in/out, Jeremy would have had to let the murderer know how to do this.
The circles on the back are a very minor injury, and could well be as a result of a weapon already having been fired. Highly unlikely to be able to force Neville to do anything if the family are already shot.
The circles could be the result of something completely un-connected, they're certainly not torture inflicted, as they just aren't going to give pain.
-
Paulg...........you are quite right.The loaded gun really does seem to be the "loaded gun" in this case.According to people that knew Ralph well,he was meticulous about his firearms being put back where they were supposed to be kept.It has always concerned me that intially JB said he left the gun on the kitchen table,yet years later it has changed to being left on the settle in the scullery.Am I wrong in thinking that Ralphs office is just a few steps from the scullery.I imagine he could have been to his office at least once that evening,surely he would have put the rifle away and unloaded it due to the twins being around.Its all rather odd to say the least.
-
Lady Chelmsey
The more you read the more you get suspicious of the family have you ever seen the video of David Boutflour coming out of court after JBs conviction sayingWe are all losers here
I think he must of been followed by Julie Mugford
Really both losers with what they got out of JB s conviction
Apparently mugford agreed to identify the twins bodies because the relatives couldn't tell one from the other I have no idea if that is true but if it is it shows what a CLOSE family they were
I remember his smirk.
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
By law he was - the Bs and Es couldn´t just make their own laws.
It saddens me every time I see this attitude towards adopted children.
I'm going to share something with everyone here...
I have the exact same scenario in my own family abs, with an adopted child who will inherit a substantial part of the family estates so I can empathise with the relations. This is probably one reason why I was drawn to the case in the first place. As a child growing up I listened to my own parents deride the arrangement over many years, I have watched the whole debacle unfold before me and ultimately polarise the family just like as in the Bamber family.
I agree that adoption is a wonderful thing but only if undertaken for all the right reasons.
I also don't agree that the comment by Nevill about bringing children into this world didn't apply to Jeremy. This is a figure of speech, a well known saying that I have heard many times within my own family. I am quite sure it was aimed at Jeremy.
The punch by Peter Eaton has also been blown out of all proportion. So what if Peter was angry and had a quick temper...he didn't beat Nevill up for Gods sake! Jackie's comment to the effect that Peter could kill him is just typical Jackie, exaggeration being her forté.
-
Lady Chelmsey
Apparently mugford agreed to identify the twins bodies because the relatives couldn't tell one from the other I have no idea if that is true but if it is it shows what a CLOSE family they were
You really should hear yourself Jackie. Isn't it quite obvious that the family couldn't bring themselves to identify the twins...it does say a lot for Julie however that she was strong enough to do it.
Every time you attempt to deride Julie you simply boost her appeal.
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
By law he was - the Bs and Es couldn´t just make their own laws.
It saddens me every time I see this attitude towards adopted children.
I'm going to share something with everyone here...
I have the exact same scenario in my own family abs, with an adopted child who will inherit a substantial part of the family estates so I can empathise with the relations. This is probably one reason why I was drawn to the case in the first place. As a child growing up I listened to my own parents deride the arrangement over many years, I have watched the whole debacle unfold before me and ultimately polarise the family just like as in the Bamber family.
I agree that adoption is a wonderful thing but only if undertaken for all the right reasons.
I also don't agree that the comment by Nevill about bringing children into this world didn't apply to Jeremy. This is a figure of speech, a well known saying that I have heard many times within my own family. I am quite sure it was aimed at Jeremy.
The punch by Peter Eaton has also been blown out of all proportion. So what if Peter was angry and had a quick temper...he didn't beat Nevill up for Gods sake! Jackie's comment to the effect that Peter could kill him is just typical Jackie, exaggeration being her forté.
I don´t understand that way of thinking. Those adopted children have nowhere else to go, they have been in a family from infancy in most cases.
We have two adopted children in my family. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE thinks of them as anything but belonging to the FAMILY 100%.
So you seriously think that adopted children should have no right to inherit???
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
By law he was - the Bs and Es couldn´t just make their own laws.
It saddens me every time I see this attitude towards adopted children.
I'm going to share something with everyone here...
I have the exact same scenario in my own family abs, with an adopted child who will inherit a substantial part of the family estates so I can empathise with the relations. This is probably one reason why I was drawn to the case in the first place. As a child growing up I listened to my own parents deride the arrangement over many years, I have watched the whole debacle unfold before me and ultimately polarise the family just like as in the Bamber family.
I agree that adoption is a wonderful thing but only if undertaken for all the right reasons.
I also don't agree that the comment by Nevill about bringing children into this world didn't apply to Jeremy. This is a figure of speech, a well known saying that I have heard many times within my own family. I am quite sure it was aimed at Jeremy.
The punch by Peter Eaton has also been blown out of all proportion. So what if Peter was angry and had a quick temper...he didn't beat Nevill up for Gods sake! Jackie's comment to the effect that Peter could kill him is just typical Jackie, exaggeration being her forté.
I don´t understand that way of thinking. Those adopted children have nowhere else to go, they have been in a family from infancy in most cases.
We have two adopted children in my family. NO ONE, and I mean NO ONE thinks of them as anything but belonging to the FAMILY 100%.
So you seriously think that adopted children should have no right to inherit???
You have to understand the old way of thinking abs which is still very prevalent even today. There was a time when an adopted or illegitimate child could not automatically by right inherit from their fathers estate. Even today, heritable titles are not passed on to illegitimate or adopted children.
To give you a simple example, if the Queen and Prince Philip had adopted a child before Charlie boy was born, that child would never become the monarch.
-
Family heirlooms that would go to Jeremy!!!
He wasn't considered family by the Boutflours and Eatons lovey!
By law he was - the Bs and Es couldn´t just make their own laws.
It saddens me every time I see this attitude towards adopted children.
I'm going to share something with everyone here...
I have the exact same scenario in my own family abs, with an adopted child who will inherit a substantial part of the family estates so I can empathise with the relations. This is probably one reason why I was drawn to the case in the first place. As a child growing up I listened to my own parents deride the arrangement over many years, I have watched the whole debacle unfold before me and ultimately polarise the family just like as in the Bamber family.
I agree that adoption is a wonderful thing but only if undertaken for all the right reasons.
I also don't agree that the comment by Nevill about bringing children into this world didn't apply to Jeremy. This is a figure of speech, a well known saying that I have heard many times within my own family. I am quite sure it was aimed at Jeremy.
The punch by Peter Eaton has also been blown out of all proportion. So what if Peter was angry and had a quick temper...he didn't beat Nevill up for Gods sake! Jackie's comment to the effect that Peter could kill him is just typical Jackie, exaggeration being her forté.
Now we know where you are coming from John. You were jealous of the cuckoo, as you said this what drew you to the case.
Neville did not bring any children into this world, he could June could not.
How do you know how many times Peter hit Neville, you are implying it was one punch yet it could have been an all out assault.
Tell me John as a young man would you have beat a 62 year old man. I hope you can answer no.
-
Now we know where you are coming from John. You were jealous of the cuckoo, as you said this what drew you to the case.
Neville did not bring any children into this world, he could June could not.
How do you know how many times Peter hit Neville, you are implying it was one punch yet it could have been an all out assault.
Tell me John as a young man would you have beat a 62 year old man. I hope you can answer no.
Apparently you cannot read and your response is most certainly disingenuous and to be expected of a Bamber supporter.
Nevill probably deserved the punch in the eye or he would have taken it further...oops forgot, he had a secret deal with Peter behind June's back didn't he?
I wonder how he explained that one away to the family?
-
Now we know where you are coming from John. You were jealous of the cuckoo, as you said this what drew you to the case.
Neville did not bring any children into this world, he could June could not.
How do you know how many times Peter hit Neville, you are implying it was one punch yet it could have been an all out assault.
Tell me John as a young man would you have beat a 62 year old man. I hope you can answer no.
Apparently you cannot read and your response is most certainly disingenuous and to be expected of a Bamber supporter.
Nevill probably deserved the punch in the eye or he would have taken it further...oops forgot, he had a secret deal with Peter behind June's back didn't he?
I wonder how he explained that one away to the family?
John to be clear I am NOT a Bamber supporter. As I have always stated I am a fence sitter.
Now you tell me how you came to the conclusion that Nevill deserved the punch in the eye. As you already know Nevill tried to keep things in house, that is why he did not take it further.
I ask you again would you as a young man assault a man of 62. Please answer honestly.
-
i though you had changed to innocent cliff? :) i was on the fence for ages, but them splinters were murder ;)
-
i though you had changed to innocent cliff? :) i was on the fence for ages, but them splinters were murder ;)
Nah Andrea I have always been a fence sitter, but did admit my bum sliding towards JB. To be honest I think he is innocent, but I am sure even you are not certain.
More to the point I asked John a question a while ago. I shall refresh his memory.
John as a young man would you have assaulted a man of 62. Honest answer PLEASE.
-
looks like youre not going to get your answer cliff ;)
-
More to the point I asked John a question a while ago. I shall refresh his memory.
John as a young man would you have assaulted a man of 62. Honest answer PLEASE.
I answered you ages ago Cliff...do keep up!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,831.msg22728.html#msg22728
-
John how dare you say Neville deserved it you really shouldn't be walking the streets. The longer you are on this forum the nastier you get. It's disgusting the stuff you come out with who are you to judge Neville.
I hope everything I have heard about you is true it couldn't have happened to a nicer person.
I wish I had been there to see it.
Your obsessional hatred of JB is unnatural thank god I have never come across someone so vile in my life
It was an absolute pleasure to see you put in your place today
-
How dare you Jackie!
Dream on Jackie, it would take a better player to do that luvey. Some anonymous numpty who thinks he is jack the lad with a pea shooter...what an idiot! :)
It is quite true about Nevill, he probably did the dirty on Peter in some way and he got a black eye for his trouble. It's not rocket science!
But then again you don't understand logic and the facts do you Jackie? Do you ever answer questions Jackie or it your life's quest to ask stupid ones?
What about that date in Tolleshunt D'Arcy Jackie, is the Queens Head still on or would you feel intimidated?
-
Please, please don't lets blacken the character of a man who it would appear died while trying to save his family. I'm sure that John didn't mean that Ralph deserved what happened to him.
-
Please, please don't lets blacken the character of a man who it would appear died while trying to save his family. I'm sure that John didn't mean that Ralph deserved what happened to him.
Sorry if I misled Shona, my remark relates to the black eye and not the murder.
-
It's cool, John. Maybe we're all getting a bit twitchy because we've reached stalemate. We're waiting for something to happen.
-
Possibly, off now, catch you later!
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
-
Jackie, you're a lucky, lucky girl. I hope that you touched wood and whistled.
-
Jackie, you're a lucky, lucky girl. I hope that you touched wood and whistled.
Are you using "wood" in a naughty way Pugsy? ;D
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
Jackie you have an unnatural obsession in relation to who people are and how many tweets and letters they get.
Who cares because I couldn't care less who you are or about Jeremy Bamber! Your continual spouting of rubbish is indicative of what this case is all about and how hopeless it all is. Jeremy means absolutely nothing to me Jackie, you can obsess as much as you want about him but it isn't going to change anything. I feel sorry for you and the other no hoper's.... ;)
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
Jackie you have an unnatural obsession in relation to who people are and how many tweets and letters they get.
Who cares because I couldn't care less who you are or about Jeremy Bamber! Your continual spouting of rubbish is indicative of what this case is all about and how hopeless it all is. Jeremy means absolutely nothing to me Jackie, you can obsess as much as you want about him but it isn't going to change anything. I feel sorry for you and the other no hoper's.... ;)
To be fair John, you must care something about Jeremy Bamber (one way or another) or you wouldn't be posting on this forum :D
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
Jackie you have an unnatural obsession in relation to who people are and how many tweets and letters they get.
Who cares because I couldn't care less who you are or about Jeremy Bamber! Your continual spouting of rubbish is indicative of what this case is all about and how hopeless it all is. Jeremy means absolutely nothing to me Jackie, you can obsess as much as you want about him but it isn't going to change anything. I feel sorry for you and the other no hoper's.... ;)
Ngb smarter? ...what sort of a dick holds ammo in his hand when firing a rifle??? ;D ;D ;D
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
Jackie you have an unnatural obsession in relation to who people are and how many tweets and letters they get.
Who cares because I couldn't care less who you are or about Jeremy Bamber! Your continual spouting of rubbish is indicative of what this case is all about and how hopeless it all is. Jeremy means absolutely nothing to me Jackie, you can obsess as much as you want about him but it isn't going to change anything. I feel sorry for you and the other no hoper's.... ;)
To be fair John, you must care something about Jeremy Bamber (one way or another) or you wouldn't be posting on this forum :D
I care about justice for Sheila and her family, not for a murderer.
-
Don't feel sorry for me John I don't say vile evil things about someone who is dead and never really appeared to do anything bad in his life
You said you thought he deserved being violently punched
I hope you get what you deserve
Better get off to bed now to read up on books about guns
-
I care about any single person who might be innocent and be in prison that is why I am looking at a number of other cases at the moment.
I will fight in any way I can to make our justice system fairer and applaud the law students who demonstrated they thought documents in JB s case were being witheld unfairly
Things will continue to change and improve
-
I care about any single person who might be innocent and be in prison that is why I am looking at a number of other cases at the moment.
I will fight in any way I can to make our justice system fairer and applaud the law students who demonstrated they thought documents in JB s case were being witheld unfairly
Things will continue to change and improve
I don't always agree with you Jackie but +1 for this sentiment :)
-
Thanks Bob and if you don't see me on here again you know where to start looking for the body
-
I care about any single person who might be innocent and be in prison that is why I am looking at a number of other cases at the moment.
I will fight in any way I can to make our justice system fairer and applaud the law students who demonstrated they thought documents in JB s case were being witheld unfairly
Things will continue to change and improve
+1 Jackie. Very well said.
-
Thanks Bob and if you don't see me on here again you know where to start looking for the body
It's the end of justice in this country if we start burying the dissenters!
-
Don't feel sorry for me John I don't say vile evil things about someone who is dead and never really appeared to do anything bad in his life
You said you thought he deserved being violently punched
I hope you get what you deserve
Better get off to bed now to read up on books about guns
You have a queer comprehension of the terms vile and evil Jackie. Remind me, what is it you have been posting about the Pargeter's, Eaton's and Boutflour's for weeks now? Are you by any chance jealous of this family Jackie?
For someone who boasts about not speaking ill of the dead you have a very short memory as you have done nothing but criticise Robert Boutflour. They do say people in glass houses should not throw stones Mrs Preece.
-
So the punch is only stated by David Shaw, yet it's being quoted as fact, and now being described as a violent punch, not sure what the difference is?
Maybe Neville did deserve it, if it occurred, we just don't know, conclusions are being jumped to based on preconceptions.
JB selling photos of Bambi is stated in newspaper articles, seems to me that is as strong if not a stronger source than an article penned by a vocal JB supporter.
-
John intimidated by you never
You have no idea who I am but I know all about you
I find it hilarious that you are doing your best to frighten people you are what you are and that's why your life has turned out the way it has
My life is wonderful I don't have a single thing to complain about
Your obsession about JB (he gets about 100 letters a week from girls)is abnormal
And now you are acting the same about Ngb because he is smarter than you
You need to get some professional help and soon
Jackie you have an unnatural obsession in relation to who people are and how many tweets and letters they get.
Who cares because I couldn't care less who you are or about Jeremy Bamber! Your continual spouting of rubbish is indicative of what this case is all about and how hopeless it all is. Jeremy means absolutely nothing to me Jackie, you can obsess as much as you want about him but it isn't going to change anything. I feel sorry for you and the other no hoper's.... ;)
To be fair John, you must care something about Jeremy Bamber (one way or another) or you wouldn't be posting on this forum :D
I care about justice for Sheila and her family, not for a murderer.
------------------
What if Sheila was the murderess?
-
So the punch is only stated by David Shaw, yet it's being quoted as fact, and now being described as a violent punch, not sure what the difference is?
Maybe Neville did deserve it, if it occurred, we just don't know, conclusions are being jumped to based on preconceptions.
JB selling photos of Bambi is stated in newspaper articles, seems to me that is as strong if not a stronger source than an article penned by a vocal JB supporter.
---------------------
seems to me, that because the Eatons owed such a vast amount of monies to the Bamber estate, they did everything imaginable to conceal the truth about this from the police at the time of the origibnal investigations, and they were anxious that Jeremy did not get wind of it - or they knew that if he did, they would have had very serious financial problems and may have ended up having to sell the farm (Oak) to pay the debt back to the bamber estate...
Seems to me...
They went out of their way to conceal the truth about these matters from everyone, whilst at the same time going out of their way to try and paint Jeremy in a poor light...
If necessary, I will post the details of the Bamber estates to show that the monies borrowed from Ralph Bamber were deliberately and willfully omitted from the official estates...
-
It wasn't hard, Jeremy by his actions did that all on his own.
-
It wasn't hard, Jeremy by his actions did that all on his own.
-----------------------
the actions you are referring to were described by the relatives to the police,. and are not accepted by Jeremy as having occurred in the way the relatives have sought to describe them - on the other hand, the relatives concealed the fact that they owed the Bamber estates hundreds of thousands of pounds at the time of the deaths. These monies, were not declared as part of the Bamber estates when they were calculated...
Now if that ain't one big deception, then I do not know what is?
Lets get the facts right, there were substantial loans of cash for two separate families of relatives, made by Ralph Bamber - (1) the Pargeters, and (2) the Eatons...
At the time of the deaths, these relatives stood to benefit by a vast amount of money irrespective of anything they might be entitled to as a result of any will...
-
Not only did the relatives line their own pockets with monies loaned to them by Ralph Bamber, which was not declared as part of Ralph Bambers estate, but when these relatives started their campaign to implicate Jeremy, they did not tell the police about the deceptions they were engaged in, and when they turned up at the trial they did not tell the court before whom they all testified as part of the prosecutions case, that they had all diddled Ralph Bambers estate of hundreds of thousands of pounds...
-
I will be posting details of the Ralph Bamber estate very shortly, with a view to substantiating everything I am saying...
-
the actions you are referring to were described by the relatives to the police,. and are not accepted by Jeremy as having occurred in the way the relatives have sought to describe them -
He would say that wouldn't he?
-
the actions you are referring to were described by the relatives to the police,. and are not accepted by Jeremy as having occurred in the way the relatives have sought to describe them -
He would say that wouldn't he?
----------------
and the relatives would say what they did say wouldn't they?
Concealing for the fact that the relatives owed Ralph Bambers estate hundreds of thousands of pounds, is nothing really is it? They kept these details secret from Essex police, and from the court when they all testified - the truth did not come out until COLP saw Peter Eaton and interviewed him, in 1991...
I don't believe anything at all the relatives said or say, they had their own script to work towards, and they pulled it off big time...
Jeremy's account is much more believable than the relatives version of events, regarding why he was getting valuable items valued, and the odd occasion he went out for a meal, and a holiday...
If anyone intended to pull off a financial scam in this case, it was the relatives...
Getting him convicted was the biggest scam of all, because it guaranteed them everything in both of the Bamber parents estates...
-
Imagine that, it must have been akin to a game show for the relatives, playing their parts with a view to getting their hands on the Bambers estate, if they helped to get Jeremy convicted for the murders...
-
the actions you are referring to were described by the relatives to the police,. and are not accepted by Jeremy as having occurred in the way the relatives have sought to describe them -
He would say that wouldn't he?
----------------
and the relatives would say what they did say wouldn't they?
Concealing for the fact that the relatives owed Ralph Bambers estate hundreds of thousands of pounds, is nothing really is it? They kept these details secret from Essex police, and from the court when they all testified - the truth did not come out until COLP saw Peter Eaton and interviewed him, in 1991...
I don't believe anything at all the relatives said or say, they had their own script to work towards, and they pulled it off big time...
Jeremy's account is much more believable than the relatives version of events, regarding why he was getting valuable items valued, and the odd occasion he went out for a meal, and a holiday...
If anyone intended to pull off a financial scam in this case, it was the relatives...
Getting him convicted was the biggest scam of all, because it guaranteed them everything in both of the Bamber parents estates...
According to Boutflour he blew the money anyway. Very thrifty.
-
The serious money problems the relatives had would surely have had an enormous bearing on the case considering the smoking gun silencer was found and mishandled by the relatives.
if I had been in that position and thought somebody had murdered some of my family I would have as carefully as possible passed it on to the police straightway everyone has known for years how easy it is to contaminate evidence.
-
the actions you are referring to were described by the relatives to the police,. and are not accepted by Jeremy as having occurred in the way the relatives have sought to describe them -
He would say that wouldn't he?
----------------
and the relatives would say what they did say wouldn't they?
Concealing for the fact that the relatives owed Ralph Bambers estate hundreds of thousands of pounds, is nothing really is it? They kept these details secret from Essex police, and from the court when they all testified - the truth did not come out until COLP saw Peter Eaton and interviewed him, in 1991...
I don't believe anything at all the relatives said or say, they had their own script to work towards, and they pulled it off big time...
Jeremy's account is much more believable than the relatives version of events, regarding why he was getting valuable items valued, and the odd occasion he went out for a meal, and a holiday...
If anyone intended to pull off a financial scam in this case, it was the relatives...
Getting him convicted was the biggest scam of all, because it guaranteed them everything in both of the Bamber parents estates...
If this money which was owed to Nevill Bamber was undeclared as part of the estate, was there an unpaid Inheritance Tax issue?
It may be that this tax was paid at a later date, once the debts were acknowledged, but if not, then is there still an outstanding Inheritance Tax liability?
Inheritance Tax was introduced during March 1986, so the estate might have escaped liability for these sums during 1985, however, on the assumption that the estate passed to the extended family once Bamber was found guilty, then would 1986 not have become the period of accountability, not 1985 when the family died?
Apologies if anyone has already mentioned this.
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
Hmm, perhaps I'd better go there. Perhaps she might tell me something different? ::) If that was so why didn't she tell him what actually happened? ;)
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
Hmm, perhaps I'd better go there. Perhaps she might tell me something different? ::) If that was so why didn't she tell him what actually happened? ;)
I can´t imagine why you would want your children to grow up where five members of your own family was wiped out! I can´t imagine you wanting to live there!
Warped.
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
Hmm, perhaps I'd better go there. Perhaps she might tell me something different? ::) If that was so why didn't she tell him what actually happened? ;)
I can´t imagine why you would want your children to grow up where five members of your own family was wiped out! I can´t imagine you wanting to live there!
Warped.
;D no I wasn't saying that. I was just wondering what the "ghost of Sheila" would say to me?
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
Hmm, perhaps I'd better go there. Perhaps she might tell me something different? ::) If that was so why didn't she tell him what actually happened? ;)
I can´t imagine why you would want your children to grow up where five members of your own family was wiped out! I can´t imagine you wanting to live there!
Warped.
;D no I wasn't saying that. I was just wondering what the "ghost of Sheila" would say to me?
Grahame, I wasn´t answering your post specifically. Just pondering about people wanting to live there - kids having nightmares, things like that!
-
i read that the kids had nightmares too, i also read somewhere that db claimed sheilas ghost haunted them to tell them to find out the truth!! hmm not sure what to make of that.
Hmm, perhaps I'd better go there. Perhaps she might tell me something different? ::) If that was so why didn't she tell him what actually happened? ;)
I can´t imagine why you would want your children to grow up where five members of your own family was wiped out! I can´t imagine you wanting to live there!
Warped.
;D no I wasn't saying that. I was just wondering what the "ghost of Sheila" would say to me?
Grahame, I wasn´t answering your post specifically. Just pondering about people wanting to live there - kids having nightmares, things like that!
Well I for one would not like to live there.
-
Is this the same secret land deal which was mentioned in COLP's Dickinson Report and in the 2002 Appeal Judgement?
No, I don't think it can be as Mike told me the following:
"Jeremy told me about the argument which Ralph and Peter Eaton had just before the time of the shootings, over a loan connected with the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton lived on. This loan was monies which Ralph Bamber paid on behalf of the Eatons, to a university. Eaton and Ralph Bamber came to blows and Ralph ended up with a black eye..."
Jeremy knew about this episode, so it can't be the same as this latest secret land deal that's come to light.
Mike,
You've posted a statement elsewhere regarding Nevill loaning PE the money to purchase his brother's third share in farm land that their mother had bequeathed to them and one other brother.
I've also seen a reference to Nevill paying money to a university, I believe on PE's behalf.
1. Are you suggesting that this was just one land deal?
2. Were there two farms involved?
3. Did the land deal date to 1961 or some time after?
4. Was it a college and not a university that Nevill paid the money to?
5. Where was this university/ college, could it have been in Gloucestershire - where Sheila was born?
I'm asking because I have a sort of half formed theory that there were two farms that Nevill funded, but I'm probably completely wrong.
-
Is this the same secret land deal which was mentioned in COLP's Dickinson Report and in the 2002 Appeal Judgement?
No, I don't think it can be as Mike told me the following:
"Jeremy told me about the argument which Ralph and Peter Eaton had just before the time of the shootings, over a loan connected with the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton lived on. This loan was monies which Ralph Bamber paid on behalf of the Eatons, to a university. Eaton and Ralph Bamber came to blows and Ralph ended up with a black eye..."
Jeremy knew about this episode, so it can't be the same as this latest secret land deal that's come to light.
Mike,
You've posted a statement elsewhere regarding Nevill loaning PE the money to purchase his brother's third share in farm land that their mother had bequeathed to them and one other brother.
I've also seen a reference to Nevill paying money to a university, I believe on PE's behalf.
1. Are you suggesting that this was just one land deal?
2. Were there two farms involved?
3. Did the land deal date to 1961 or some time after?
4. Was it a college and not a university that Nevill paid the money to?
5. Where was this university/ college, could it have been in Gloucestershire - where Sheila was born?
I'm asking because I have a sort of half formed theory that there were two farms that Nevill funded, but I'm probably completely wrong.
---------------------
Ralph also loaned monies to Anthony Pargeter and his sister to help pay for renovations of a five bedroomed house in Guildford that was turned into flats, monies which were also not included in the Bamber estate(s)...
-
Is this the same secret land deal which was mentioned in COLP's Dickinson Report and in the 2002 Appeal Judgement?
No, I don't think it can be as Mike told me the following:
"Jeremy told me about the argument which Ralph and Peter Eaton had just before the time of the shootings, over a loan connected with the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton lived on. This loan was monies which Ralph Bamber paid on behalf of the Eatons, to a university. Eaton and Ralph Bamber came to blows and Ralph ended up with a black eye..."
Jeremy knew about this episode, so it can't be the same as this latest secret land deal that's come to light.
Mike,
You've posted a statement elsewhere regarding Nevill loaning PE the money to purchase his brother's third share in farm land that their mother had bequeathed to them and one other brother.
I've also seen a reference to Nevill paying money to a university, I believe on PE's behalf.
1. Are you suggesting that this was just one land deal?
2. Were there two farms involved?
3. Did the land deal date to 1961 or some time after?
4. Was it a college and not a university that Nevill paid the money to?
5. Where was this university/ college, could it have been in Gloucestershire - where Sheila was born?
I'm asking because I have a sort of half formed theory that there were two farms that Nevill funded, but I'm probably completely wrong.
---------------------
Ralph also loaned monies to Anthony Pargeter and his sister to help pay for renovations of a five bedroomed house in Guildford that was turned into flats, monies which were also not included in the Bamber estate(s)...
Thanks, Mike,
So where does the university come into the loan equation? Was this uni in Gloucestershire and did the transaction occur some time between - or around - 1961 and 1975? The uni I'm thinking of is the one of which someone (Hartley?) posted here:
"No, I don't think it can be as Mike told me the following:
Jeremy told me about the argument which Ralph and Peter Eaton had just before the time of the shootings, over a loan connected with the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton lived on. This loan was monies which Ralph Bamber paid on behalf of the Eatons, to a university. Eaton and Ralph Bamber came to blows and Ralph ended up with a black eye..."
I know these seem like daft questions, but there is method in my madness. I'm looking at Professor Robert Boutflour and his family.
-
Chochokeira I have some up to date stuff re land deals which I will scan but I need to check to see if it is ok to post
-
There are many things stated in this thread which are untrue.
There is no secret land deal !! It is in the statement which you have printed for a start !! There is nothing unusual in a richer family member helping out another family member to prevent land from falling into the hands of developers.
Can I also stress that WHF has never and will never be owned by any member of the family as it is rented.
Why should a farm, which was farmed by the family for many many years, not remain with the family? Would this have not been what Nevill and June would have wanted?
Peter Eaton was as devastated as anyone with Nevill's death. He's never got over it.
-
There are many things stated in this thread which are untrue.
There is no secret land deal !! It is in the statement which you have printed for a start !! There is nothing unusual in a richer family member helping out another family member to prevent land from falling into the hands of developers.
Can I also stress that WHF has never and will never be owned by any member of the family as it is rented.
Why should a farm, which was farmed by the family for many many years, not remain with the family? Would this have not been what Nevill and June would have wanted?
Peter Eaton was as devastated as anyone with Nevill's death. He's never got over it.
oh how do you come to these conclusions? are you like "JOHN" and falsely claim to know some of the people involved or is it guesswork?
you just couldnt make it up now could you?...
that phrase you used in another post is so familiar to me... I have seen "John" use it a number of times...did you learn it from him?
-
"you couldnt make it up" is very familiar, along with lol hmmmmm...
-
Peter Eaton yeah right very funny
-
Peter Eaton yeah right very funny
i bet the money helped him get over it though.
-
There are many things stated in this thread which are untrue.
There is no secret land deal !! It is in the statement which you have printed for a start !! There is nothing unusual in a richer family member helping out another family member to prevent land from falling into the hands of developers.
Can I also stress that WHF has never and will never be owned by any member of the family as it is rented.
Why should a farm, which was farmed by the family for many many years, not remain with the family? Would this have not been what Nevill and June would have wanted?
Peter Eaton was as devastated as anyone with Nevill's death. He's never got over it.
But it was not the Eatons who were his family, especially P. Eaton who punched him.
I bet PE never got over it! He will always be known as the one who hit Nevill, therefore I doubt, in that case, he would have been thought of as the rightful heir.
-
mike is it too late for submissions to the ccrc now?
i posted this on wrong thread.. duh
-
Smiffy and Andrea. You seem to be suggesting that I am actually 'John'. I can assure you I am my own Man.
Saying something like "Bet the money helped him get over it" shows a complete lack of understanding for what the family went through and continues to go through. Not that I expect many on this forum to understand or want to understand.
Please remember that none of the family ever wanted any of this to happen. Also remember that in the first few hours after those dreadful events they rallied round JB and tried to support him. JB knows this to be true.
It was only after things were overheard being told to the police that doubts started to emerge and the events of that night were questioned.
I have read many times on here about greedy relatives. I ask you. Do you really believe that the Nevill and June estate would have changed any of the families lives?! That they needed to frame Jeremy for the money? Ridiculous.
-
erm ......when did i suggest you was john vidvic?
-
Vidvic
What book did that come out of?
Enid Blyton
-
vidvic...nearly half a million quid wouldnt change their lives?....now whos being ridiculous
-
Theres a great bit of tv footage that shows David Boutflour coming out of court probabably followed by Mugford saying to the camera we are all losers here (right) on his way to the celebration party with the police
-
they must have rubbed there hands together so much they smoked, greedy bastards.
-
Hmmm. He did look like a bit of a twat, didn't he? Is that when he said "piffle"? Who on this planet says piffle?
-
Yes Shona thats him I will have to try and find the footage he wasnt blessed in the looks department either was he
-
Fuck me, NO!! He had a mighty smack from the ugly tree!!
-
he hit every branch when he fell from the ugly tree
-
Imagine if he is reading this now he might have splashed out on a nose job and some surgery when he got all the money he might be gorgeous now but didnt I read somewhere he has got through all the money nearly
-
I am actually laughing so much that my pugs have woken up and I've fallen into the ash tray. You girls so rock!!
-
I am now going from the computer to the bedroom so I will be on the iphone a bit slower and worse spelling
-
The money they inherited from the estate was nowhere near half a million.
How the hell do you think they could afford to send Jeremy to the school he went? Because they were already an extremely wealthy family.
Did Jeremy buy his house? Did Sheila buy her flat? Is their property portfolio almost identical to what it is was before the murders? What about the other farms? What about all the other properties and farmland?
I'm sorry Andrea, but it is not me that is being ridiculous. Ask JB. He knows all this to be true!
-
Vidvic,not really sure what you are trying to say here? The Bambers were a wealthy family - agreed.But the Baltflours were not.If that were the case,then surely the Eatons would have gone to Robert (father/father - in - law),to borrow the money in order to purchase Peters brothers land? It has been said,that the Boutflours and Eatons were having financial problems prior to the murders.If members of this forum believe the relatives to have been greedy for money,then you cant really blame them.In one of Robert Boutflours statements,posted on this forum,he tells how he went to Granny Speakman whilst she was on her deathbed,to make her cut Jeremy out of her will.And that was before Jeremy was even arrested on suspicion of murder!
-
Vidvic,not really sure what you are trying to say here? The Bambers were a wealthy family - agreed.But the Baltflours were not.If that were the case,then surely the Eatons would have gone to Robert (father/father - in - law),to borrow the money in order to purchase Peters brothers land? It has been said,that the Boutflours and Eatons were having financial problems prior to the murders.If members of this forum believe the relatives to have been greedy for money,then you cant really blame them.In one of Robert Boutflours statements,posted on this forum,he tells how he went to Granny Speakman whilst she was on her deathbed,to make her cut Jeremy out of her will.And that was before Jeremy was even arrested on suspicion of murder!
The point I am trying to make is that there was absolutely no motive for either the Eatons or the Boutflours to frame JB. It simply doesn't wash. The Boutflours, the Eatons and the Bambers were extremely close and shared the family business of the caravan park. The Boutflours had built up a farming portfolio since before the 1920's. There were three farms and other properties and Vaulty Manor overlooking the caravan park. Also, Robert Boutflour, did not go to Granny Speakman to get her to 'cut Jeremy out of her will'. Because of her ill health she was not immediately told of the murders and Pam and Robert went to break the bad news. It is an awful side effect of this forum that these good people are constantly vilified.
-
I see where you are coming from Vidvic.Yes,I know that the Baltflours went to "break the bad news" to Granny Speakman.But instead of just gently telling her that the Bamber family had been murdered,Robert also told her that Jeremy was responsible.Jeremy was not even under suspicion by the police at that time.What was his motive in telling the old lady something which had not been proved? He knew how she would react and what the consequences would be,obviously!
-
Vidvic why are you on here at 4.28 in the morning is it so there is nobody to challenge what you post
Vidvic the people on this forum who think JB is guilty are often likeminded with the people that believe JB is innocent when we discuss the relatives
Most people know WHF was leased rented whatever
When Jeremy was convicted his inheritance was worth around £400,000 probably a few million in today's terms
Most people on here except that the relatives treated jeremy like the cuckoo in the nest although Neville and June did not
There character assassination of JB was terrible and does not hold water they tried to say he was gay because Brett was gay that makes most people in this country gay because we all know someone who is gay
The way they describe JB doesn't add up to what a lot of impartial witnesses said
In the middle of their grief the relatives were snooping around WHF
The caring relatives couldn't even be bothered to identify the bodies
What excuse have you got for Peter Eaton hitting Neville
I could go on and on you know the truth thats why you are worried about what the general public think about your friends
-
Well said Jackie +1 :)
-
Jackie, even with your rose tinted specs on, surely you could understand the reluctance of the family to formally identify the bodies. Maybe you need to re read the list of injuries to them all and try and imagine what it would be like to see loved ones in that condition. Isn't it only natural that you would want to remember them alive and well? If this is your marker for greed then does it not equally apply to JB.?
Anyway, factually, you are incorrect. At least one family member offered to go.
-
Jackie, even with your rose tinted specs on, surely you could understand the reluctance of the family to formally identify the bodies. Maybe you need to re read the list of injuries to them all and try and imagine what it would be like to see loved ones in that condition. Isn't it only natural that you would want to remember them alive and well? If this is your marker for greed then does it not equally apply to JB.?
Anyway, factually, you are incorrect. At least one family member offered to go.
Why didn't they go? After all JM wasn't family. Victims of murder or accident are usually ideally identified by relatives if at all possible. Was Julie Mugford immune to trauma?
-
Exactly Grahame
Vidvic I am not looking through Rose tinted spectacles at all most of the people that go on this forum are trying to separate fact from fiction
You are obviously close to the family are you prepared to say who you are to add weight to your argument
Recently you mentioned the family supported JB until a conversation was overheard
You are obviously referring to the alleged comment by JB to jm. I should have been an actor
That alledged (I don't believe it happened) comment was said the day of the murders I believe so how many hours did the relatives actually support JB and why didn't the policeman who it is alleged heard this stop evidence being removed from the farm
If you are a relative would you be prepared to be interviewed I could arrange that in no time it would be a chance to challenge different points and be challenged
Tell me vidvic what do you think of the housekeepers testimony about JB and the landlord of the chequers and freddies testimonies hardly evil beyond belief is it vidvic
-
Exactly Grahame
Vidvic I am not looking through Rose tinted spectacles at all most of the people that go on this forum are trying to separate fact from fiction
You are obviously close to the family are you prepared to say who you are to add weight to your argument
Recently you mentioned the family supported JB until a conversation was overheard
You are obviously referring to the alleged comment by JB to jm. I should have been an actor
That alledged (I don't believe it happened) comment was said the day of the murders I believe so how many hours did the relatives actually support JB and why didn't the policeman who it is alleged heard this stop evidence being removed from the farm
If you are a relative would you be prepared to be interviewed I could arrange that in no time it would be a chance to challenge different points and be challenged
Tell me vidvic what do you think of the housekeepers testimony about JB and the landlord of the chequers and freddies testimonies hardly evil beyond belief is it vidvic
I believe the disputed allegation that JB told JM, "I should have been an actor", was yet another of JM's unsupported claims.
-
Vidvic
Has left the building
4.38am what's worrying you vidvic
A problem shared and all that
Choco + 1
-
Exactly Grahame
Vidvic I am not looking through Rose tinted spectacles at all most of the people that go on this forum are trying to separate fact from fiction
You are obviously close to the family are you prepared to say who you are to add weight to your argument
Recently you mentioned the family supported JB until a conversation was overheard
You are obviously referring to the alleged comment by JB to jm. I should have been an actor
That alledged (I don't believe it happened) comment was said the day of the murders I believe so how many hours did the relatives actually support JB and why didn't the policeman who it is alleged heard this stop evidence being removed from the farm
If you are a relative would you be prepared to be interviewed I could arrange that in no time it would be a chance to challenge different points and be challenged
Tell me vidvic what do you think of the housekeepers testimony about JB and the landlord of the chequers and freddies testimonies hardly evil beyond belief is it vidvic
I believe the disputed allegation that JB told JM, "I should have been an actor", was yet another of JM's unsupported claims.
Chochokeira - you are correct. The only evidence that Jeremy Bamber said "I should have been an actor" was the evidence given by Julie Mugford. There was no corroboration of this from any other witness.
-
Jackie,I think the conversation that Vidvic is refering to was when Jeremy was giving his statement at his cottage on the morning of the murders.Whatever Jeremy told the police is allegedly what caused AE to become suspicious.So they "rallied round" supporting JB for all of about,hmmm lets see - half hour or so?It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?
-
"It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?"
Neither of these two statements is true.
Why are you so bothered by the time of my posts Jackie? I don't understand. You say you are interested in the truth, yet you have consistantly made false statements and theories. Why? If you make statements which I know to be false then I will defend.
-
"It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?"
Neither of these two statements is true.
Why are you so bothered by the time of my posts Jackie? I don't understand. You say you are interested in the truth, yet you have consistantly made false statements and theories. Why? If you make statements which I know to be false then I will defend.
You could easily defend by giving her proof that what she says is wrong. You could also give weight to your arguments by giving her your name? ;)
-
Vidvic
Has left the building
4.38am what's worrying you vidvic
A problem shared and all that
Choco + 1
Thank you, Jackie and ngb1066.
-
vidvic, hi.
You seem to know the case well and know the relatives of the Bambers. On that background I would like to hear your thoughts about the silencer(s). How it/they were found, how it/they were handled prior to being handed over to the EP.
Do you think the silencer should have been allowed as evidence against Jeremy Bamber after the handling of it?
-
Jackie,I think the conversation that Vidvic is refering to was when Jeremy was giving his statement at his cottage on the morning of the murders.Whatever Jeremy told the police is allegedly what caused AE to become suspicious.So they "rallied round" supporting JB for all of about,hmmm lets see - half hour or so?It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?
AE, in her 72 page statement (copied to this website), the second statement she made to the police, states that she went to Jeremy's cottage following the murders to "do my duty" in respect of her cousin. Odd words to choose in respect of a cousin who has just lost his entire immediate family. As far as I recall, there is no mention of AE feeling sympathetic towards JB. Was there no love lost there then, even before AE went to see JB on the morning of the murders?
In another section of that statement, I believe I recall AE stating something along the lines of, two girls whom gran Speakman had raised (after they were orphaned?) were not due much inheritance because they were 'not proper family'. I wonder if AE had the same attitude towards Jeremy, viewed him as an outsider because he was adopted?
Scapegoating an individual as an outsider can be a prelude to other forms of scapegoating.
-
Jackie,I think the conversation that Vidvic is refering to was when Jeremy was giving his statement at his cottage on the morning of the murders.Whatever Jeremy told the police is allegedly what caused AE to become suspicious.So they "rallied round" supporting JB for all of about,hmmm lets see - half hour or so?It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?
AE, in her 72 page statement (copied to this website), the second statement she made to the police, states that she went to Jeremy's cottage following the murders to "do my duty" in respect of her cousin. Odd words to choose in respect of a cousin who has just lost his entire immediate family. As far as I recall, there is no mention of AE feeling sympathetic towards JB. Was there no love lost there then, even before AE went to see JB on the morning of the murders?
In another section of that statement, I believe I recall AE stating something along the lines of, two girls whom gran Speakman had raised (after they were orphaned?) were not due much inheritance because they were 'not proper family'. I wonder if AE had the same attitude towards Jeremy, viewed him as an outsider because he was adopted?
Scapegoating an individual as an outsider can be a prelude to other forms of scapegoating.
So well said! +1
-
I am back vicvid and I see you are line could you answer the questions I put to you please would you be happy to do and interview to put the relatives of friends side forward
Set the record straight so to speak
-
Smiffy and Andrea. You seem to be suggesting that I am actually 'John'. I can assure you I am my own Man.
Saying something like "Bet the money helped him get over it" shows a complete lack of understanding for what the family went through and continues to go through. Not that I expect many on this forum to understand or want to understand.
Please remember that none of the family ever wanted any of this to happen. Also remember that in the first few hours after those dreadful events they rallied round JB and tried to support him. JB knows this to be true.
It was only after things were overheard being told to the police that doubts started to emerge and the events of that night were questioned.I have read many times on here about greedy relatives. I ask you. Do you really believe that the Nevill and June estate would have changed any of the families lives?! That they needed to frame Jeremy for the money? Ridiculous.
Vicvid please remind me how many hours did the family rally around JB
-
Smiffy and Andrea. You seem to be suggesting that I am actually 'John'. I can assure you I am my own Man.
Saying something like "Bet the money helped him get over it" shows a complete lack of understanding for what the family went through and continues to go through. Not that I expect many on this forum to understand or want to understand.
Please remember that none of the family ever wanted any of this to happen. Also remember that in the first few hours after those dreadful events they rallied round JB and tried to support him. JB knows this to be true.
It was only after things were overheard being told to the police that doubts started to emerge and the events of that night were questioned.I have read many times on here about greedy relatives. I ask you. Do you really believe that the Nevill and June estate would have changed any of the families lives?! That they needed to frame Jeremy for the money? Ridiculous.
-
Sorry vicvid I had to repost that again in navy so you know exactly what you said
-
Jackie, even with your rose tinted specs on, surely you could understand the reluctance of the family to formally identify the bodies. Maybe you need to re read the list of injuries to them all and try and imagine what it would be like to see loved ones in that condition. Isn't it only natural that you would want to remember them alive and well? If this is your marker for greed then does it not equally apply to JB.?
Anyway, factually, you are incorrect. At least one family member offered to go.
Why didn't they go? After all JM wasn't family. Victims of murder or accident are usually ideally identified by relatives if at all possible. Was Julie Mugford immune to trauma?
julie was immune trauma for over a month, until she was dumped.
-
+1 Andrea
-
No disrespect meant to any fellow posters who have been challenging vidvic... but... to be fair to vidvic, from what I've seen of his/her posts, they do try to argue their views in a reasonable manner. It is an interesting and welcome slant on the forum, in my view. It does seem to be a bit of a turkey shoot on here re the relatives at times. Personally, I've never gone in for that, though I do mull over posts which allege a suspected collusion with certain police officers.
-
No disrespect meant to any fellow posters who have been challenging vidvic... but... to be fair to vidvic, from what I've seen of his/her posts, they do try to argue their views in a reasonable manner. It is an interesting and welcome slant on the forum, in my view. It does seem to be a bit of a turkey shoot on here re the relatives at times. Personally, I've never gone in for that, though I do mull over posts which allege a suspected collusion with certain police officers.
I couldn´t agree more! +1
-
Vidvic,you posted earlier that PE was devastated by the death of Neville Bamber.That may be so,but it didnt stop him from pilfering from the Bamber company in the wake of those tragic deaths did it?
You may think that it is unfair for JBs relatives to be villified (as you put it).Well I happen to think that it is unfair that Jeremys family turned on him within hours of his whole family being wiped out.I think that it is unfair that the relatives meddled into a police investigation that according to EP was concluded.But more unfair than anything is the fact that Jeremy did not even receive a fair court trial.If he had of Vidvic and was still found guilty,then I would be one of the first to sympathize with you.But as it stands,an innocent man may be sitting in prison and that,to me,is unfair!
-
RochfordShields,I agree.Vidvic is very polite and his/her views are welcome.I wouldnt like to think that I am challenging Vidvic,just simply debating.Obviously we all have different views and opinions regarding the case and so obviously we are going to disagree at times.No harm is meant by it.
-
Tyler plus one we just want to get to the truth and I for one would like it if the relatives would come on here
-
No disrespect meant to any fellow posters who have been challenging vidvic... but... to be fair to vidvic, from what I've seen of his/her posts, they do try to argue their views in a reasonable manner. It is an interesting and welcome slant on the forum, in my view. It does seem to be a bit of a turkey shoot on here re the relatives at times. Personally, I've never gone in for that, though I do mull over posts which allege a suspected collusion with certain police officers.
+1 Roch
-
"It probably then dawned on her that JB was now the main shareholder in the caravan park and also very possibly owned the Eatons home?"
Neither of these two statements is true.
Hi Video Victor,
You accuse Jackie of making untrue statements in respect of Jeremy's shareholding. Yet you offer no sources, no references, no proof whatsoever in support of your claim.
With respect, can I ask you: what are your sources, where is your proof? Because without these, as you would presumably agree, your claims boil down to wild speculation.
The problem is that your only source appears to be yourself:
Vic's views are true because Vic says so.
Well, we could all attempt to pull the wool over everyone's eyes in that way.
Your posts implicitly suggest that you have insider knowledge. However, if you do have such knowledge, Vic, the insider you've been interviewing has a very one sided view of this case.
Have you tried speaking to the other side to get a more balanced view of the case or are you quite happy with your current one dimensional grasp of it?
-
yes,I agree Keira.With regard to the caravan park shares,Scott Lomax revealed that June Bamber,Jeremy Bamber,Pamela Boutflour and Ann Eaton all owned a quarter share each.It is no secret that Scott,like Mike,has had access to thousand of documents regarding the case.So surely,upon the deaths of the Bamber family with Jeremy being the main beneficiary of the estate,he would inherit his mothers share? Now Im not that great at maths,but would that not equate to Jeremy owning half of the caravan buisness,with Pamela and Ann still owning a quarter each?If so,how would it not be true that Jeremy would be the main shareholder?
-
yes,I agree Keira.With regard to the caravan park shares,Scott Lomax revealed that June Bamber,Jeremy Bamber,Pamela Boutflour and Ann Eaton all owned a quarter share each.It is no secret that Scott,like Mike,has had access to thousand of documents regarding the case.So surely,upon the deaths of the Bamber family with Jeremy being the main beneficiary of the estate,he would inherit his mothers share? Now Im not that great at maths,but would that not equate to Jeremy owning half of the caravan buisness,with Pamela and Ann still owning a quarter each?If so,how would it not be true that Jeremy would be the main shareholder?
I believe you're right, Tyler. Whoever Vic Video has been interviewing (and filming?) appears to have given him a rather distorted view of this case.
-
It doesnt really matter to me who owned what.Its just that Id always believed that they were the facts.Vidvic says it is not true,so maybe he could explain what the facts actually are?
-
Been a bit busy so taken a while to respond.
Yes, I am a TV Producer and yes, I have known the family for many many years. I originally worked for Anglia TV and Sky News (right from it's very beginning) though in 2004 concentrated on sport.
I am proud to say I know this family. They are good people. I probably get more annoyed than I should when I read about them as 'greedy', 'liars' and the like, because it is unrecognisable to the people that I know.
Please don't accuse me of not listening to the JB version of events either. I read and view everything I can lay my hands on and I respect Mike Tesko for his tenacity, though obviously I believe misguided.
Yes, it does not take a rocket scientist to see that the Police made many errors, but JB is in prison despite these errors, not because of them.
I know many journalists that have spent thousands of hours doing exactly what some of you do, asking questions, reading statements, testing theories. The vast majority that I have met agree with me and the appeal court judges, in that the more you know about this case, the more convinced you become of JB's guilt.
-
but when the main prosecution witness in a case gets all the money and property that the defendant would have had you have to admit it looks a tiny bit dodgy.
-
It doesnt really matter to me who owned what.Its just that Id always believed that they were the facts.Vidvic says it is not true,so maybe he could explain what the facts actually are?
Dear Tyler, in 1985 JB was an 8% shareholder in the caravan park. Keira; I believe you can find this info in the court papers with reference to JB's court action against the family, which failed, when he attempted to sue for loss of earnings and the like. When costs were awarded against him he tried to lie to the court and claimed he had no assets, which was untrue, as he owned an 8% share in the park.
-
I should add that the shares were taken from him to go towards the legal costs of the family in that case.
Everytime JB instigates any legal action (which costs him nothing) it costs the family thousands in legal fees to defend.
JB is therfore no longer a shareholder in the park.
-
Vidvic,you posted earlier that PE was devastated by the death of Neville Bamber.That may be so,but it didnt stop him from pilfering from the Bamber company in the wake of those tragic deaths did it?
You may think that it is unfair for JBs relatives to be villified (as you put it).Well I happen to think that it is unfair that Jeremys family turned on him within hours of his whole family being wiped out.I think that it is unfair that the relatives meddled into a police investigation that according to EP was concluded.But more unfair than anything is the fact that Jeremy did not even receive a fair court trial.If he had of Vidvic and was still found guilty,then I would be one of the first to sympathize with you.But as it stands,an innocent man may be sitting in prison and that,to me,is unfair!
Very well said, Tyler +1!!!
-
Been a bit busy so taken a while to respond.
Yes, I am a TV Producer and yes, I have known the family for many many years. I originally worked for Anglia TV and Sky News (right from it's very beginning) though in 2004 concentrated on sport.
I am proud to say I know this family. They are good people. I probably get more annoyed than I should when I read about them as 'greedy', 'liars' and the like, because it is unrecognisable to the people that I know.
Please don't accuse me of not listening to the JB version of events either. I read and view everything I can lay my hands on and I respect Mike Tesko for his tenacity, though obviously I believe misguided.
Yes, it does not take a rocket scientist to see that the Police made many errors, but JB is in prison despite these errors, not because of them.
I know many journalists that have spent thousands of hours doing exactly what some of you do, asking questions, reading statements, testing theories. The vast majority that I have met agree with me and the appeal court judges, in that the more you know about this case, the more convinced you become of JB's guilt.
Excellent! How's that for sleuthing!
Thank you for your honesty, though of course I knew that you produced films from virtually your first
post - I'm a head hunter, Vic.
I'm glad that you've read the version of events here, though you've not been a member here for very long, have you? Have you just begun reading the posts here or have you been a silent lurker for years?
Can I ask you:
1. Have you ever met Jeremy Bamber?
2. What grounds do you have for believing he's guilty?
-
Strange how people's perceptions of things change according to their own prejudices? If you know the family personally of course you are going to defend them. Because you only hear things from their side of the story. And whatever evidence you may have will always be looked at in that light.
-
Vic, apologies, I forgot, can I also ask you:
3. Does your 'JB did it' theory view JB as the murderer or does it favour the idea of a hitman?
-
Strange how people's perceptions of things change according to their own prejudices? If you know the family personally of course you are going to defend them. Because you only hear things from their side of the story. And whatever evidence you may have will always be looked at in that light.
Dear Grahame, unfortunately you dont know me personally, but I can tell you that If i'd ever believed JB to be innocent then I would not be on here defending the family. That would be against everything I believe in.
-
Vic, apologies, I forgot, can I also ask you:
3. Does your 'JB did it' theory view JB as the murderer or does it favour the idea of a hitman?
Dear Keira,
Goodness! Where to begin......
The phone call. 'Terrified' father calls....doesn't call 999, gets phone book, calls witham, back to phone book, calls chelmsford, gets agitated, calls Julie, leaves house, gets overtaken by Police car. (Team JB now creeping time of call and introducing another call to get round some of the problems with this.)
Jeremy adamant father said "Sheila" has got THE gun, so completely rules out anyone else being involved. (Team JB have in the past said he may have misheard this, to introduce someone else)
Read the actual descriptions of what was done to the victims.....Arc of bullets into one of the twins heads, Nevill's injuries to his face, all done by Sheila? A woman whom Jeremy himself admitted to having never seen fire a gun as an adult. How many times did she load the magazine? You try doing it! It's bloody hard going! And by Sheila? Yeah right!
Jeremy leaves gun in kitchen having shot rabbits without the sights on. For a start, especially with the twins in the house, Nevill would never have left it there. Secondly, what would JB have been doing shooting rabbits without the sight? (Bit convenient this rifle just lying around)
If JB is innocent and the family framed him, then the silencer wasn't used. How can you shoot all those different people without anyone making an escape without the silencer?
Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
Julie told police that a hitman was to blame. Why? If she was lying then why not simply blame JB. Bit of a strange move to blame someone else instead.
Also WHY? Why would the police believe the evil relatives instead of taking the easier option and just blaming Sheila. Is it not possible that they were telling the truth when members of the police weren't convinced with the initial decision? If you, as a relative found the explanation so completely ridiculous would you not investigate it? Would you welcome JB back into the fold if you believed he may have wiped out half your family?
Have you ever considered how many people would have had to have lied all these years?? Hundreds...Relatives, Police, reinvestigation police, friends, ballistic experts, the list is endless.......and not ONE has ever come forward, even when JB offered ONE MILLION pounds to break cover.....
Just a brief selection of reasons......
-
Vidvic I know many people in the entertainment/film industry as well what kind of films do you produce and why would you put something of such a bad quality on you tube (if that is your work)
I notice that you only joined Twitter in February and have just a few followers I thought in your business you would be more active.
Do you agree Jeremy was convicted on circumstantial evidence
-
Jackie, just because I do not agree with your view, does not give you the right to suggest that my career is in some way flawed. Your post comes across as quite 'bitchy' but I'm sure it's just the way it reads.....
-
I have never posted a video to youtube......
-
Jackie, just because I do not agree with your view, does not give you the right to suggest that my career is in some way flawed. Your post comes across as quite 'bitchy' but I'm sure it's just the way it reads.....
I hope so! :o
Thanks for your account of why you think JB is guilty.
-
Vidvic
As you speak openly about knowing the relatives do they support the release of all evidence held under PII so this case can finally be concluded.
You didnt answer my question about do you agree Jeremy was convicted on circumstantial evidence?
I think their is someone on you tube using your name or similar to post rubbish I thought I would make you aware
What sort of films have you produced in the past as I know you producers like to brag about your work
My friend Mark McQueen has a fantastic showreel and Dominic Minghella
I am sorry if I came across as being bitchy I normally try to be polite and usually people speak about me in glowing terms
-
vidvic, when you look at photographs of sheila, could you honestly say she had been dead for 7 hrs?
-
plus one Andrea
-
thanks jackie, but that picture of sheila is strong evidence imo that she hadnt been dead for 7 hrs.
the fact that her hand had been moved shows there was no sign of rigor mortis, and there is no discolouration, after 7hrs there should be.
-
Andrea
Vidvic has gone just when I thought I might get some answers too
Its exciting that we might here what they think ha ha
Your question Andrea dont hold your breath >:( >:( >:(
-
Vic, apologies, I forgot, can I also ask you:
3. Does your 'JB did it' theory view JB as the murderer or does it favour the idea of a hitman?
Dear Keira,
Goodness! Where to begin......
The phone call. 'Terrified' father calls....doesn't call 999, gets phone book, calls witham, back to phone book, calls chelmsford, gets agitated, calls Julie, leaves house, gets overtaken by Police car. (Team JB now creeping time of call and introducing another call to get round some of the problems with this.)
Jeremy adamant father said "Sheila" has got THE gun, so completely rules out anyone else being involved. (Team JB have in the past said he may have misheard this, to introduce someone else)
Read the actual descriptions of what was done to the victims.....Arc of bullets into one of the twins heads, Nevill's injuries to his face, all done by Sheila? A woman whom Jeremy himself admitted to having never seen fire a gun as an adult. How many times did she load the magazine? You try doing it! It's bloody hard going! And by Sheila? Yeah right!
Jeremy leaves gun in kitchen having shot rabbits without the sights on. For a start, especially with the twins in the house, Nevill would never have left it there. Secondly, what would JB have been doing shooting rabbits without the sight? (Bit convenient this rifle just lying around)
If JB is innocent and the family framed him, then the silencer wasn't used. How can you shoot all those different people without anyone making an escape without the silencer?
Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
Julie told police that a hitman was to blame. Why? If she was lying then why not simply blame JB. Bit of a strange move to blame someone else instead.
Also WHY? Why would the police believe the evil relatives instead of taking the easier option and just blaming Sheila. Is it not possible that they were telling the truth when members of the police weren't convinced with the initial decision? If you, as a relative found the explanation so completely ridiculous would you not investigate it? Would you welcome JB back into the fold if you believed he may have wiped out half your family?
Have you ever considered how many people would have had to have lied all these years?? Hundreds...Relatives, Police, reinvestigation police, friends, ballistic experts, the list is endless.......and not ONE has ever come forward, even when JB offered ONE MILLION pounds to break cover.....
Just a brief selection of reasons......
Vidvic, this just seems to be the 'same old - same old' official line. I take your point though about nobody breaking cover. £1m is pretty enticing.. if immunity from prosecution comes with the package also (?). If I was a copper who could blow the case wide open regarding the falsification of documents, in order to obtain my £1 million... I'd certainly be weighing that prize up against what might happen to me for not coughing up much, much, much, earlier.
Otherwise, I'd be making the same mistake as Jeremy, i.e. killing everyone for inheritance but tipping off my girlfriend to ensure I'd never enjoy the inheritance anyway ???
-
Where would JB get one million pounds from? ???
-
I've read about this 1m before. probably from posters who pop up on here for some aggro from time to time. If I've wrongly assumed this was a genuine offer of reward then I apologise.
-
Where would JB get one million pounds from? ???
Perhaps why no one came forward!
-
I've read about this 1m before. probably from posters who pop up on here for some aggro from time to time. If I've wrongly assumed this was a genuine offer of reward then I apologise.
Rochford,It was being offered on JBs official website.Is it no longer on there?
-
Vidvic you are online would you like to answer mine and Andreas questions they are very important to us
-
Be gentle with vidvic, Jack. He/she thinks the same as I do.............
-
Shona I am ready for the challenge before I chill with the wide away club 8)
-
Vidvic you are online would you like to answer mine and Andreas questions they are very important to us
Hi Jackie, I imagine vidvic does what I tend to do. I log in to have a quick look at the forum in the evenings then go off and do other things - while remaining logged in. Though I usually aim to return to post to the forum, quite often I'm too busy to do so. The record of members who are logged in might suggest that I've been looking at the forum all evening when I've barely had time to glance at it.
-
Got you Chocho but I have been monitering the situation and I can see when someone dissapears when i am on here
I am getting a complex now
This is such a brilliant chance to get the relatives to agree to have everything released under PII and then we can all go off and live peaceful and safe and happy lives in the knowledge of how lucky we are to have Essex Police
-
I wish I could do irony!! ;)
-
Who've you been tweeting with today, Jack? Anyone interesting?
-
Got you Chocho but I have been monitering the situation and I can see when someone dissapears when i am on here
I am getting a complex now
This is such a brilliant chance to get the relatives to agree to have everything released under PII and then we can all go off and live peaceful and safe and happy lives in the knowledge of how lucky we are to have Essex Police
Do the relatives have any influence over PII release Jackie? I thought it was purely a home office/judiciary thing?
-
Shona David Hasslehoff is following me and I have no idea why? I would love him to open his shirt and reveal a Jeremy Bamber is Innocent T Shirt
Ken Clarke is just a wanker he keeps blanking me so he is looking stupid Im not letting it drop
If you go on to my followers they are mostly barristers, law students, police, writers, filmakers and celebs I have nearly 1300 Vidvic has 6
Bob I think it would definately help if the relatives said they wanted everything released dont you?
-
Bob I think it would definately help if the relatives said they wanted everything released dont you?
I wouldn't be so sure Jackie. If PII is being used to cover up police cock-ups then I doubt the relatives' opinions would carry much weight.
-
Bob it would be nice if they publicly stated they were quite happy for everything to be released then we would be narrowing who really doesnt want information released
-
Jack, you've got the Hoff? Wow! But Ken Clarke could well twat him in a fight.
-
Jack, you've got the Hoff? Wow! But Ken Clarke could well twat him in a fight.
Aye - the Hoff would be too busy rolling around naked on a hotel toilet floor covered in burgers!
-
I'm guessing that the relatives want no further part in any of this. And JM, too.
-
OMG, bob. That was one of the strangest things I've ever seen!
-
OMG, bob. That was one of the strangest things I've ever seen!
It was a very special moment in the Hoff's mighty career. It's amazing how he's just shrugged it off and carried on regardless - such is the talent of the Hoff :)
-
I havent seen it is it funny or weird? :-\
-
It's bloody horrible. But thanks to his plastic surgeon, he can't register shame!
-
I havent seen it is it funny or weird? :-\
It's not great I have to admit. Mostly because his daughter is there trying to look after him.
Although that does raise the question of why he was being filmed!
Here you go anyway Jackie... http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7f1_1178355247
-
think ive done that before when pissed...but with a chicken curry, wow was i in a state ;)
-
Ive kissed very ugly people thats even worse :-[
-
Have you ever kissed a man with tits?
-
The phone call. 'Terrified' father calls....doesn't call 999, gets phone book, calls witham, back to phone book, calls chelmsford, gets agitated, calls Julie, leaves house, gets overtaken by Police car. (Team JB now creeping time of call and introducing another call to get round some of the problems with this.)
Hi Vic,
Thank you for your reply. I shan't have time te reply to all of it this evening but I'll make a few points now.
As Jeremy has said, this was the 1980s when mental illness was still regarded as shameful, something to be hidden away and not discussed. Nevill and June clearly did not discuss the extent of Sheila's illness even with their extended family, or the extended family would not have had so little understanding of how very ill Sheila was. There may well have been an unspoken understanding in the Bamber family that, in the event of Sheila having one of her psychotic episodes, the local police, whom Nevill, a JP, was likely to know, should be called in. That would have allowed Nevill to manage the situation by getting Sheila into a private hospital, thereby avoiding involving social services and bypassing the gossip network in the village.
Regarding the call to JM. Jeremy would almost certainly have felt in conflict regarding what his response should be. Should he do what his father wanted him to do and go to WHF, or should he first call the police? My instinctive response would have been to ring my brother for support and advice and that may have been why Jeremy rang JM. In the event, however, as JM said in her statement, she was still half asleep when she answered.
Regarding the speed at which Jeremy drove to WHF, I've read here that he drove slowly because the police had instructed him to wait for them.
-
Jeremy adamant father said "Sheila" has got THE gun, so completely rules out anyone else being involved. (Team JB have in the past said he may have misheard this, to introduce someone else)
This does not rule out the possiblity of Nevill being coerced into ringing Jeremy and told what he must say - either by Sheila or a third party/parties. That might also explain the odd circular burn marks on Nevill's neck.
-
Shona I have never kissed a man with tits YET :P
-
Choch do you think Vidvic is a film producer or a fake. Lets take bets
I will go fake
-
Oh Jack, I'm so fond of you, but you can be so harsh. Google him/her.
-
Read the actual descriptions of what was done to the victims.....Arc of bullets into one of the twins heads, Nevill's injuries to his face, all done by Sheila? A woman whom Jeremy himself admitted to having never seen fire a gun as an adult. How many times did she load the magazine? You try doing it! It's bloody hard going! And by Sheila? Yeah right!
ngb1066 has explained that Sheila could have loaded bullets individually into the chamber and could have done so without any difficulty and very quickly.
-
the police told jb to go to white house farm but not to approach the farmhouse.
-
Choch do you think Vidvic is a film producer or a fake. Lets take bets
I will go fake
You lot are drinking, aren't you? Lucky beggars, I've been working.
You know what my views are of ad hominem, it merely weakens our case if we resort to this. I will not get involved in it. Go for the arguments, not the person, Jackie.
-
Hmmm. Apparently, the more you have to load that particular gun, the harder it gets. She really didn't show any signs of the loading, or residue.
-
thats me told off then :'(
-
I had to google ad hominem, choch, so now I understand it. And yes, some members on here have been imbibing. Disgraceful.
Hic.
-
Jackie, as I have produced over 100 shows for Sky, I think you might have lost your bet. I said TV producer, not film producer.
-
Hmmm. Apparently, the more you have to load that particular gun, the harder it gets. She really didn't show any signs of the loading, or residue.
Shona, think back to those close up photographs of Sheila's hand: there were (oil?) marks and blood on Sheila's hand consistent with using a gun.
Now think back to what EP reported regarding the condition of Sheila's hands:
'spotlessly clean'.
What does that tell you about:
1. Your above remark
2. Essex Police's investigation of this case?
-
Jackie, as I have produced over 100 shows for Sky, I think you might have lost your bet. I said TV producer, not film producer.
are you male vidvic?
-
thats me told off then :'(
Sorry, Jackie... but you're still a legend! ;D
-
Jackie, as I have produced over 100 shows for Sky, I think you might have lost your bet. I said TV producer, not film producer.
Don't take offence, vidvic, they're all drunk ;D
-
Choch, you're right. When abs enhanced those images, I had to eat my words. And they tasted bitter. There did seem to be marks, and even bruising between her thumb and hand. I wobble so much, then someone like vidvic joins in and underlines what I've believed for a long time. The reason that I joined this forum was the shocking image that Mike put on here of Sheila, lying dead. She really didn't look like she'd battled with Ralph. She actually looked like she'd died in her sleep. Like those poor boys.
-
And we're not all drunk, you cheeky monkey. At least you can spell legend!!
-
Keira, I always expected to get abuse for my views, but didn't expect to have to defend my career! lol ......
Is there actually anything that you can say on here and be believed? lol
-
So vidvic before there is no more babycham left could you answer mine and Andreas questions and do you know my friend Mark Mcqueen and what have you produced
You can understand we have a lot of fakers on here
-
To be totally fair, vidvic, you've got the cream of the crop tonight, no numpties and a fair cross section. Choch and ngb, if he's about, are about as good as it gets. And Jackie puts up a fair arguement too, luckily for jb.
-
Jackie, as I have produced over 100 shows for Sky, I think you might have lost your bet. I said TV producer, not film producer.
Don't take offence, vidvic, they're all drunk ;D
i havent been drinking keira :D
-
Eeew!! Babycham??
-
vidvic, what do you think of the pics of sheila, do you think she has been dead for 7hrs and are you a male or female :)
-
Essex through and through
I cant cook either I just turn the cooker up and hope for the best
-
That's either really insightful, or totally random. I still think that JB was responsible for what happened on that dreadful night, and I await your comments, with respect.
Best love and testicles, Shona xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
-
Jackie, as I have produced over 100 shows for Sky, I think you might have lost your bet. I said TV producer, not film producer.
Don't take offence, vidvic, they're all drunk ;D
i havent been drinking keira :D
Sorry, Andrea, it was all of the talk of kissing men with boobs, I thought you must all be drunk ;D
-
And love and thanks to abs, too.
-
Right, got distracted reading another thread.....
My name is Vic, can we drop the vidvic. I now produce mainly sports shows and produce for big events, massive video screens and such.
I'm sorry that my list of reasons was 'same old' but I believe what I believe.
I am not a blood expert, but the pictures of Sheila's wounds, to my eye, and I was a photographic interpreter in the RAF, DO NOT show 'flowing' blood. The shine, that gives that impression comes from the flash light, but I am sure that various experts have a view either way.
-
Keira, I always expected to get abuse for my views, but didn't expect to have to defend my career! lol ......
Is there actually anything that you can say on here and be believed? lol
It gets worse once the staunch anti-JB crowd return. One of them, who shall be nameless, labelled me a witch, ngb1066 a serial liar and threatened Jackie with scalping - and I don't believe he was joking.
-
Right, got distracted reading another thread.....
My name is Vic, can we drop the vidvic. I now produce mainly sports shows and produce for big events, massive video screens and such.
I'm sorry that my list of reasons was 'same old' but I believe what I believe.
I am not a blood expert, but the pictures of Sheila's wounds, to my eye, and I was a photographic interpreter in the RAF, DO NOT show 'flowing' blood. The shine, that gives that impression comes from the flash light, but I am sure that various experts have a view either way.
The photographs are however, supported by scene of crime reports from one or more officers who stated that Sheila's blood was still flowing when they found her.
I won't press you on the rigor mortis and lividity issues as you appear to be experiencing difficulty addressing these. Take all the time you need.
-
Right, got distracted reading another thread.....
My name is Vic, can we drop the vidvic. I now produce mainly sports shows and produce for big events, massive video screens and such.
I'm sorry that my list of reasons was 'same old' but I believe what I believe.
I am not a blood expert, but the pictures of Sheila's wounds, to my eye, and I was a photographic interpreter in the RAF, DO NOT show 'flowing' blood. The shine, that gives that impression comes from the flash light, but I am sure that various experts have a view either way.
Then why would the shine from the flash light be confined solely to the photographs of Sheila's blood? Mike has said that photographs of Nevill and June clearly show their blood to be congealed and not flowing.
-
Vic
Would you agree that Jeremy was convicted on just circumstantial evidence
-
I think you have to remember Keira is that from the family's viewpoint, what happened to them is unimaginable. Whether you believe JB or Sheila did it, they lost 5 members of their family in horiffic circumstances.
They, or anyone who cares for them, will always find it incredibly hard to understand how anyone can put up a defence of JB. They are not going to be tactful.
-
No Jackie, I don't believe that at all.
-
The first actual known wherabouts of JB is at around 4.00am at WHF. We don't know where he was until then. I have repeatedly read on here and seen it on blogs and youtube videos that he was with police from 3.30. Again, this is 'time creep'. We don't know how long he took to kill them all. Possibly June and Nevill were murdered a lot earlier than Sheila.
-
Keira, as I understand it, rigor mortis only STARTS to kick in after approx 3 Hours (though this can vary) and it reaches it's peak after 12 Hours. It is not an instant thing......
-
Vidvic there is not one single piece of evidence JB committed the murders
Give me one single piece of evidence
-
The first actual known wherabouts of JB is at around 4.00am at WHF. We don't know where he was until then. I have repeatedly read on here and seen it on blogs and youtube videos that he was with police from 3.30. Again, this is 'time creep'. We don't know how long he took to kill them all. Possibly June and Nevill were murdered a lot earlier than Sheila.
It sounds to me as though someone is doing some time creep of their own here.
Could you explain how you arrive at JB's whereabouts being unknown until
4 am.
Also, if Sheila was killed later than the others, what do you believe she was doing in the intervening period? Why didn't she escape?
I've just lost a long reply to you when I timed out and I'm off to bed. I'll redo it tomorrow if I have time.
-
Right, got distracted reading another thread.....
My name is Vic, can we drop the vidvic. I now produce mainly sports shows and produce for big events, massive video screens and such.
I'm sorry that my list of reasons was 'same old' but I believe what I believe.
I am not a blood expert, but the pictures of Sheila's wounds, to my eye, and I was a photographic interpreter in the RAF, DO NOT show 'flowing' blood. The shine, that gives that impression comes from the flash light, but I am sure that various experts have a view either way.
Then why would the shine from the flash light be confined solely to the photographs of Sheila's blood? Mike has said that photographs of Nevill and June clearly show their blood to be congealed and not flowing.
If she had been dead for more that 3 hours I should think her blood would be dried. Also why did she not have rigor mortis as was the case of Ralph?
-
The first actual known wherabouts of JB is at around 4.00am at WHF. We don't know where he was until then. I have repeatedly read on here and seen it on blogs and youtube videos that he was with police from 3.30. Again, this is 'time creep'. We don't know how long he took to kill them all. Possibly June and Nevill were murdered a lot earlier than Sheila.
It sounds to me as though someone is doing some time creep of their own here.
Could you explain how you arrive at JB's whereabouts being unknown until
4 am.
Also, if Sheila was killed later than the others, what do you believe she was doing in the intervening period? Why didn't she escape?
I've just lost a long reply to you when I timed out and I'm off to bed. I'll redo it tomorrow if I have time.
Just before 4, when the police car overtook JB on his way to WHF is the first time JB is seen since the evening before.
-
Apologies if this has already been covered, but why would the Bambers have discussed fostering the twins, as JB claims, if they were already living mainly with Colin?....
-
Jeremy leaves gun in kitchen having shot rabbits without the sights on. For a start, especially with the twins in the house, Nevill would never have left it there. Secondly, what would JB have been doing shooting rabbits without the sight? (Bit convenient this rifle just lying around)
There were guns all over WHF, Vic. Guns in the gun cupboard, two on the stairs (used as a makeshift cupboard for the kitchen), a bandolier of bullets hanging on the door, a loaded shotgun under Nevill's bed at one stage. A gun on the settle would hardly have been out of place.
My family lived in Tolleshunt D'Arcy and surrounding villages for centuries. I'm a local historian, researching for a book about the district, so I know this part of the world quite well.
This was a tiny village in deepest Essex in the midst of gun and wildfowling country: the sort of village where many a house and tiny cottage had a gun on the settle.
Just 50 years previously, this was a wild, lawless place on Tiptree Heath: smuggler country within the district of a rotten borough, where locals were no lovers of authority or of snooping revenue men. It was then the sort of place where old families and money ruled with rough justice - or no justice at all. A place where the local lord of manor and GP, among others, bought elections by locking the other side's supporters in the pub with copious free beer and by hiring gangs of villains to help them personally beat up those who wore the other side's colours or who attempted to vote against their man.
Have things changed? Of course, yet old ways die hard. A few years ago I stood on the public highway, my back to a small farm, taking photographs of views across the fields to the coast. Out came the farmer: what did I think I was doing photographing his land! What was I up to? He stood behind his hedge, so I couldn't see whether he'd a shotgun or not, but I felt the menace of it in his tone.
Remember too that this was the 1980s, a time before the EU and its legions of bureaucrats and Health and Safety edicts had taken over our lives. It was a different world to ours.
-
Keira, yes there were, but they were either well hidden or broken down and made safe. Nevill would never have left a loaded rifle where the children might find it.
And why could JB not remember if he'd shot at rabbits or not?
-
If JB is innocent and the family framed him, then the silencer wasn't used. How can you shoot all those different people without anyone making an escape without the silencer?
Mike's already explained this. Given that no one, not even the experts who gave evidence in court, could determine with certainty the order with which family members were shot, questions in respect of the shootings are difficult to answer without the use of speculation. If Sheila was the killer and the boys were shot first, then only Nevill and June remained to be shot before Sheila ritualistically threw her clothes into a couple of buckets filled with water, showered and turned the gun on herself. So, there wasn't a family to escape as such, just either Nevill or June. It only becomes more complex if you theorise Jeremy as the killer, then there's the question of why Sheila did not escape while JB was allegedly killing the other two.
-
Vidvic why did your friends take the silencer home why wouldnt they call the police if they were certain Jeremy was the killer. Taking the silencer home could have ruined the forensic evidence they would have known that
If your friends were to upset to identify the body dont you think its strange that Anne Eaton took home a bucket of bloody clothes
I feel Ann Eatons behaviour in doing that could potentially show she was plotting to frame Jeremy
All the events that I describe here make me very suspicious
As you know and like these people could you explain what on earth Neville could have done to receive an attack from Peter Eaton
I have never read anything about violence in Neville and Junes house this violent behaviour must have really shocked him and even frightened him
Was Peter Eaton bought up with violence at home I dont believe Jeremy was
-
Because I added the crime channel to my sky package I have been watching quite a few murder stories and I have heard police officers mentioned people they have found dead having a look of sheer horror on their face does anyone know more about this because Sheila looked quite beautiful as if she was asleep
-
only Nevill and June remained to be shot before Sheila ritualistically threw her clothes into a couple of buckets filled with water, showered and turned the gun on herself
Wild speculation.
-
only Nevill and June remained to be shot before Sheila ritualistically threw her clothes into a couple of buckets filled with water, showered and turned the gun on herself
Wild speculation.
You are entirely correct. That's why I preceded my comments with:
Given that no one, not even the experts who gave evidence in court, could determine with certainty the order with which family members were shot, questions in respect of the shootings are difficult to answer without the use of speculation.
-
Because I added the crime channel to my sky package I have been watching quite a few murder stories and I have heard police officers mentioned people they have found dead having a look of sheer horror on their face does anyone know more about this because Sheila looked quite beautiful as if she was asleep
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
-
Nevill would never have left a loaded rifle where the children might find it.
And yet he kept a loaded shotgun under his bed?
-
Vidvic why did your friends take the silencer home why wouldnt they call the police if they were certain Jeremy was the killer. Taking the silencer home could have ruined the forensic evidence they would have known that Is this along the same lines as "why didnt JB dial 999, why didn't he rush to the house??"
If your friends were to upset to identify the body dont you think its strange that Anne Eaton took home a bucket of bloody clothes Ann was prepared to identify them and went with JM.
I feel Ann Eatons behaviour in doing that could potentially show she was plotting to frame Jeremy
Based on what?
All the events that I describe here make me very suspicious
GOSH
As you know and like these people could you explain what on earth Neville could have done to receive an attack from Peter Eaton
An attack! Did this really happen? Are you sure?......
I have never read anything about violence in Neville and Junes house this violent behaviour must have really shocked him and even frightened him Not as frightened as he was of suffering a shooting accident on the farm.......
-
Apologies if this has already been covered, but why would the Bambers have discussed fostering the twins, as JB claims, if they were already living mainly with Colin?....
I don't see that as being improbable. I think they were all increasingly worried about Sheila being ALONE with the twins - wouldn't you? Sheila had confided to a doctor that she thought they were the Devil's children, that they were capable of having sex with her and kill her. Colin couldn't be there 24/7, that would leave Sheila who, frankly, wasn't fit for the task. Not her own fault. Have you seen what I found about the medication Sheila was on? Her dosage of Haloperidol had abruptly been halved - that creates EXTREMELY DANGEROUS withdrawal symptoms. Andrea Yates, who killed her five children, had abruptly been taken off the same medication.
Please read what I found on the drug Sheila was on:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,869.0.html (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,869.0.html)
-
Abs, totally respect what you say about her medication, but point I'm making is that the twins were already living with Colin, not Sheila and I am absolutely certain that if they were that concerned about their safety (and I've never heard they were) then they would have preferred Colin to have them than try and put them into care. Colin would have never allowed that anyway.
That is why I believe this conversation never happened.
-
Abs, totally respect what you say about her medication, but point I'm making is that the twins were already living with Colin, not Sheila and I am absolutely certain that if they were that concerned about their safety (and I've never heard they were) then they would have preferred Colin to have them than try and put them into care. Colin would have never allowed that anyway.
That is why I believe this conversation never happened.
The twins had been in partial foster care while Colin had them earlier. I think it is very possible that he wanted some free time, new girlfriend, his work etc.
-
Keira, yes there were, but they were either well hidden or broken down and made safe. Nevill would never have left a loaded rifle where the children might find it.
And why could JB not remember if he'd shot at rabbits or not?
Two rifles on the stairs and a bandolier of bullets hanging on the inside of the door...
I can't remember what Jeremy said about the rabbits, any chance of a reminding me?
-
Vic hi,
JB may not have rushed to the house as he may have been scared? Took time in pondering what to do for the best?
We are led to believe that although AE took JM to identify the victims,AE did not do so herself as she could not tell the twins apart?
When JB was telling the police his version of events on the morning of the murders,could shock not have made him confused in recalling previous events,times etc?This was not accounted for by the relatives.Instead they beame suspicious sleuth detectives whilst all the while being nice to his face.Why on earth did they not confront him?
I believe that Nevilles paranoia about being killed in a shooting "accident* is linked to the reason he had a panic alarm installed and slept with a shotgun under his bed.Are you trying to say that this was all down to a fear of Jeremy?
You seem a really nice guy and I can fully understand your loyallty to your friends/relatives,but to be fair,most of your opinions are just as speculative as everybody elses,because nobody but JB,actually knows the truth.
-
Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
There is a photograph on the forum showing a close up of one of Sheila's hands. This picture shows without a shadow of doubt that the police were entirely wrong to tell the court that Sheila's hands were spotlessly clean' when they were anythign but clean. The hand and arm in the photo are blood stained and the hand has a distinctive marking - bruise, oil, or other substance? - which would be entirely consistent with Sheila having fired a gun.
Abs: do you remember which thread that photo can be found under, please? I can't find it.
There was also a blood stained hand print on sheila's nightdress which appears to have been Sheila's, that would suggest there was blood on Sheila's palm.
As the police failed to accurately record this crucial evidence, I have no confidence in their findings regarding gun residue - it's known too that Sheila's residue test findings were confused with someone else's.
-
Nevill would never have left a loaded rifle where the children might find it.
And yet he kept a loaded shotgun under his bed?
However the shotgun NB usually kept under the bed was not under the bed at the time of the murders (as I am sure NB would have used it if he could - rather than running dowstairs to make a phone call ???) and I believe this shotgun was photographed by EP near the gun cupboard in the office.
NB may have locked it away with the children staying over (if so, a fatal move), or again was it moved by someone else prior to the murders, but would NB not have noticed if his shotgun had been moved esp. with the children saying over?
-
Nevill would never have left a loaded rifle where the children might find it.
And yet he kept a loaded shotgun under his bed?
However the shotgun NB usually kept under the bed was not under the bed at the time of the murders (as I am sure NB would have used it if he could - rather than running dowstairs to make a phone call ???) and I believe this shotgun was photographed by EP near the gun cupboard in the office.
NB may have locked it away with the children staying over (if so, a fatal move), or again was it moved by someone else prior to the murders, but would NB not have noticed if his shotgun had been moved esp. with the children saying over?
Fair point. ;)
-
How do you know that Neville ran downstairs to use the phone in the kitchen? He may have ran down down the stairs pursuing the killer with his shotgun.A tussle may have ensued in which concluded with Neville being beaten and subsequently killed.Thats how Nevilles gun could have ended up being found downstairs.Didnt Mike say something about a second gun being found in the kitchen?Is that Nevilles gun that is photographed in the downstairs office?There were many weapons at whf.Why did the police photograph only that one shotgun and the rifle that was found with Sheila?The shotgun must therefore hold some relevance to the crime?
-
Wild speculation about Jeremy being evil beyond beleif nobody proved that, the housekeeper of 20 years testified for Jeremy
Freddie who was close to Sheila testified on behalf of Jeremy, he wouldnt have testified if Sheila did not get on with Jeremy
Wild speculation that Jeremy is gay on one hand the relatives say he is this cocky monster with all these girls around him then they say he is gay
I am finding your posts hilarious because they do not contain anything factual and as I am always trying to get to the truth why wont you tell me what work you have done as a tv producer I know many people
working in the tv industry so we probably no the same people
-
Vidvic every single time someone comes on here that is anti bamber I live in hope that they will have new evidence to prove JB is guilty because I would rather find out he is guilty than think of an innocent man in prison for 26 years. Most of the people on this forum probably think they would be better of dead than live Jeremys life. Every Friday Saturday and Sunday he is locked in his tiny single cell from 5pm until the next morning.
Since I have been coming on this forum I have seen them all and most of them hide behind dodgy names and some of their behaviour has been absolutely disgusting they would be far more likely be the type of person to carry out a murder than JB for once can you bring something to the table of FACT
I loved a good debate with Hartley and Kaldin and the brilliant mistake and not one of those was pro Bamber
I am sick to death of the same crap
There is not one single excuse that Ann Eaton could use to say why she took that bucket of bloody clothes home. In fact in my opinion she is up to her neck in it.
Ive studied both familys as much as an outsider can and I know which family I would trust and Jeremy was part of that one
-
Have you read Colin Caffell's book, vidvic? He does say that one of his son's let slip to Ralph & June that they'd seen him 'sharing a cigarette' with a friend, which Sheila said her parents were 'po-faced' about. This was shortly before the murders.
Edit: It's on pages 36/37 of 'In Search of the Rainbow's End' published 1994.
The conversation with Sheila was 'only weeks earlier'
Yes, very moving book....Nevill might have been po-faced but hardly likely to make them favour care over living with Colin..
-
Vidvic why did your friends take the silencer home why wouldnt they call the police if they were certain Jeremy was the killer. Taking the silencer home could have ruined the forensic evidence they would have known that Is this along the same lines as "why didnt JB dial 999, why didn't he rush to the house??"
Vidvic you answer my question I put to you first and I will answer mine is very easy to answer
-
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
I am going for it Vidvic plenty more up my sleeve
I dont know if there are policeman on this forum but can people have a look of horror on there face say if they are murdered or does everyone look peaceful like Sheila when they die
or are there any nurses on this forum I am really interested because I dont find Sheilas pictures gruesome she just looks like she is an actress covered in fake blood and just looks so peaceful
I wonder if NGB would know anything about this and this is normally something right up Chocho or Abs street
-
I don't think this Mr Vic can add anything to that which we don't already know? Come on Vic tell us something about the family that we don't know. It shouldn't be that difficult seeing you have known them since the beginning? ;D
-
Have you read Colin Caffell's book, vidvic? He does say that one of his son's let slip to Ralph & June that they'd seen him 'sharing a cigarette' with a friend, which Sheila said her parents were 'po-faced' about. This was shortly before the murders.
Edit: It's on pages 36/37 of 'In Search of the Rainbow's End' published 1994.
The conversation with Sheila was 'only weeks earlier'
Yes, very moving book....Nevill might have been po-faced but hardly likely to make them favour care over living with Colin..
Well likely or not, Colin himself thought it may have been a clue to Sheila's parents wanting to have the boys fostered.
I think I remember that as well?
-
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
I am going for it Vidvic plenty more up my sleeve
I dont know if there are policeman on this forum but can people have a look of horror on there face say if they are murdered or does everyone look peaceful like Sheila when they die
or are there any nurses on this forum I am really interested because I dont find Sheilas pictures gruesome she just looks like she is an actress covered in fake blood and just looks so peaceful
I wonder if NGB would know anything about this and this is normally something right up Chocho or Abs street
Jackie - I am afraid this is not within my area of expertise. I have seen quite a few photographs of dead bodies in the course of my legal work but I am not able to draw any general conclusions from them on this point.
-
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
I am going for it Vidvic plenty more up my sleeve
I dont know if there are policeman on this forum but can people have a look of horror on there face say if they are murdered or does everyone look peaceful like Sheila when they die
or are there any nurses on this forum I am really interested because I dont find Sheilas pictures gruesome she just looks like she is an actress covered in fake blood and just looks so peaceful
I wonder if NGB would know anything about this and this is normally something right up Chocho or Abs street
The majority of people that have seen looked quite peaceful and just as if they were sleeping.
-
Vic may I ask? if as you say,it wasnt all about the money/property or whatever for the relatives,then why did they not compensate Colin for his loss?
-
Lucy have you seen lots of dead bodies?
I suppose that just a stupid american documentary then how ridiculous
-
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
I am going for it Vidvic plenty more up my sleeve
I dont know if there are policeman on this forum but can people have a look of horror on there face say if they are murdered or does everyone look peaceful like Sheila when they die
or are there any nurses on this forum I am really interested because I dont find Sheilas pictures gruesome she just looks like she is an actress covered in fake blood and just looks so peaceful
I wonder if NGB would know anything about this and this is normally something right up Chocho or Abs street
The majority of people that have seen looked quite peaceful and just as if they were sleeping.
Out of interest Lucy,does this include murder victims?
-
Wild speculation about Jeremy being evil beyond beleif nobody proved that, the housekeeper of 20 years testified for Jeremy --yes they did, he's in prison And the house keeper was privy to all the personal details of JB and his family? The secretary and trusted friend of Nevill testified against him
Freddie who was close to Sheila testified on behalf of Jeremy, he wouldnt have testified if Sheila did not get on with Jeremy Jeremy himself said that they didn't get on
Wild speculation that Jeremy is gay on one hand the relatives say he is this cocky monster with all these girls around him then they say he is gay No relevance WSE
I am finding your posts hilarious because they do not contain anything factual and as I am always trying to get to the truth why wont you tell me what work you have done as a tv producer I know many people
working in the tv industry so we probably no the same people I produce sports shows for Sky, why is this relevant?
Vidvic every single time someone comes on here that is anti bamber I live in hope that they will have new evidence to prove JB is guilty because I would rather find out he is guilty than think of an innocent man in prison for 26 years. Most of the people on this forum probably think they would be better of dead than live Jeremys life. Every Friday Saturday and Sunday he is locked in his tiny single cell from 5pm until the next morning. That's because he murdered his family
Since I have been coming on this forum I have seen them all and most of them hide behind dodgy names and some of their behaviour has been absolutely disgusting they would be far more likely be the type of person to carry out a murder than JB for once can you bring something to the table of FACTI am not hiding, you know my name
I loved a good debate with Hartley and Kaldin and the brilliant mistake and not one of those was pro Bamber
I am sick to death of the same crap because it doesn't fit with your theories?
There is not one single excuse that Ann Eaton could use to say why she took that bucket of bloody clothes home. In fact in my opinion she is up to her neck in it. Your opinion
Ive studied both familys as much as an outsider can and I know which family I would trust and Jeremy was part of that oneThey are the same family
-
Lucy have you seen lots of dead bodies?
I suppose that just a stupid american documentary then how ridiculous
Have seen quite a few in different circumstances and the only ones that have looked like that are (sorry if this offends anyone!) people who have hung themselves and the occasional heart attack victim.
-
Vic may I ask? if as you say,it wasnt all about the money/property or whatever for the relatives,then why did they not compensate Colin for his loss?
I don't honestly know the details of this, but all I can say is that Colin has contact with at least one member of the family and all is amicable.
-
Go for it Jackie! This will almost certainly clear his name.....
I am going for it Vidvic plenty more up my sleeve
I dont know if there are policeman on this forum but can people have a look of horror on there face say if they are murdered or does everyone look peaceful like Sheila when they die
or are there any nurses on this forum I am really interested because I dont find Sheilas pictures gruesome she just looks like she is an actress covered in fake blood and just looks so peaceful
I wonder if NGB would know anything about this and this is normally something right up Chocho or Abs street
The majority of people that have seen looked quite peaceful and just as if they were sleeping.
Out of interest Lucy,does this include murder victims?
Not in the flesh Tyler but have seen enough pictures to know.
-
How do you know that Neville ran downstairs to use the phone in the kitchen? He may have ran down down the stairs pursuing the killer with his shotgun.A tussle may have ensued in which concluded with Neville being beaten and subsequently killed.That's how Nevilles gun could have ended up being found downstairs.Didn't Mike say something about a second gun being found in the kitchen?Is that Nevilles gun that is photographed in the downstairs office?There were many weapons at whf.Why did the police photograph only that one shotgun and the rifle that was found with Sheila?The shotgun must therefore hold some relevance to the crime????
Hi Tyler, I guess your comment is directed at my post.
The reason I stated "rather than running downstairs to make a phone call" is based on the general assumption (proposed by EP - and I know this could be wrong) that NB was shot initially in the bedroom and that NB's blood was found smeared on the staircase/ hall wall leading to the kitchen and NB subsequently being found dead in the kitchen (and was alleged to have at some time used the phone in the kitchen lying of the cradle).
If NB had the shotgun, and June had been shot in front of him, I think NB would have let the killer have both barrels, and if NB missed there would be clear proof in the house that a shotgun cartridge had been discharged.
The second gun in the kitchen Mike T has referred to is a .22 air rifle that he believes SC used to try and kill herself with (first shot) and failed (no proof of an air rifle being used).
There is no evidence, that I am aware of, that suggests the shotgun photographed in the office had anything to do with the murders.
-
Vic may I ask? if as you say,it wasnt all about the money/property or whatever for the relatives,then why did they not compensate Colin for his loss?
I don't honestly know the details of this, but all I can say is that Colin has contact with at least one member of the family and all is amicable.
Thanks.Colin comes across as a really nice guy.What do you make of Suthersts findings?That the scratch in the paintwork above the aga was created some considerable time AFTER the murders?
-
Vic may I ask? if as you say,it wasnt all about the money/property or whatever for the relatives,then why did they not compensate Colin for his loss?
I don't honestly know the details of this, but all I can say is that Colin has contact with at least one member of the family and all is amicable.
Thanks.Colin comes across as a really nice guy.What do you make of Suthersts findings?That the scratch in the paintwork above the aga was created some considerable time AFTER the murders?
I think it made a good headline for PR purposes. From the pictures I've seen (used at the appeal in 2002) it would be impossible to tell as they weren't big enough. But, as they now have the ability to test them properly this will either form part of the CCRC submissions or be quietly dropped.
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns dont mix ;)
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns dont mix ;)
Hi Tyler, that's an interesting statement in support of SC not doing it - I guess that's your message ;)
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns dont mix ;)
Hi Tyler, that's an interesting statement in support of SC not doing it - I guess that's your message ;)
Actually I didnt see the irony of my last post ;) In all fairness,unlike me,Sheila grew up surrounded by guns so Im sure she had alot more knowledge than me!
-
Tyler if you need to know anything about gunds ask Ngb1066 he is brilliant at explaining anything :)
-
Tyler if you need to know anything about gunds ask Ngb1066 he is brilliant at explaining anything :)
yeah I know Jackie.He is very nice ;)
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns don't mix ;)
Hi Tyler, that's an interesting statement in support of SC not doing it - I guess that's your message ;)
Actually I didn't see the irony of my last post ;) In all fairness,unlike me,Sheila grew up surrounded by guns so I'm sure she had alot more knowledge than me!
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
Back to the shotgun, I think that in a moment of madness SC would have used a shotgun as this would be quick and only require loading with 4 cartridges for the murders - and the noise would be irrelevant to a women gone "berserk". IMO
However if NB had locked the shotgun away maybe it was not available ???
-
That's because he murdered his family
Vidvic you have made the statement above and you have no idea of that unless you were there
We have some highly intelligent posters on here Shona for one and she thinks a third party carried out the murders
Admit it Vidvic you do not know
-
Freddie who was close to Sheila testified on behalf of Jeremy, he wouldnt have testified if Sheila did not get on with Jeremy Jeremy himself said that they didn't get on
Where did he say they didnt get on other that most brother and sister normal spats
-
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
Back to the shotgun, I think that in a moment of madness SC would have used a shotgun as this would be quick and only require loading with 4 cartridges for the murders - and the noise would be irrelevant to a women gone "berserk". IMO
However if NB had locked the shotgun away maybe it was not available ???
Isn't this ascribing too much logic to somebody described as a paranoid schizophrenic?
Surely if she just flipped out, she didn't think of what the best method of execution was or what the best chambering option was, as that would set the scene for a slightly more pre-meditated killing.
-
Good point TylerD. She had apparantly been in a strange brooding type mood that evening.It is possible that whilst watching Jeremy load the rifle,she could have been having disturbing violent thoughts and when she did finally flip,the rifle was just simply avaliable.
-
...and I'm sure I read something about an incident the previous night where a shot was fired in the kitchen.
-
Vic, apologies, I forgot, can I also ask you:
3. Does your 'JB did it' theory view JB as the murderer or does it favour the idea of a hitman?
Dear Keira,
Goodness! Where to begin......
The phone call. 'Terrified' father calls....doesn't call 999, gets phone book, calls witham, back to phone book, calls chelmsford, gets agitated, calls Julie, leaves house, gets overtaken by Police car. (Team JB now creeping time of call and introducing another call to get round some of the problems with this.)
Jeremy adamant father said "Sheila" has got THE gun, so completely rules out anyone else being involved. (Team JB have in the past said he may have misheard this, to introduce someone else)
Read the actual descriptions of what was done to the victims.....Arc of bullets into one of the twins heads, Nevill's injuries to his face, all done by Sheila? A woman whom Jeremy himself admitted to having never seen fire a gun as an adult. How many times did she load the magazine? You try doing it! It's bloody hard going! And by Sheila? Yeah right!
Jeremy leaves gun in kitchen having shot rabbits without the sights on. For a start, especially with the twins in the house, Nevill would never have left it there. Secondly, what would JB have been doing shooting rabbits without the sight? (Bit convenient this rifle just lying around)If JB is innocent and the family framed him, then the silencer wasn't used. How can you shoot all those different people without anyone making an escape without the silencer?Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
Julie told police that a hitman was to blame. Why? If she was lying then why not simply blame JB. Bit of a strange move to blame someone else instead.
Also WHY? Why would the police believe the evil relatives instead of taking the easier option and just blaming Sheila. Is it not possible that they were telling the truth when members of the police weren't convinced with the initial decision? If you, as a relative found the explanation so completely ridiculous would you not investigate it? Would you welcome JB back into the fold if you believed he may have wiped out half your family?
Have you ever considered how many people would have had to have lied all these years?? Hundreds...Relatives, Police, reinvestigation police, friends, ballistic experts, the list is endless.......and not ONE has ever come forward, even when JB offered ONE MILLION pounds to break cover.....
Just a brief selection of reasons......
Vic - You have set out fairly the main factors which have convinced you of Jeremy Bamber's guilt. Others have already posted responses but I would like to deal with the points which you have made relating to the rifle and silencer, because there is a genuine contrary argument which can be advanced in relation to each of your points. I apologise to other members of the forum who will have read earlier posts of mine dealing with several of the points but I do believe that it is important that Vic's points are answered. I will deal with the points briefly following the order in Vic's post.
1. The "arc of bullets" fired into the head of one of the twins is not indicative of anything. The rifle was light in weight and semiautomatic with a light trigger pull. Anyone, whether or not experienced in the use of firearms, could fire a sequence of shots very rapidly. The "arc" of shots could easily be the result of the end of the barrel moving slightly during the course of the shots being fired. The number of shots strongly suggests to me that the murderer of the twins was involved in a frenzied attack rather than a cold calculated execution. A single shot to the head of each of the twins at close range would have been sufficient to cause death. It would also have been the natural method to be used by a calm and calculating murderer in that there would have been more rounds left in the rifle to deal with the remaining victims.
2. It is not hard to load the magazine of a .22 Anschutz rifle. At the trial evidence was given that it became progressively harder to load bullets the nearer the magazine came to be full. The final round (the 10th) required some effort and the jury were invited to experiment themselves with loading bullets into the magazine. However the first 6 or 7 rounds are very easy to load. It is only as the spring within the magazine becomes more compressed that loading requires more pressure to be applied. It is likely in my view that the rifle at WHF was reloaded several times during the course of the shootings, with perhaps 4 or 5 bullets loaded each time. I have also explained on an earlier thread the ease with which individual rounds can be loaded and fired, by placing a round directly into the breach of the rifle rather than into the magazine. i believe that it is likely that this happened with some of the shots to Nevill and possibly to June.
3. It is perfectly possible to use the Anschutz rifle to shoot rabbits without the telescopic sights being fitted. The rifle had what are known as "iron sights" fitted as standard (the photographs of the rifle show these clearly) and the telescopic sights are an optional attachment. The standard "iron" sights enable the rifle to be fired accurately and quickly, particularly at close or moderate range. The telescopic sights assist with shooting accurately particularly at longer range, but only if they have been properly "zeroed". There is no evidence about whether the telescopic sights had been properly and recently zeroed. If this had not been done, the telescopic sights would have been an impediment to shooting rabbits. If therefore on the evening before the killings at WHF Jeremy Bamber saw rabbits near the house, he may have found it more convenient to remove the telescopic sights and rely on the standard "iron" sights. There would be nothing sinister in this.
4. There is evidence that weapons security was lax at WHF. This was not unusual at the time, particularly for farmers. Now the accepted practice is for both shotguns and rifles to be stored when not in use unloaded in approved steel cabinets, firmly secured to the premises and in an area of the house where the cabinet cannot easily be seen. The situation in the mid 1980s was very different. Shotguns and rifles at WHF were not stored in secure cabinets. If Jeremy Bamber left the rifle on the settle in the scullery at WHF I do not believe it can be said with any degree of confidence that Nevill would have moved it.
5. The evidence is that the ammunition used was Eley hollowpoint subsonic. Even without the silencer fitted the noise of shots being fired would not have been great. There would not have been the "crack" generated by standard supersonic ammunition. It would have been perfectly possible for the shootings at WHF to have been carried out without a silencer being attached to the rifle. In addition we have no way of knowing the order in which each person was shot so I do not accept that the evidence indicates that a silencer was attached to the rifle at any stage.
Vic - I respect your views and accept that many people share them. However it is important to point out the contrary views on the points above which are at least as credible as the views you have expressed. It is also important to remember that if there are two alternative credible conclusions which may be drawn from proven facts, the defendant should be given the benefit of the doubt.
-
Also remember that in the first few hours after those dreadful events they rallied round JB and tried to support him. JB knows this to be true.
It was only after things were overheard being told to the police that doubts started to emerge and the events of that night were questioned.
Remind me vidvic who overheard exactly what and how many hours did they rally around Jeremy
Please answer this question you are stating what you have put above as fact
-
Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
There is a photograph on the forum showing a close up of one of Sheila's hands. This picture shows without a shadow of doubt that the police were entirely wrong to tell the court that Sheila's hands were spotlessly clean' when they were anythign but clean. The hand and arm in the photo are blood stained and the hand has a distinctive marking - bruise, oil, or other substance? - which would be entirely consistent with Sheila having fired a gun.
Abs: do you remember which thread that photo can be found under, please? I can't find it.There was also a blood stained hand print on sheila's nightdress which appears to have been Sheila's, that would suggest there was blood on Sheila's palm.
As the police failed to accurately record this crucial evidence, I have no confidence in their findings regarding gun residue - it's known too that Sheila's residue test findings were confused with someone else's.
I don´t remember which thread, but here it is again:
(http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r318/astabasta_2006/b.jpg)
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns don't mix ;)
Hi Tyler, that's an interesting statement in support of SC not doing it - I guess that's your message ;)
Actually I didn't see the irony of my last post ;) In all fairness,unlike me,Sheila grew up surrounded by guns so I'm sure she had alot more knowledge than me!
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
Back to the shotgun, I think that in a moment of madness SC would have used a shotgun as this would be quick and only require loading with 4 cartridges for the murders - and the noise would be irrelevant to a women gone "berserk". IMO
However if NB had locked the shotgun away maybe it was not available ???
´
As far as I know, there was not a lock on the cupboard. I don´t know if the office it was in had a lock.
-
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
Back to the shotgun, I think that in a moment of madness SC would have used a shotgun as this would be quick and only require loading with 4 cartridges for the murders - and the noise would be irrelevant to a women gone "berserk". IMO
However if NB had locked the shotgun away maybe it was not available ???
Isn't this ascribing too much logic to somebody described as a paranoid schizophrenic?
Surely if she just flipped out, she didn't think of what the best method of execution was or what the best chambering option was, as that would set the scene for a slightly more pre-meditated killing.
Hi, Tyler. I obviously don´t know whether Sheila committed the murders or not. But I have read that murders by paranoid/schizophrenics (or schizophrenics) ARE in fact often well planned - there IS some logic behind most of them. And most involve family members.
-
Bring it on Vicvid the insider to the relatives, now is the time for you to put your facts to NGB1066
I live for these moments
-
+1 NGB. If ever I get in trouble,I would want you to represent me ;D
-
Hi, Tyler. I obviously don´t know whether Sheila committed the murders or not. But I have read that murders by paranoid/schizophrenics (or schizophrenics) ARE in fact often well planned - there IS some logic behind most of them. And most involve family members.
Hey there Abs.
I appreciate your point of view but would like to offer a counter.
Through some aspects of my work, I deal with a lot of people with mental health problems and in particular paranoid schizophrenics. Whilst I do concede that on occassion they will plan something meticulously, the actual planning in some cases is poorly thought out.
In other cases, there is no comprehensible logic to the planning and it just appears random to a level headed mind.
I'm not saying she did or did not do it, as I am still in a 50/50 stage.
It wasn't so long ago that I believed JB was guilty without any doubt.
Now I have some doubts.
-
Oh NGB1066 look what you have done frightened him off plus 1 :)
He has just gone >:(
Tyler he was my friend first but if its a murder trial you can have him :)
-
Brilliant Tyler Durden we love fence sitters it was becoming boooooooooooooring
-
5. The evidence is that the ammunition used was Eley hollowpoint subsonic. Even without the silencer fitted the noise of shots being fired would not have been great. There would not have been the "crack" generated by standard supersonic ammunition. It would have been perfectly possible for the shootings at WHF to have been carried out without a silencer being attached to the rifle. In addition we have no way of knowing the order in which each person was shot so I do not accept that the evidence indicates that a silencer was attached to the rifle at any stage.
Posted this link a while ago about the difference in noise whilst using both types of bullets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X7Td2JMLhc and whilst I respect your opinion NGB1 have to say that I find it really hard to believe that no one would have heard this if a silencer hadn't of been fitted as it was in the middle of the night when noise tends to sound louder.
-
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
It depends how you look at it. I would say that the victims were shot at very close range? And if that was so then several shots missed their target, such as arms etc. Those I would count as a miss if the shots were meant to kill the victim. On the other hand if Jeremy shot them he was a very good shot apparently and he would have been more accurate. Similarly if a "hit man" had been hired, than I doubt if he would get much work after that very "unprofessional" job?
-
Oh NGB1066 look what you have done frightened him off plus 1 :)
He has just gone >:(
Tyler he was my friend first but if its a murder trial you can have him :)
Dont worry Jackie,I wouldnt dream of trying to steal your forum crush ;) aint love grand :-*
-
That's because he murdered his family
Vidvic you have made the statement above and you have no idea of that unless you were there
We have some highly intelligent posters on here Shona for one and she thinks a third party carried out the murders
Admit it Vidvic you do not know
I have to say that this is one of the most ridiculous posts I've read.
If Shona thinks a third party did it then we might as well all go home and let him out now......
So, actually being there is all it would take to prove innocence or guilt?
So where were you when it happened? In a kitchen cupboard??!!
-
Vic - You have set out fairly the main factors which have convinced you of Jeremy Bamber's guilt. Others have already posted responses but I would like to deal with the points which you have made relating to the rifle and silencer, because there is a genuine contrary argument which can be advanced in relation to each of your points. I apologise to other members of the forum who will have read earlier posts of mine dealing with several of the points but I do believe that it is important that Vic's points are answered. I will deal with the points briefly following the order in Vic's post.
1. The "arc of bullets" fired into the head of one of the twins is not indicative of anything. The rifle was light in weight and semiautomatic with a light trigger pull. Anyone, whether or not experienced in the use of firearms, could fire a sequence of shots very rapidly. The "arc" of shots could easily be the result of the end of the barrel moving slightly during the course of the shots being fired. The number of shots strongly suggests to me that the murderer of the twins was involved in a frenzied attack rather than a cold calculated execution. A single shot to the head of each of the twins at close range would have been sufficient to cause death. It would also have been the natural method to be used by a calm and calculating murderer in that there would have been more rounds left in the rifle to deal with the remaining victims. JB had never shot another human being as far as I'm aware. In the cold light of day, as you rightly state, a single bullet would be enough. I'm not so sure JB would have been prepared to take that chance. He also had to shot one twin before the other possibly woke and I think he would have had to kill both of them as quickly as possible.
2. It is not hard to load the magazine of a .22 Anschutz rifle. At the trial evidence was given that it became progressively harder to load bullets the nearer the magazine came to be full. The final round (the 10th) required some effort and the jury were invited to experiment themselves with loading bullets into the magazine. However the first 6 or 7 rounds are very easy to load. It is only as the spring within the magazine becomes more compressed that loading requires more pressure to be applied. It is likely in my view that the rifle at WHF was reloaded several times during the course of the shootings, with perhaps 4 or 5 bullets loaded each time. I have also explained on an earlier thread the ease with which individual rounds can be loaded and fired, by placing a round directly into the breach of the rifle rather than into the magazine. i believe that it is likely that this happened with some of the shots to Nevill and possibly to June. This assumes a knowledge of the rifle which I simply don't believe Sheila had.
3. It is perfectly possible to use the Anschutz rifle to shoot rabbits without the telescopic sights being fitted. The rifle had what are known as "iron sights" fitted as standard (the photographs of the rifle show these clearly) and the telescopic sights are an optional attachment. The standard "iron" sights enable the rifle to be fired accurately and quickly, particularly at close or moderate range. The telescopic sights assist with shooting accurately particularly at longer range, but only if they have been properly "zeroed". There is no evidence about whether the telescopic sights had been properly and recently zeroed. If this had not been done, the telescopic sights would have been an impediment to shooting rabbits. If therefore on the evening before the killings at WHF Jeremy Bamber saw rabbits near the house, he may have found it more convenient to remove the telescopic sights and rely on the standard "iron" sights. There would be nothing sinister in this.I agree to a point. To set up the sights took time and so they were almost always on the rifle. In JB's statements he never said that he had removed them prior to 'rushing out' of the back door.
4. There is evidence that weapons security was lax at WHF. This was not unusual at the time, particularly for farmers. Now the accepted practice is for both shotguns and rifles to be stored when not in use unloaded in approved steel cabinets, firmly secured to the premises and in an area of the house where the cabinet cannot easily be seen. The situation in the mid 1980s was very different. Shotguns and rifles at WHF were not stored in secure cabinets. If Jeremy Bamber left the rifle on the settle in the scullery at WHF I do not believe it can be said with any degree of confidence that Nevill would have moved it.I believe that with the twins there, he would of.
5. The evidence is that the ammunition used was Eley hollowpoint subsonic. Even without the silencer fitted the noise of shots being fired would not have been great. There would not have been the "crack" generated by standard supersonic ammunition. It would have been perfectly possible for the shootings at WHF to have been carried out without a silencer being attached to the rifle. In addition we have no way of knowing the order in which each person was shot so I do not accept that the evidence indicates that a silencer was attached to the rifle at any stage.I have to accept your greater knowledge of guns, but find it incredibly hard to accept you could fire that rifle, whatever the amo, inside a house, at the dead of night, without alerting everyone in the house imediately. Would not the twin who was alive last, have jumped out of his skin with a rifle going off in the same room?
Vic - I respect your views and accept that many people share them. However it is important to point out the contrary views on the points above which are at least as credible as the views you have expressed. It is also important to remember that if there are two alternative credible conclusions which may be drawn from proven facts, the defendant should be given the benefit of the doubt
But, with the greatest of respects, a criminal defence will attack individual points, create doubt in the mind of a jury and move to the next point. Like bricks in a wall, rattle them and try and make them loose, so to speak. But in this case, there are too many bricks.
Thank you for taking the time to write what you did and for showing my views as much respect as I hold yours.
-
Vic, you have copied ngb1066's post and added your own to the bottom AFTER 'benefit of the doubt' so it looks like ngb said the second from last para. I'm sure that was unintended, but it'd be best to 'quote' so we can see clearly who said what. Thanks :)
Sorry Sarann, just to be clear the 'bold' type is mine as is the last sentence NOT in bold.....
-
Tyler you are so right it makes the world go around ::)
Some people are are just so special we are very lucky indeed to have our Ngb1066 :)
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
-
Vidvic, just because I don't believe that JB actually pulled the trigger, I still think that he is culpable.
-
Vic, apologies, I forgot, can I also ask you:
3. Does your 'JB did it' theory view JB as the murderer or does it favour the idea of a hitman?
Dear Keira,
Goodness! Where to begin......
The phone call. 'Terrified' father calls....doesn't call 999, gets phone book, calls witham, back to phone book, calls chelmsford, gets agitated, calls Julie, leaves house, gets overtaken by Police car. (Team JB now creeping time of call and introducing another call to get round some of the problems with this.)
Jeremy adamant father said "Sheila" has got THE gun, so completely rules out anyone else being involved. (Team JB have in the past said he may have misheard this, to introduce someone else)
Read the actual descriptions of what was done to the victims.....Arc of bullets into one of the twins heads, Nevill's injuries to his face, all done by Sheila? A woman whom Jeremy himself admitted to having never seen fire a gun as an adult. How many times did she load the magazine? You try doing it! It's bloody hard going! And by Sheila? Yeah right!
Jeremy leaves gun in kitchen having shot rabbits without the sights on. For a start, especially with the twins in the house, Nevill would never have left it there. Secondly, what would JB have been doing shooting rabbits without the sight? (Bit convenient this rifle just lying around)If JB is innocent and the family framed him, then the silencer wasn't used. How can you shoot all those different people without anyone making an escape without the silencer?Sheila didn't have anywhere near enough blood on her top to suggest she could possibly have shot herself once, moved, then had another go. Oh, and without hardly a trace of anything on her hands to suggest she'd fired the rifle anyhow....
Julie told police that a hitman was to blame. Why? If she was lying then why not simply blame JB. Bit of a strange move to blame someone else instead.
Also WHY? Why would the police believe the evil relatives instead of taking the easier option and just blaming Sheila. Is it not possible that they were telling the truth when members of the police weren't convinced with the initial decision? If you, as a relative found the explanation so completely ridiculous would you not investigate it? Would you welcome JB back into the fold if you believed he may have wiped out half your family?
Have you ever considered how many people would have had to have lied all these years?? Hundreds...Relatives, Police, reinvestigation police, friends, ballistic experts, the list is endless.......and not ONE has ever come forward, even when JB offered ONE MILLION pounds to break cover.....
Just a brief selection of reasons......
Vic - You have set out fairly the main factors which have convinced you of Jeremy Bamber's guilt. Others have already posted responses but I would like to deal with the points which you have made relating to the rifle and silencer, because there is a genuine contrary argument which can be advanced in relation to each of your points. I apologise to other members of the forum who will have read earlier posts of mine dealing with several of the points but I do believe that it is important that Vic's points are answered. I will deal with the points briefly following the order in Vic's post.
1. The "arc of bullets" fired into the head of one of the twins is not indicative of anything. The rifle was light in weight and semiautomatic with a light trigger pull. Anyone, whether or not experienced in the use of firearms, could fire a sequence of shots very rapidly. The "arc" of shots could easily be the result of the end of the barrel moving slightly during the course of the shots being fired. The number of shots strongly suggests to me that the murderer of the twins was involved in a frenzied attack rather than a cold calculated execution. A single shot to the head of each of the twins at close range would have been sufficient to cause death. It would also have been the natural method to be used by a calm and calculating murderer in that there would have been more rounds left in the rifle to deal with the remaining victims.
2. It is not hard to load the magazine of a .22 Anschutz rifle. At the trial evidence was given that it became progressively harder to load bullets the nearer the magazine came to be full. The final round (the 10th) required some effort and the jury were invited to experiment themselves with loading bullets into the magazine. However the first 6 or 7 rounds are very easy to load. It is only as the spring within the magazine becomes more compressed that loading requires more pressure to be applied. It is likely in my view that the rifle at WHF was reloaded several times during the course of the shootings, with perhaps 4 or 5 bullets loaded each time. I have also explained on an earlier thread the ease with which individual rounds can be loaded and fired, by placing a round directly into the breach of the rifle rather than into the magazine. i believe that it is likely that this happened with some of the shots to Nevill and possibly to June.
3. It is perfectly possible to use the Anschutz rifle to shoot rabbits without the telescopic sights being fitted. The rifle had what are known as "iron sights" fitted as standard (the photographs of the rifle show these clearly) and the telescopic sights are an optional attachment. The standard "iron" sights enable the rifle to be fired accurately and quickly, particularly at close or moderate range. The telescopic sights assist with shooting accurately particularly at longer range, but only if they have been properly "zeroed". There is no evidence about whether the telescopic sights had been properly and recently zeroed. If this had not been done, the telescopic sights would have been an impediment to shooting rabbits. If therefore on the evening before the killings at WHF Jeremy Bamber saw rabbits near the house, he may have found it more convenient to remove the telescopic sights and rely on the standard "iron" sights. There would be nothing sinister in this.
4. There is evidence that weapons security was lax at WHF. This was not unusual at the time, particularly for farmers. Now the accepted practice is for both shotguns and rifles to be stored when not in use unloaded in approved steel cabinets, firmly secured to the premises and in an area of the house where the cabinet cannot easily be seen. The situation in the mid 1980s was very different. Shotguns and rifles at WHF were not stored in secure cabinets. If Jeremy Bamber left the rifle on the settle in the scullery at WHF I do not believe it can be said with any degree of confidence that Nevill would have moved it.
5. The evidence is that the ammunition used was Eley hollowpoint subsonic. Even without the silencer fitted the noise of shots being fired would not have been great. There would not have been the "crack" generated by standard supersonic ammunition. It would have been perfectly possible for the shootings at WHF to have been carried out without a silencer being attached to the rifle. In addition we have no way of knowing the order in which each person was shot so I do not accept that the evidence indicates that a silencer was attached to the rifle at any stage.
Vic - I respect your views and accept that many people share them. However it is important to point out the contrary views on the points above which are at least as credible as the views you have expressed. It is also important to remember that if there are two alternative credible conclusions which may be drawn from proven facts, the defendant should be given the benefit of the doubt.
A big round of applause for this, ngb1066, a lovely post!
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
I don´t believe there was a silencer on the rifle at all. Please don´t ask me to explain why!
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
So have I and it makes enough noise to be heard, especially in the middle of the night!
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
-
Vic I have a question if you dont mind.If your friends/relatives only "found" one sound moderator.The one in the gun cupboard allegedly found on the 10th August (but turned out to actually have been found in september),how did EP come to have two sound moderators being forensically examined? Where did the second one come from?
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
Sorry Grahame but I find your post quite offensive.
Have worked in mental health for many years and have read all of the evidence regarding Sheila's illness and medication and do not believe for a second that she did this......you have a bystanders view of paranoid schizophrenia that in no way resembles the reality.
June was actually shot in a sleeping position which suggests that she was initially asleep.....I think that this points to a silencer being used.
The fact that there was hardly an accurate shot points to them actually being moving targets after they were awakened.
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
Sorry Grahame but I find your post quite offensive.
Have worked in mental health for many years and have read all of the evidence regarding Sheila's illness and medication and do not believe for a second that she did this......you have a bystanders view of paranoid schizophrenia that in no way resembles the reality.
June was actually shot in a sleeping position which suggests that she was initially asleep.....I think that this points to a silencer being used.
The fact that there was hardly an accurate shot points to them actually being moving targets after they were awakened.
No Lucy I have personal experience of schizophrenia. And the fact that they actually were awakened points to the fact that a silencer was not used. Also you have absolutely no right to say that my post was offensive. Just because you think you know all about schizophrenia and assume that I don't. Believe you me I have seen it and experienced it first hand young lady and know exactly what paranoid schizophrenics are capable of. So you have no reason on earth to say my post is offensive. Let me tell you one thing Lucy70. You ain't lived mate. You need to experience their violence first hand and then you can come back and tell me what you think I don't know. Sitting on the edge as an observer thinking you know it all. Goods grief woman use your brains for once. If you are anything like those so called psychiatrists treating my ******* then you know sod all. Most of the psychiatrists I've dealt with in the time I and my wife were suffering with my own ****** were crackpots themselves and knew diddly squat. You and your "many years" experience. >:( >:( >:( bystanders view indeed? Perhaps you ought to start living with a paranoid schiziphrenic instead of "working in" mental health. Know all about the case indeed. lolololol You have just proved you know nothing about it at all.
-
chill Grahame,there is always gonna be one that thinks they know it all ;)
-
chill Grahame,there is always gonna be one that thinks they know it all ;)
Well. These little tyros think they know everything. The reality is they've not even begun to know anything.
-
absolutley well said graham.
-
Plus one Grahame, fancy pulling you on that one
You handled that well
At least we have a really nice new fence sitter poster in Tyler
Two nice Tylers and sensible questions :) :) :)
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
Sorry Grahame but I find your post quite offensive.
Have worked in mental health for many years and have read all of the evidence regarding Sheila's illness and medication and do not believe for a second that she did this......you have a bystanders view of paranoid schizophrenia that in no way resembles the reality.
June was actually shot in a sleeping position which suggests that she was initially asleep.....I think that this points to a silencer being used.
The fact that there was hardly an accurate shot points to them actually being moving targets after they were awakened.
No Lucy I have personal experience of schizophrenia. And the fact that they actually were awakened points to the fact that a silencer was not used. Also you have absolutely no right to say that my post was offensive. Just because you think you know all about schizophrenia and assume that I don't. Believe you me I have seen it and experienced it first hand young lady and know exactly what paranoid schizophrenics are capable of. So you have no reason on earth to say my post is offensive. Let me tell you one thing Lucy70. You ain't lived mate. You need to experience their violence first hand and then you can come back and tell me what you think I don't know. Sitting on the edge as an observer thinking you know it all. Goods grief woman use your brains for once. If you are anything like those so called psychiatrists treating my ******* then you know sod all. Most of the psychiatrists I've dealt with in the time I and my wife were suffering with my own ****** were crackpots themselves and knew diddly squat. You and your "many years" experience. >:( >:( >:( bystanders view indeed? Perhaps you ought to start living with a paranoid schiziphrenic instead of "working in" mental health. Know all about the case indeed. lolololol You have just proved you know nothing about it at all.
I have experienced their violence first hand Grahame and know exactly how scary and destructive this can be and what some people are capable of but this has always been from people on secure units. With the right medication the vast majority of schizophrenics are entirely manageable either in the community or on a general ward and in no way pose any threat to anyone. To say that that I know nothing and have no experience is unfair and innaccurate. Apart from having a schizophrenic parent for the past 40 years and 10 years working experience I currently work in the community with an active caseload of around 50, the majority of whom are schizophrenics.
Is that enough experience for you?
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
Sorry Grahame but I find your post quite offensive.
Have worked in mental health for many years and have read all of the evidence regarding Sheila's illness and medication and do not believe for a second that she did this......you have a bystanders view of paranoid schizophrenia that in no way resembles the reality.
June was actually shot in a sleeping position which suggests that she was initially asleep.....I think that this points to a silencer being used.
The fact that there was hardly an accurate shot points to them actually being moving targets after they were awakened.
No Lucy I have personal experience of schizophrenia. And the fact that they actually were awakened points to the fact that a silencer was not used. Also you have absolutely no right to say that my post was offensive. Just because you think you know all about schizophrenia and assume that I don't. Believe you me I have seen it and experienced it first hand young lady and know exactly what paranoid schizophrenics are capable of. So you have no reason on earth to say my post is offensive. Let me tell you one thing Lucy70. You ain't lived mate. You need to experience their violence first hand and then you can come back and tell me what you think I don't know. Sitting on the edge as an observer thinking you know it all. Goods grief woman use your brains for once. If you are anything like those so called psychiatrists treating my ******* then you know sod all. Most of the psychiatrists I've dealt with in the time I and my wife were suffering with my own ****** were crackpots themselves and knew diddly squat. You and your "many years" experience. >:( >:( >:( bystanders view indeed? Perhaps you ought to start living with a paranoid schizophrenic instead of "working in" mental health. Know all about the case indeed. lolololol You have just proved you know nothing about it at all.
I have experienced their violence first hand Grahame and know exactly how scary and destructive this can be and what some people are capable of but this has always been from people on secure units. With the right medication the vast majority of schizophrenics are entirely manageable either in the community or on a general ward and in no way pose any threat to anyone. To say that that I know nothing and have no experience is unfair and innaccurate. Apart from having a schizophrenic parent for the past 40 years and 10 years working experience I currently work in the community with an active caseload of around 50, the majority of whom are schizophrenics.
Is that enough experience for you?
Yes Lucy it is. But you had no right to say that you find my post offensive. And assume that I see things from a bystanders point of view. Even on your own admission you say they can be violent. Plus, the right medication as you put it is a hit and miss situation as many psychologists will admit. It sometimes takes years to get the right medication. That is if they get the diagnosis right in the first place? We found it very difficult to make the different psychologists listen to us and still they don't. In fact at the interviews they rather listened to the patient than to us. They completely discounted what we had to say. We knew the patient was lying, but they listened to her and the said all she needed was "anger management classes". ::) Where "right" medication is concerned most of it is them experimenting with different drugs on our relatives and then watching the reaction. I have confidence in very very few psychologists. Where schizophrenics are concerned it is not right to say that they can't think straight and plan mischief. The facts are that they can be very deceptive and calculating as well as having violent episodes. The person I'm talking about kicked in front door in (she is 7 stone in weight) but she kicked the front door in. Made several holes in walls with her fists (not a mark on her fists by the way) And stabbed her boyfriend, missing his brain by inches....she stabbed him in his butt. ;) So I don't really accept your statement that the violent ones are institutionalised. The fact is it is the national health's policy to de-institutionalise as many mentally ill people as possible. The money being the chief reason for this. And so you have more potentially violent schizophrenics outside institutions than there are inside. All because in the psychiatrists view they can be handled with drugs. And do you know what Lucy? If you work with these people I think you know that what I say is true? ;)
-
Vidvic, With the greatest respect concerning the firing of a .22 rifle inside a house in the dead of night the attaching of a silencer with the ammo used would make very almost no difference at all. Silencers are usually used for distance shooting with supersonic ammunition.
.22 make little more noise than a cap gun. I have fired .22 on a number of occasions. To be fair it was on an indoor range.
Cliff, doesn't it seem reasonable to you that it was irrelevant whether a silencer was used because if it wasn't then it would have woken them up? Because it was quite obvious that it did wake them, so why argue that a silencer was used? It seems that those who keep on about a silencer are just arguing to make it seem as if the silencer was the crucial piece of evidence that convicted Jeremy. When in fact it would have made no difference if it was used or not?
I agree Grahame.
You really think he could have murdered those two little boys without a silencer??
The fact that they were discovered in a sleeping position without ever seemingly being disturbed says otherwise.
The evidence shows that June was shot first whilst in a sleeping position so is feasible to say that a silencer must have been fitted as it's generally accepted that the boys were the first victims and without question the elder Bambers would have heard this and have been out of bed by the time he got to their room.
Yes I do Lucy. It is quite feasible. It had to be that way, because (1) She loved them and didn't want them to wake up. Perhaps the little boy with the thumb in his mouth was shot first. But had to be killed first if it was Sheila so that they would not suffer. June and Ralph both woke up and the shots to them were all over the place. Hardly an accurate shot in them. Only when they stopped moving were they finished off with bullets to the head.
Sorry Grahame but I find your post quite offensive.
Have worked in mental health for many years and have read all of the evidence regarding Sheila's illness and medication and do not believe for a second that she did this......you have a bystanders view of paranoid schizophrenia that in no way resembles the reality.
June was actually shot in a sleeping position which suggests that she was initially asleep.....I think that this points to a silencer being used.
The fact that there was hardly an accurate shot points to them actually being moving targets after they were awakened.
No Lucy I have personal experience of schizophrenia. And the fact that they actually were awakened points to the fact that a silencer was not used. Also you have absolutely no right to say that my post was offensive. Just because you think you know all about schizophrenia and assume that I don't. Believe you me I have seen it and experienced it first hand young lady and know exactly what paranoid schizophrenics are capable of. So you have no reason on earth to say my post is offensive. Let me tell you one thing Lucy70. You ain't lived mate. You need to experience their violence first hand and then you can come back and tell me what you think I don't know. Sitting on the edge as an observer thinking you know it all. Goods grief woman use your brains for once. If you are anything like those so called psychiatrists treating my ******* then you know sod all. Most of the psychiatrists I've dealt with in the time I and my wife were suffering with my own ****** were crackpots themselves and knew diddly squat. You and your "many years" experience. >:( >:( >:( bystanders view indeed? Perhaps you ought to start living with a paranoid schizophrenic instead of "working in" mental health. Know all about the case indeed. lolololol You have just proved you know nothing about it at all.
I have experienced their violence first hand Grahame and know exactly how scary and destructive this can be and what some people are capable of but this has always been from people on secure units. With the right medication the vast majority of schizophrenics are entirely manageable either in the community or on a general ward and in no way pose any threat to anyone. To say that that I know nothing and have no experience is unfair and innaccurate. Apart from having a schizophrenic parent for the past 40 years and 10 years working experience I currently work in the community with an active caseload of around 50, the majority of whom are schizophrenics.
Is that enough experience for you?
Yes Lucy it is. But you had no right to say that you find my post offensive. And assume that I see things from a bystanders point of view. Even on your own admission you say they can be violent. Plus, the right medication as you put it is a hit and miss situation as many psychologists will admit. It sometimes takes years to get the right medication. That is if they get the diagnosis right in the first place? We found it very difficult to make the different psychologists listen to us and still they don't. In fact at the interviews they rather listened to the patient than to us. They completely discounted what we had to say. We knew the patient was lying, but they listened to her and the said all she needed was "anger management classes". ::) Where "right" medication is concerned most of it is them experimenting with different drugs on our relatives and then watching the reaction. I have confidence in very very few psychologists. Where schizophrenics are concerned it is not right to say that they can't think straight and plan mischief. The facts are that they can be very deceptive and calculating as well as having violent episodes. The person I'm talking about kicked in front door in (she is 7 stone in weight) but she kicked the front door in. Made several holes in walls with her fists (not a mark on her fists by the way) And stabbed her boyfriend, missing his brain by inches....she stabbed him in his butt. ;) So I don't really accept your statement that the violent ones are institutionalised. The fact is it is the national health's policy to institutionalise as many mentally ill people as possible. The money being the chief reason for this. And so you have more potentially violent schizophrenics outside institutions than there are inside. All because in the psychiatrists view they can be handled with drugs. And do you know what Lucy? If you work with these people I think you know that what I say is true? ;)
Well said, Grahame. I'm so sorry to hear about your relation's mental health problems. A member of my family has had mental health problems too resulting from the use of cannabis and I would think there are many, many families with similar experiences to yours.
Although my relation's problems were not as serious as those that your relation and your family have suffered, these were serious enough, so I can understand and relate to your experience. In my family's experience, mental health issues, even when the sufferer is on medication, mean long term misery for the sufferer and their family. So my heart goes out to you and your relation.
My relation had a breakdown after using cannabis, which a friend at school gave her. She was admitted to a psychiatric unit when she was just 16. Following a few months of treatment, my relation, who was still very ill, told her family and those treating her that she wished to leave the unit in order to live with a 58 year old fellow patient who had been a drug addict for many years and who had been grooming her in the unit.
Though her family saw this as a symptom of my relation's illness and the influence of this much older man as abusive, her psychologist stated that this meant she was recovering, her family's concerns were brushed aside and both patients were released at the same time to begin living together - though thankfully not for long. So I share your deep concern about the poor judgement of some mental health professionals.
-
I am not suggesting that all cannabis users become mentally ill, by the way, that's not the case, but some users do have very bad reactions to this drug.
-
I am not suggesting that all cannabis users become mentally ill, by the way, that's not the case, but some users do have very bad reactions to this drug.
Where I wrote "it is the national health's policy to institutionalise as many mentally ill people as possible" I meant to say "un-institutionalise". In most cases of heroin addicts, they began with the so called milder drugs like cannibis. Thankfully my son tried cannibis given to him by some of his friends had such a violent reaction to it that it has put him off entirely.
-
Time and time people have been put in prison when the medical proffession or "doctors" have got it wrong i e over the last 15 years people being jailed for killing their babies
We are talking 26 years ago and this information would have been vital at Jeremys trial
I still believe that it is pot luck with mental health issues i e where you live and which doctor your case is referred to
I have posted before I had a friend that was an absolutely wonderful mother yet she had a breakdown and her children came home to find her hanging from the banisters in the hall. How could any mother let her children see that. What state of mind was my friend in to let that happen
When you read everything about Sheila she just appears to be at the end of her tether and even her husband rejected her days before the murders saying he was happy in a new relationship but might get back with her some time in the future
You could blame Colin for her probably feeling distraught, you could blame her mum and dad for not understanding her or you could you could blame Jeremy so wrapped up in his "playboy" lifestyle he didnt see what was going on right in front of his eyes
It is my own personal opinion from what I have read about this case and about the medication Sheila was on, and how desperately unhappy she must have been with nobody really close to her she could turn to that she ended up taking her own life and I believe that if the jury had all the facts that we have right now they would have come to the same conclusion
Grahame you always put so much time and thought into matters you post about I cant find anything that could ever be classed as offensive.
Lucy maybe you could put your thoughts forward to the Appeal Court Judges WHEN Jeremy gets his appeal or maybe they will have to listen to a number of experts with up to date information about Sheilas condition
-
Thank you NEWBURY for scuppering my theory. Obviously women and knowledge of guns don't mix ;)
Hi Tyler, that's an interesting statement in support of SC not doing it - I guess that's your message ;)
Actually I didn't see the irony of my last post ;) In all fairness,unlike me,Sheila grew up surrounded by guns so I'm sure she had alot more knowledge than me!
Yes, but if SC did have gun knowledge would she chose to pick up a relatively light weight rifle that required loading with at least 15 rounds, and firing 25 shots (not one missed).
Back to the shotgun, I think that in a moment of madness SC would have used a shotgun as this would be quick and only require loading with 4 cartridges for the murders - and the noise would be irrelevant to a women gone "berserk". IMO However if NB had locked the shotgun away maybe it was not available ???
Newbury - Sheila clearly had some experience of guns and rifles although it appears she could not be regarded as an expert in their use. I accept that in a psychotic state Sheila might have reached for any weapon but she would have had far greater difficulty in using the shotgun than the rifle and she would have been aware of that. The shotgun was far heavier than the rifle and Sheila would have been aware that whilst the rifle had a negligible recoil, Nevill's 12 bore shotgun would have a kick like a mule. The shotgun would also have been difficult for Sheila to use as the photographs show it had an extended butt (Nevill was a very tall man with long arms) and she would not have been able to mount the gun to her shoulder. Whereas the rifle could be used either shoulder mounted or hand held (it could even be fired using one hand) the shotgun would have been very hard to use without being shoulder mounted. In my view if Sheila was resposible the rifle was the natural weapon for her to use.
-
...and I'm sure I read something about an incident the previous night where a shot was fired in the kitchen.
Yes there has been some suggestion of this but there appears to be very little evidence of it. I believe that it is suggested that someone heard the sound of a single shotgun round being fired at WHF during the evening before the shootings. However there is no evidence of damage within the house which would be expected if a shot was fired inside. The shot could of course have been fired through an open external door or window. If a shot was fired it raises the question of the circumstances in which it happened. In the absence of further evidence we can only speculate on that.