Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: mike tesko on December 30, 2017, 10:48:PM
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
...
-
He's John Jennery Bradley, Consultant Psychiatrist and Honorary Senior Lecturer at the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine and University of London, but these notes are very difficult to read, otherwise very interesting. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zV3WCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=John+Jennery+Bradley+psychiatrist&source=bl&ots=jQAWO3H9t1&sig=-uuVyitUtafRW4Mpyr1FffKiPiI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKoe2B-7LYAhVjCMAKHcmDAJoQ6AEIQTAF#v=onepage&q=John%20Jennery%20Bradley%20psychiatrist&f=false
-
He's John Jennery Bradley, Consultant Psychiatrist and Honorary Senior Lecturer at the Royal Free Hospital School of Medicine and University of London, but these notes are very difficult to read, otherwise very interesting. https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zV3WCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA370&lpg=PA370&dq=John+Jennery+Bradley+psychiatrist&source=bl&ots=jQAWO3H9t1&sig=-uuVyitUtafRW4Mpyr1FffKiPiI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiKoe2B-7LYAhVjCMAKHcmDAJoQ6AEIQTAF#v=onepage&q=John%20Jennery%20Bradley%20psychiatrist&f=false
I will upload this transcript in a better format in due course!
-
I will upload this transcript in a better format in due course!
Here is a clerarer copy of the transcript:-
-
Interesting, but as Jennery says himself he never met Sheila, and even in his own patients it was impossible to predict future behaviour. Whilst his assertion that there was a common theme of possession with the Devil from 1983 is worthy of note I also read that in his opinion it's not usually the case that after altruistic killings the perpetrator kills himself or herself alongside.
-
Interesting, but as Jennery says himself he never met Sheila, and even in his own patients it was impossible to predict future behaviour. Whilst his assertion that there was a common theme of possession with the Devil from 1983 is worthy of note I also read that in his opinion it's not usually the case that after altruistic killings the perpetrator kills himself or herself alongside.
Sheila was predisposed to believing in the devil, her Iranian boyfriend was the devil, her two sons were the devil, as disturbing as it was, she had the devil inside herself! Nothing which was done to the four victims was anything so shocking that none of us would expect the devil not to be capable of!
Sheila was the only victim who had been shot upwards, all the others were shot across at, with the exception of Neville Bam,ber who had shots to the top of his head when he had no strength to resist...
-
Sheila was predisposed to believing in the devil, her Iranian boyfriend was the devil, her two sons were the devil, as disturbing as it was, she had the devil inside herself! Nothing which was done to the four victims was anything so shocking that none of us would expect the devil not to be capable of!
Sheila was the only victim who had been shot upwards, all the others were shot across at, with the exception of Neville Bam,ber who had shots to the top of his head when he had no strength to resist...
But taking the rifle off Sheila in her docile state would be like taking candy off a baby..no hint of a row at all those last few days from outside independent witnesses, her thought processes as Jennery himself admitted impossible to predict. The Devil theme is worrying though this was not to be found in Daniel and Nicholas themselves, more likely it was Sheila who initially thought she might be an unfit mother and therefore project her thoughts onto them, thoughts which by the summer of 1985 had disappeared.
-
But taking the rifle off Sheila in her docile state would be like taking candy off a baby..no hint of a row at all those last few days from outside independent witnesses, her thought processes as Jennery himself admitted impossible to predict. The Devil theme is worrying though this was not to be found in Daniel and Nicholas themselves, more likely it was Sheila who initially thought she might be an unfit mother and therefore project her thoughts onto them, thoughts which by the summer of 1985 had disappeared.
Sheila had very recently 'had a relapse' and had been back into hospital - I believe it to be true that to some people who she came into contact with, or was observed by them, that she hadn't behaved in an unnormal manner, she may have appeared to them to be lethargic and sluggish in her motability. However, despite that arguably being the case one cannot assess her thought processes, one cannot possibly gauge the turmoil that might have been festering inside her head, pressure which must have been building up from that week-end party, knowing that Colin was never coming back to her, and that she, her two boys and Colin would never live together as a family again. Colin had moved on, he had another girlfriend, he seemed happy and he had had custody recently of the boys, Sheila didn't like the idea of another wwoman spending time with her children, it ate away at her inner self, it reminded her of herself in many ways, orphaned out to somebody else. She feared that she might endd up losing the boys altogether, such thoughts grew like a cancer in her mind!
I have no doubt whatsoever in my own mind that the situation started to get worse at that week-end party, resulting in her leaving early...
On the journey up to whf in the car, she sat totally silent and never utterred a word throughout the entire journey ( I believe because she was sulking and brooding ). I think she harboured the idea of making sure that Colin would never take her children away from her, like she had been taken away from her own mother, and I think she had these thoughts in her mind even before they arrived at the farmhouse on that last occasion...
There were clues as to what might be forthcoming - her outrageous outburst at the official who turned up at the farmhouse on the 6th August 1985, to take a reading from the electricity meter - how she had gone berserk, ranting and raving, like a woman mad and possessed, swearing and ordering the official off her property, or she would do him some mischief or other (Ewen Smith obtained a witness statement from this official)...
And, there was the letter which Colin had wrote out that he sent to Neville Bamber prior to the time he dropped off Sheila at whf on that last occasion - although it was addressed to Neville Bamber, Colin must have either told Sheila that he had sent Neville the letter, or that Sheila overheard Neville speaking to June Bamber about its contents, or she got hold of it, and had read the contents itself...
I shall take this opportunity to remind you all of the contents of Colins letter to Neville Bamber -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'It starts off with Colin saying how pleased he was that Sheila was now out of hospital, stating that this whole episode has been a great worry for him. He sought to inform Neville of some thoughts and fears that he was having, and wanted to sound him out directly! Colin told him that his main concern was for the health, safety, and the stabiltity of his boys, and everything that was a threat, and that he would stand firm to protect them from such. He outlined the boys behaviour regarding their educational progress and poor school attendanance, until the boys had come to stay with him full time, and how this had improved since that time! In particular, Colin told Neville that on most mornings that the boys had to dress themselves and get their own breakfast, and then wake mummy up to take them to school. He was right, this sort of thing should not have been happenning to 5 year olds. How the boys condition had worsened around about the time of Sheila's latest breakdown. Apparently, according to what the children told Colin and his parents, Sheila didn't spend much quality time with the children, and when she did she did not take much notice of what they had to say! Colin told Neville that Sheila lives in her own little world and that she seemed oblivious to anything but her own thoughts, and that she had been like that for a long time, and that the boys were now finding the situation very distressful. He went further, and told Nevile Bamber that the boys were also very dilusional about religion and were put off by it, since all of this had been going on. Apparently, the boys had complained to Colin that June Bamber had been forcing them to say prayers at every opportunity she was alone with them! Colin requested that Neville 'told or asked June' to refrain from forcing any religion upon the boys, and that if she does not argree to this, that Colin will be forced to restrict the amount of time that June can spend with the boys - in Colins words he told Neville Bamber 'I WILL NOT ALLOW HER TO FUCK UP THE MINDS OF MY CHILDREN, IN THE WAY I SUSPECT SHE HAS YOUR DAUGHTER'...
Colin went on to say in this letter, that he was sorry for being so blunt, but that what he had said was restrained compared to how he really felt (So Colin was very angry but unprepared to say how angry this had really made him feel)!
Colin invited Neville to help him, to resolve these matters...
Colin told Neville that it would be better if 'the boys stayed with him most of the time' and that Sheila could see them 'whenever she wanted to'! He tried to make it absolutely clear to Neville that it was not his intention 'to take the boys away from her'. More importantly, he told Neville that 'he wished to have full control over the boys' wellfare'!
------------------------------------------------------------
Well, that was the gist of Colins letter to Neville Bamber, a letter that was sent to Neville Bamber just prior to the last occasion that he took Sheila and the boys to the farmhouse for a short stay (on the last occasion)...
Now, I know some people have said, that Colin didn't actually post that letter, but 'I believe that he did'...
I choose to believe that not only did Colin post that letter, but I also choose to believe that the original copy of that letter was recovereed from a top the bedside cabinet in Sheila's bedroom together with other 'notes', and 'a crazy handwritten note' written by Sheila herself! In a nutshell therefore I believe that Essex police seized copies of 'all these notes and letters' as part of their original investigation (SC/688/85) 'four murders and a suicide', knowing that 'this is what may have sparked Sheila into shooting the other four victims'...
This of course, all tallies in with the argument that was manifesting at the supper table that last evening, (according to Jeremy) the topic of conversation being that 'Sheila needed help to look after her boys' and that 'they may have to look into getting a foster parent' or 'permanent carer to help her' to manage them!
In order to get a clearer picture I believe that the contents of Colins letter, together with the other handwritten letter (strongly suspected of having been written by Sheila herself prior to the tragedy unfolding), and the note containing a selection of 'letters of the alphabet', which I believe were all found on Sheila's bedside cabinet (DRH/42 refers), need to be looked at 'collectively', because the 'real motivating force' which led to this tragedy 'is' contained 'there', within these documents...
Therefore, I shall start off with a copy of 'Colins (undated) letter', albeit this was penned after Sheila's discharge from Hospital on the last occasion, followed by the almost 'undecipherable letter written in Sheila's own hand' almost certainly written 'on the evening of the tragedy', and 'the note' containing a series of 'letters of the alphabet' which I suspect was either a coded note to herself, or intended for those who were to follow, and who would find and understand 'why she had been driven to do' what 'she had intended to do', and that which 'she had done'...
The that 'the contents of these three documents', therefore, 'lie at the heart' of this tragedy!
-
Colins Letter to Neville Bamber
-
The Note
-
Sheila Caffells 'Crazy Suicide Letter'..
-
I believe that Sheila overheard Neville talking to June at some point early evening or perhaps earlier in the day, about the contents of Colins letter, and that this caused friction within the family, including the fact that Sheila may have attacked June and thumped her giving her a black eye (according to Jeremy his mum had a black eye at the time he walked in on a so called family argument around the supper table). This may also be the reason why June did not attend her regular tuesday evening bible reading class (because there was trouble brewing and she had got a blackened eye). It seems somewhat obvious to me now that the family were not going to take what Colin had said in his letter to Neville lying down, and that they were going to try to keep the boys with Sheila, even if it meant them getting her help with either a foster parent or social services, or even that Sheila would move back into the farmhouse with the boys so that her parents could help more than they already thought they had been helping!
One things for sure, and that is that June told her sister Pamela Boutflour, later that evening over the telephone, that 'Sheila had been behaving' very oddly!!
-
I believe that Sheila overheard Neville talking to June at some point early evening or perhaps earlier in the day, about the contents of Colins letter, and that this caused friction within the family, including the fact that Sheila may have attacked June and thumped her giving her a black eye (according to Jeremy his mum had a black eye at the time he walked in on a so called family argument around the supper table). This may also be the reason why June did not attend her regular tuesday evening bible reading class (because there was trouble brewing and she had got a blackened eye). It seems somewhat obvious to me now that the family were not going to take what Colin had said in his letter to Neville lying down, and that they were going to try to keep the boys with Sheila, even if it meant them getting her help with either a foster parent or social services, or even that Sheila would move back into the farmhouse with the boys so that her parents could help more than they already thought they had been helping!
One things for sure, and that is that June told her sister Pamela Boutflour, later that evening over the telephone, that 'Sheila had been behaving' very oddly!!
I believe that Sheila found the letter that Colin had written to Neville Bamber (above) and that she brooded over its contents in her bedroom after Pamela's telephone call to June Bamber that evening...
-
I believe that Sheila found the letter that Colin had written to Neville Bamber (above) and that she brooded over its contents in her bedroom after Pamela's telephone call to June Bamber that evening...
According to Jeremy, Neville was supposed to take the tractor to the fields to collect the last trailor of produce, but apparently that did not materialise, because I think it was Ralph Neville who turned up on Pages Lane on the following morning with the tractor (and possibly the trailor as well), after taking it overnight to Osea Road Camp site where he was being accomodated - police turnedd him and the tractor away when he showed up! So, Neville Bamber never went to get the last trailor load of farm produce from the field, afterall...
-
According to Jeremy, Neville was supposed to take the tractor to the fields to collect the last trailor of produce, but apparently that did not materialise, because I think it was Ralph Neville who turned up on Pages Lane on the following morning with the tractor (and possibly the trailor as well), after taking it overnight to Osea Road Camp site where he was being accomodated - police turnedd him and the tractor away when he showed up! So, Neville Bamber never went to get the last trailor load of farm produce from the field, afterall...
It makes you wonder whether or not Neville Bambers intended journey to the fields to collect the last trailor of produce, and the fact that Ralph Neville should take the tractor to Osea Road caamp site overnight, played any role in the tragedy?
-
It makes you wonder whether or not Neville Bambers intended journey to the fields to collect the last trailor of produce, and the fact that Ralph Neville should take the tractor to Osea Road caamp site overnight, played any role in the tragedy?
How many working tractors did the Bambers have?
We know that Jeremy returned from the fields in a tractor with its trailor just before 9.30pm, and that he then had left the farmhouse in his astra GTE motor vehicle at around that time! The tractor with a full trailor load of produce had been arked up in the storage barn by Jeremy!
By 10.00am, Jeremy was no longer at the farmhouse, and I think Barbara Wilson had spoken to Neville Bamber on the telephone at around this time, getting the impression that she thought that the timing of her call to Mr Bamber had interupted some sort of a dispute or family argument, because Neville Bamber was off hand with her apparently!
-
How many working tractors did the Bambers have?
We know that Jeremy returned from the fields in a tractor with its trailor just before 9.30pm, and that he then had left the farmhouse in his astra GTE motor vehicle at around that time! The tractor with a full trailor load of produce had been arked up in the storage barn by Jeremy!
By 10.00am, Jeremy was no longer at the farmhouse, and I think Barbara Wilson had spoken to Neville Bamber on the telephone at around this time, getting the impression that she thought that the timing of her call to Mr Bamber had interupted some sort of a dispute or family argument, because Neville Bamber was off hand with her apparently!
Then at the time of Pamela Boutflours telephone call to her sister June Bamber at about 10.00am, Sheila was all moody and silent, and Neville Bamber did not seem to be present at all...
So, where did Neville Bamber go to?
Did he take the tractor to the field intending to collect the last trailor load of produce?
If, so how did Ralph Neville 'end up with the tractor' overnight?
-
Then at the time of Pamela Boutflours telephone call to her sister June Bamber at about 10.00am, Sheila was all moody and silent, and Neville Bamber did not seem to be present at all...
So, where did Neville Bamber go to?
Did he take the tractor to the field intending to collect the last trailor load of produce?
If, so how did Ralph Neville 'end up with the tractor' overnight?
This dilemna has got me thinking, trying to remember what Jeremy told me about Ralph Neville...
I have my notes somewhere amongst that lot of material in my possesssion, but without reference to those notes, I am trying to remember what Jeremy told me about him?
-
This dilemna has got me thinking, trying to remember what Jeremy told me about Ralph Neville...
I have my notes somewhere amongst that lot of material in my possesssion, but without reference to those notes, I am trying to remember what Jeremy told me about him?
I think Jeremy told me that Ralph Neville was South African, a person who had left South Africa under a cloud of suspicion, something to do with shootings of people, or other...
-
I think Jeremy told me that Ralph Neville was South African, a person who had left South Africa under a cloud of suspicion, something to do with shootings of people, or other...
By all accounts he was firearms proficient...
He owned a camper van which was parked up at whf at the time of the tragedy...
-
By all accounts he was firearms proficient...
He owned a camper van which was parked up at whf at the time of the tragedy...
Was Ralph Neville, 'the scruffy looking hunched man' seen walking away from the farmhouse about an hour after police first arrived at the incident (refer Kim Senguptas article in Daily Express)?
-
Was Ralph Neville, 'the scruffy looking hunched man' seen walking away from the farmhouse about an hour after police first arrived at the incident (refer Kim Senguptas article in Daily Express)?
And, was Ralph Neville the hitchhiker who was trying to get to a port to leave the country at around midday on the first morning of the police investigation?
If so, what about his camper van, why did he leave it at the scene, and leave the country as fast as he could?
-
And, was Ralph Neville the hitchhiker who was trying to get to a port to leave the country at around midday on the first morning of the police investigation?
If so, what about his camper van, why did he leave it at the scene, and leave the country as fast as he could?
Lets fremind ourselves about what the hitchhiker told the local person who gave him a lift - he tol the driver that he had been staying at a farm with a family who had all been shot dead, and that police and the press were everywhere!
-
Lets fremind ourselves about what the hitchhiker told the local person who gave him a lift - he tol the driver that he had been staying at a farm with a family who had all been shot dead, and that police and the press were everywhere!
I hope I'm not getting muddled up because of the passage of time (if I had my notes to hand I could be more certain of what I am saying) but it seems to me that what took place at whf could have had something to ddo with Ralph Nevilles speedy departure to flee the country...
The tractor in his possession overnight, his camper van parked up at whf, and his sudden desire to flee the UK on the first morning of the tragedy - and if what Jeremy told me about Ralph Neville having to suddenly leave South Africa in a hurrry, because of firearms offences, or whatever, it provides food for thought...
-
Who was Ralph Neville, does aanybody know?
Was he related in some way to the Bamber, Boutflour, or the Eaton families?
-
Who was Ralph Neville, does aanybody know?
Was he related in some way to the Bamber, Boutflour, or the Eaton families?
Apparently, he was a student:-
-
Who was Ralph Neville, does aanybody know?
Was he related in some way to the Bamber, Boutflour, or the Eaton families?
I wonder if he was a relation of Ralph Nevill, father of Beatrice Bamber and therefore Nevill's grandfather.
-
I wonder if he was a relation of Ralph Nevill, father of Beatrice Bamber and therefore Nevill's grandfather.
I think we may take it as read -from his name- that he was related to Nevill Bamber. His family appear to have had few parameters.
-
Just find the threads from the last time he was discussed in detail and the answers will all be there.
-
Just find the threads from the last time he was discussed in detail and the answers will all be there.
Yeah, is this the second or third airing it's had?
-
Yeah, is this the second or third airing it's had?
God knows but if there was only one tractor, I think that fact would have been highlighted long ago. Jeremy mentions that he was in the NEW tractor which obviously means they had more than one - most farms do.
-
Sheila had very recently 'had a relapse' and had been back into hospital - I believe it to be true that to some people who she came into contact with, or was observed by them, that she hadn't behaved in an unnormal manner, she may have appeared to them to be lethargic and sluggish in her motability. However, despite that arguably being the case one cannot assess her thought processes, one cannot possibly gauge the turmoil that might have been festering inside her head, pressure which must have been building up from that week-end party, knowing that Colin was never coming back to her, and that she, her two boys and Colin would never live together as a family again. Colin had moved on, he had another girlfriend, he seemed happy and he had had custody recently of the boys, Sheila didn't like the idea of another wwoman spending time with her children, it ate away at her inner self, it reminded her of herself in many ways, orphaned out to somebody else. She feared that she might endd up losing the boys altogether, such thoughts grew like a cancer in her mind!
I have no doubt whatsoever in my own mind that the situation started to get worse at that week-end party, resulting in her leaving early...
On the journey up to whf in the car, she sat totally silent and never utterred a word throughout the entire journey ( I believe because she was sulking and brooding ). I think she harboured the idea of making sure that Colin would never take her children away from her, like she had been taken away from her own mother, and I think she had these thoughts in her mind even before they arrived at the farmhouse on that last occasion...
There were clues as to what might be forthcoming - her outrageous outburst at the official who turned up at the farmhouse on the 6th August 1985, to take a reading from the electricity meter - how she had gone berserk, ranting and raving, like a woman mad and possessed, swearing and ordering the official off her property, or she would do him some mischief or other (Ewen Smith obtained a witness statement from this official)...
And, there was the letter which Colin had wrote out that he sent to Neville Bamber prior to the time he dropped off Sheila at whf on that last occasion - although it was addressed to Neville Bamber, Colin must have either told Sheila that he had sent Neville the letter, or that Sheila overheard Neville speaking to June Bamber about its contents, or she got hold of it, and had read the contents itself...
I shall take this opportunity to remind you all of the contents of Colins letter to Neville Bamber -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'It starts off with Colin saying how pleased he was that Sheila was now out of hospital, stating that this whole episode has been a great worry for him. He sought to inform Neville of some thoughts and fears that he was having, and wanted to sound him out directly! Colin told him that his main concern was for the health, safety, and the stabiltity of his boys, and everything that was a threat, and that he would stand firm to protect them from such. He outlined the boys behaviour regarding their educational progress and poor school attendanance, until the boys had come to stay with him full time, and how this had improved since that time! In particular, Colin told Neville that on most mornings that the boys had to dress themselves and get their own breakfast, and then wake mummy up to take them to school. He was right, this sort of thing should not have been happenning to 5 year olds. How the boys condition had worsened around about the time of Sheila's latest breakdown. Apparently, according to what the children told Colin and his parents, Sheila didn't spend much quality time with the children, and when she did she did not take much notice of what they had to say! Colin told Neville that Sheila lives in her own little world and that she seemed oblivious to anything but her own thoughts, and that she had been like that for a long time, and that the boys were now finding the situation very distressful. He went further, and told Nevile Bamber that the boys were also very dilusional about religion and were put off by it, since all of this had been going on. Apparently, the boys had complained to Colin that June Bamber had been forcing them to say prayers at every opportunity she was alone with them! Colin requested that Neville 'told or asked June' to refrain from forcing any religion upon the boys, and that if she does not argree to this, that Colin will be forced to restrict the amount of time that June can spend with the boys - in Colins words he told Neville Bamber 'I WILL NOT ALLOW HER TO FUCK UP THE MINDS OF MY CHILDREN, IN THE WAY I SUSPECT SHE HAS YOUR DAUGHTER'...
Colin went on to say in this letter, that he was sorry for being so blunt, but that what he had said was restrained compared to how he really felt (So Colin was very angry but unprepared to say how angry this had really made him feel)!
Colin invited Neville to help him, to resolve these matters...
Colin told Neville that it would be better if 'the boys stayed with him most of the time' and that Sheila could see them 'whenever she wanted to'! He tried to make it absolutely clear to Neville that it was not his intention 'to take the boys away from her'. More importantly, he told Neville that 'he wished to have full control over the boys' wellfare'!
------------------------------------------------------------
Well, that was the gist of Colins letter to Neville Bamber, a letter that was sent to Neville Bamber just prior to the last occasion that he took Sheila and the boys to the farmhouse for a short stay (on the last occasion)...
Now, I know some people have said, that Colin didn't actually post that letter, but 'I believe that he did'...
I choose to believe that not only did Colin post that letter, but I also choose to believe that the original copy of that letter was recovereed from a top the bedside cabinet in Sheila's bedroom together with other 'notes', and 'a crazy handwritten note' written by Sheila herself! In a nutshell therefore I believe that Essex police seized copies of 'all these notes and letters' as part of their original investigation (SC/688/85) 'four murders and a suicide', knowing that 'this is what may have sparked Sheila into shooting the other four victims'...
This of course, all tallies in with the argument that was manifesting at the supper table that last evening, (according to Jeremy) the topic of conversation being that 'Sheila needed help to look after her boys' and that 'they may have to look into getting a foster parent' or 'permanent carer to help her' to manage them!
In order to get a clearer picture I believe that the contents of Colins letter, together with the other handwritten letter (strongly suspected of having been written by Sheila herself prior to the tragedy unfolding), and the note containing a selection of 'letters of the alphabet', which I believe were all found on Sheila's bedside cabinet (DRH/42 refers), need to be looked at 'collectively', because the 'real motivating force' which led to this tragedy 'is' contained 'there', within these documents...
Therefore, I shall start off with a copy of 'Colins (undated) letter', albeit this was penned after Sheila's discharge from Hospital on the last occasion, followed by the almost 'undecipherable letter written in Sheila's own hand' almost certainly written 'on the evening of the tragedy', and 'the note' containing a series of 'letters of the alphabet' which I suspect was either a coded note to herself, or intended for those who were to follow, and who would find and understand 'why she had been driven to do' what 'she had intended to do', and that which 'she had done'...
The that 'the contents of these three documents', therefore, 'lie at the heart' of this tragedy!
This is well written, though riddled with inaccuracy and speculation. Colin had custody of the boys in name only since Sheila had gone into hospital in March 1985, but he wasn't pressing for any legal arrangement mindful of Sheila's mental state. The incident regarding the electricity reading is a total fabrication (I don't know what statement Ewen Smith has in his possession), and whether Nevill read Colin's letter is pure speculation because Colin says he never posted it.
-
I believe that Sheila overheard Neville talking to June at some point early evening or perhaps earlier in the day, about the contents of Colins letter, and that this caused friction within the family, including the fact that Sheila may have attacked June and thumped her giving her a black eye (according to Jeremy his mum had a black eye at the time he walked in on a so called family argument around the supper table). This may also be the reason why June did not attend her regular tuesday evening bible reading class (because there was trouble brewing and she had got a blackened eye). It seems somewhat obvious to me now that the family were not going to take what Colin had said in his letter to Neville lying down, and that they were going to try to keep the boys with Sheila, even if it meant them getting her help with either a foster parent or social services, or even that Sheila would move back into the farmhouse with the boys so that her parents could help more than they already thought they had been helping!
One things for sure, and that is that June told her sister Pamela Boutflour, later that evening over the telephone, that 'Sheila had been behaving' very oddly!!
Again much of this is speculation and I would have thought if Nevill and June had sided with Sheila in any forthcoming custody battle this would have settled her down rather than agitated her. Far more likely is Julie's account that Jeremy deliberately sowed discord that last evening by telling his sister what an unfit mother and disquieting her by threatening her with an NHS hospital should she become ill at an future point.
-
These last posts about the hitchhiker don't add up because it was Nevill himself according to the Jeremy supporters who reported his daughter as having gone berserk, so the Defence has to insinuate collusion between Sheila and an unknown assailant or give up on the telephone call claim to Jeremy for good, which leaves his story in tatters.
-
This is well written, though riddled with inaccuracy and speculation. Colin had custody of the boys in name only since Sheila had gone into hospital in March 1985, but he wasn't pressing for any legal arrangement mindful of Sheila's mental state. The incident regarding the electricity reading is a total fabrication (I don't know what statement Ewen Smith has in his possession), and whether Nevill read Colin's letter is pure speculation because Colin says he never posted it.
Yes. But one can clearly see -and actually concur with- the epithet Jeremy directed to Mike.
-
These last posts about the hitchhiker don't add up because it was Nevill himself according to the Jeremy supporters who reported his daughter as having gone berserk, so the Defence has to insinuate collusion between Sheila and an unknown assailant or give up on the telephone call claim to Jeremy for good, which leaves his story in tatters.
When Neville made his call to Jeremy (3.23am / 3.25am), and then the police (3.26am), he may not have realised that Sheila had an accomplice! We should not dismiss any eventuality or possibility....
-
Again much of this is speculation and I would have thought if Nevill and June had sided with Sheila in any forthcoming custody battle this would have settled her down rather than agitated her. Far more likely is Julie's account that Jeremy deliberately sowed discord that last evening by telling his sister what an unfit mother and disquieting her by threatening her with an NHS hospital should she become ill at an future point.
There is no evidence at all to support this, Jeremy did not sow discord during that last evening by telling her (Sheila) that she was an unfit mother, and no evidence that Jeremy threatened Sheila with the NHS hospital should she become ill in the future - Sheila was already ill, something which according to what Pamela Boutflour said in one of her statements, that June Bamber told her that she was bringing Sheila and the boys for tea on the following afternoon, because she wanted Pamela to have a look at her (Sheila) because sshe was behaving oddly...
-
There is no evidence at all to support this, Jeremy did not sow discord during that last evening by telling her (Sheila) that she was an unfit mother, and no evidence that Jeremy threatened Sheila with the NHS hospital should she become ill in the future - Sheila was already ill, something which according to what Pamela Boutflour said in one of her statements, that June Bamber told her that she was bringing Sheila and the boys for tea on the following afternoon, because she wanted Pamela to have a look at her (Sheila) because sshe was behaving oddly...
I feel certain you'll forgive me for pointing out that. as none of us were witness to that 'last supper', what Jeremy SAID occurred/was spoken about, can't be verified. He may SAY he did nothing to sow discord, but he would, wouldn't he. You've also given us a perfect example of how, when words become altered -even slightly- their meaning can be changed, HUGELY. You must remember that worthy women, such as June and Pam, didn't sit at home all day long. They were busy, busy, busy. They would never have dreamed of telling a family member that "they were coming round for tea the following afternoon", let alone taking three other people with them, without first knowing if it was convenient. Etiquette says they would wait for an invitation. It's also worth noting that I have NO recall of June saying Sheila "was behaving oddly" but without going into them she did voice her concerns. All of which changes the original picture, somewhat, from the one you've painted.
-
I feel certain you'll forgive me for pointing out that. as none of us were witness to that 'last supper', what Jeremy SAID occurred/was spoken about, can't be verified. He may SAY he did nothing to sow discord, but he would, wouldn't he. You've also given us a perfect example of how, when words become altered -even slightly- their meaning can be changed, HUGELY. You must remember that worthy women, such as June and Pam, didn't sit at home all day long. They were busy, busy, busy. They would never have dreamed of telling a family member that "they were coming round for tea the following afternoon", let alone taking three other people with them, without first knowing if it was convenient. Etiquette says they would wait for an invitation. It's also worth noting that I have NO recall of June saying Sheila "was behaving oddly" but without going into them she did voice her concerns. All of which changes the original picture, somewhat, from the one you've painted.
Read Pamela Boutflours witness statement for clarification (if its a true statement)?
-
I feel certain you'll forgive me for pointing out that. as none of us were witness to that 'last supper', what Jeremy SAID occurred/was spoken about, can't be verified. He may SAY he did nothing to sow discord, but he would, wouldn't he. You've also given us a perfect example of how, when words become altered -even slightly- their meaning can be changed, HUGELY. You must remember that worthy women, such as June and Pam, didn't sit at home all day long. They were busy, busy, busy. They would never have dreamed of telling a family member that "they were coming round for tea the following afternoon", let alone taking three other people with them, without first knowing if it was convenient. Etiquette says they would wait for an invitation. It's also worth noting that I have NO recall of June saying Sheila "was behaving oddly" but without going into them she did voice her concerns. All of which changes the original picture, somewhat, from the one you've painted.
According to Pam who spoke to to them on the phone that very evening. Sheila was behaving strangely and June said she was worried. Read the statement if you want to know more.
-
Read Pamela Boutflours witness statement for clarification (if its a true statement)?
According to Pam who spoke to to them on the phone that very evening. Sheila was behaving strangely and June said she was worried. Read the statement if you want to know more.
I already had -hence my post- but I've just reread it. June, whilst clearly being concerned, doesn't say that Sheila was acting "oddly", although it was the conclusion Pam arrived at. Nor did June -as was stated- invite herself to Pam's.
-
I already had -hence my post- but I've just reread it. June, whilst clearly being concerned, doesn't say that Sheila was acting "oddly", although it was the conclusion Pam arrived at. Nor did June -as was stated- invite herself to Pam's.
Ok, but the net result was that June, Sheila and the boys were going to Aunty Pam's for tea on an appointment tht would never be kept...
-
Ok, but the net result was that June, Sheila and the boys were going to Aunty Pam's for tea on an appointment tht would never be kept...
That's right, Mike..................and that's ALL you needed to say. :)
-
That's right, Mike..................and that's ALL you needed to say. :)
Well, I also needed to say that June told Pamela that she wanted to have Pam' look at Sheila because she was behaving somewhat strangely...
-
Well, I also needed to say that June toldd Pamela that she wanted to have Pam' look at Sheila because she was behaving somewhat strangely...
No you've just repeated what has already been gainsaid.
-
No you've just repeated what has already been gainsaid.
How many witness statements made by Pamela Boutflour have you read?
I guess its only the one version posted up on the forum - but there exist addditional ones...
Anyway, I am posting up again, the version I am anticipating is available to everybody on the forum (I will post others in due course), as can be seen June was 'worried' about Sheila, and Pamela commented that it was strange the way Sheila did not say 'goodnight, aunty Pam' when presumeably going off up to bed - a bed she almost certainly did not sllep in on that last evening / night!
(a) - 'Before speaking to Sheila, June told me that she, Sheila, was just going off to bed' However, there was / is no evidence whatsoever, that Sheila or anybody else had slept in either one of the two beds in Sheila's bedroom on that last occasion. This, therefore throws up a 'red flag' to anybodies version of the events...
(b) - 'I spoke on the phone to Sheila, and I made all the conversation. Sheila simply replied, yes, or no. Whilst I was speaking to Sheila the conversation suddenly stopped and June came back on the phone. I thought this was strange as she did not even say goodnight "Aunty Pam" which she normally would do.
Also (c) - 'June told me that Sheila had gone to bed'...
And, (d) - 'June then told me that she was very worried about Sheila and that she would like me to see her and form an opinion about her health. June told me that Sheila had no interest in anything including the twins, and about housework.
Further, (e) - 'That from what June was saying I gathered that Sheila was behaving oddly'...
Also..
(f) - 'June told me that she had been trying to persuade Sheila to take a holiday in a home at Bournemouth'..
And, then..
(g) - 'We then talked on the phone about bringing Sheila and the twins to my house for lunch on Thursday, 8th August, 1985.
Yet, still further, (h) - 'We then had a conversation about family affairs'.
And, [color=blue(h) - ]' I would say that June behaved quite normally whilst I was talking to her. I suppose I was on the phone about 20 minutes in all.[/color]
Then, (i) - 'During my conversation with June, she did not mention that Ralph or Jeremy were there'..
-
In the above example, there is evidence of the work done by the DPP and Essex police about what needs to be removed from Pamela Boutflours witness statement, so that any edited version 'improved and strengthened the prosecutions case' - now, please, how corrupted was / is that activity?
-
Anyway, I am posting up again, the version I am anticipating is available to everybody on the forum (I will post others in due course), as can be seen June was 'worried' about Sheila, and Pamela commented that it was strange the way Sheila did not say 'goodnight, aunty Pam' when presumeably going off up to bed - a bed she almost certainly did not sllep in on that last evening / night!
(a) - 'Before speaking to Sheila, June told me that she, Sheila, was just going off to bed' However, there was / is no evidence whatsoever, that Sheila or anybody else had slept in either one of the two beds in Sheila's bedroom on that last occasion. This, therefore throws up a 'red flag' to anybodies version of the events...
(b) - 'I spoke on the phone to Sheila, and I made all the conversation. Sheila simply replied, yes, or no. Whilst I was speaking to Sheila the conversation suddenly stopped and June came back on the phone. I thought this was strange as she did not even say goodnight "Aunty Pam" which she normally would do.
So, even Pamela Boutflour recognised that Sheila had behaved 'strangely'!
-
And, (d) - 'June then told me that she was very worried about Sheila and that she would like me to see her and form an opinion about her health. June told me that Sheila had no interest in anything including the twins, and about housework.
Not only did Pamela Boutflour 'think that Sheila' was behaving 'strangely', but her sister June Bamber, had told Pamela that 'she was worried' about Sheila's health!!!
All of this, hours before the unfolding tragedy...
-
In the above example, there is evidence of the work done by the DPP and Essex police about what needs to be removed from Pamela Boutflours witness statement, so that any edited version 'improved and strengthened the prosecutions case' - now, please, how corrupted was / is that activity?
I can see that what was not considered pertinent has been removed/scratched through. I fail to see how not educating the jury to the fact that Pam asked June if Sheila was down, would have had any bearing, one way or another, on their conclusion.
-
I can see that what was not considered pertinent has been removed/scratched through. I fail to see how not educating the jury to the fact that Pam asked June if Sheila was down, would have had any bearing, one way or another, on their conclusion.
Hang on a minute, these legal scoundrels tampered withy the contents of a witness statement, a decision that had nothing to do with Pamela Boutflouyrs own free will, exactly what the South Yorkshire police scoundrels did in the Hillsboro' disaster cover up!
It is not acceptable tyo defende these crimeinals in wigs, and gowns and uniforms for this sort of criminalised activity...
'Bring back public hangings' just for these scoundrels, and anybody who supports these atrocious activities, they are a disgrace to the system which calls itself the criminal justice system, what a rotten lot these people in all their disguises truly are...
No excuses...
They are criminals, who bend and twist to the law of this land to suit thier purpose...
Fucking evil, vile, rotten, scumbags...
-
Hang on a minute, these legal scoundrels tampered withy the contents of a witness statement, a decision that had nothing to do with Pamela Boutflouyrs own free will, exactly what the South Yorkshire police scoundrels did in the Hillsboro' disaster cover up!
It is not acceptable tyo defende these crimeinals in wigs, and gowns and uniforms for this sort of criminalised activity...
'Bring back public hangings' just for these scoundrels, and anybody who supports these atrocious activities, they are a disgrace to the system which calls itself the criminal justice system, what a rotten lot these people in all their disguises truly are...
No excuses...
They are criminals, who bend and twist to the law of this land to suit thier purpose...
Fucking evil, vile, rotten, scumbags...
The lot of them, and their supporters act like fallen angels, all devils in the making....
-
Not only did Pamela Boutflour 'think that Sheila' was behaving 'strangely', but her sister June Bamber, had told Pamela that 'she was worried' about Sheila's health!!!
However, there was no sense of urgency. June, didn't, for instance, ask Pam if she could 'drop by' the following day to assess Sheila. The (lunch) visit to Pam was not arranged for the next day (Wednesday), but for the following day (Thursday) They also spoke of other "family matters".
-
However, there was no sense of urgency. June, didn't, for instance, ask Pam if she could 'drop by' the following day to assess Sheila. The (lunch) visit to Pam was not arranged for the next day (Wednesday), but for the following day (Thursday) They also spoke of other "family matters".
Sheila was behaving strangely, and June was worried about Sheila's health, there was talk about Sheila taking a holiday on her own because she had no interest in the twins, or house work, exactly how Collin Caffell described Sheila in his letter to Neville Bamber - what we are ddealing with here is a cover up of the truth...
Crooked cops, crooked DPP, and its supporters, ought to hang their heads in shame - better still, hang the lot of them publickly, lets bring back the stocks and throw rotten fruit and vegetables at the lot of them, and shit which is what the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bmaber was and is...
-
Sheila Caffell was a very disturbed individual, in one way or another, recognised by all those close to her! She certainly was / is responsible for the killing of the other four victims, but alas she did not shoot herself dead on the main bedroom floor, and if she did (but she didn't) the rifle from the box room window had to be taken / brought into the main bedroom after the raid team entered the farmhouse...
How could Jeremy Bamber possibly have had any involvement in that event?
Could someone please educate me on how it was possible for Jeremy to bring the rifle from the box room window at some stage after Jeapes and Brown had seen that rifle there at the box room window?
I look forward to being educated by all those in the know, so to speak, please rush your replies to me here so that I may be silenced for trying to get to the truth...
-
Hang on a minute, these legal scoundrels tampered withy the contents of a witness statement, a decision that had nothing to do with Pamela Boutflouyrs own free will, exactly what the South Yorkshire police scoundrels did in the Hillsboro' disaster cover up!
It is not acceptable tyo defende these crimeinals in wigs, and gowns and uniforms for this sort of criminalised activity...
'Bring back public hangings' just for these scoundrels, and anybody who supports these atrocious activities, they are a disgrace to the system which calls itself the criminal justice system, what a rotten lot these people in all their disguises truly are...
No excuses...
They are criminals, who bend and twist to the law of this land to suit thier purpose...
Fucking evil, vile, rotten, scumbags...
You know, Mike, I'm sometimes forced to ask myself exactly WHAT is your intention here. IS it that you totally and without reservation believe Jeremy is innocent, OR is it just that a 'questionable' case has provided a loophole for you to expound your own UNquestionable hatred of anything connected to the law and judiciary of this country? Sadly, it often works that the more personal a 'quest' becomes, the less altruistic it appears to be.
As an aside, I feel perfectly certain that Pam was far too intelligent a woman to assume that the words she spoke would be written in a way which exactly conveyed the meaning she intended, without reading them through for herself. With MANY witness's, it could well have been a case of close enough being good enough.
-
Sheila was behaving starngely, and June was worried about Sheila's health, there was talk about Sheila taking a holiday on her own because she had no interest in the twins, or house work, exactly how Collin Caffell described Sheila in his letter to Neville Bamber - what we are ddealing with here is a cover up of the truth...
Crooked cops, crooked DPP, and its supporters, ought to hang their heads in shame - better still, hang the lot of them publickly, lets bring back the stocks and throw rotten fruit and vegetables at the lot of them, and shit which is what the prosecutions case against Jeremy Bmaber was and is...
WHO is denying that was so? WHERE have your -alleged- "crooked cops, crooked DPP, and it's supporters" ever sought to say otherwise? All they've done is recognize that being mentally ill doesn't equate with a person being a murderer.
-
You know, Mike, I'm sometimes forced to ask myself exactly WHAT is your intention here. IS it that you totally and without reservation believe Jeremy is innocent, OR is it just that a 'questionable' case has provided a loophole for you to expound your own UNquestionable hatred of anything connected to the law and judiciary of this country? Sadly, it often works that the more personal a 'quest' becomes, the less altruistic it appears to be.
As an aside, I feel perfectly certain that Pam was far too intelligent a woman to assume that the words she spoke would be written in a way which exactly conveyed the meaning she intended, without reading them through for herself. With MANY witness's, it could well have been a case of close enough being good enough.
You have never been a victim of an injustice, so I don't expect you to know anything about legalised dishonesty and forgery by these criminals in wigs and gowns who think they are more honest than the victims they help to frame and convict...
These crooked morons need to be prosecuted when there is clear evidence that they have fabricated, edited, forged and decieved whatever it is they did or have done - they are a lower life form than many of the innocent people they convict by adipting these dishonest tactics...
They are fallen angels, devils in other words....
Part of the system designed to look after the favoured few amongst us...
So, please, tell us about your own miscarriage of justice, how the system stitched you up, and how this crime impacted upon your own life?
-
A lie, a forgery, a deception, an edit, a fabrication, a manipulation, a swap, it is all part of the system 'they' use to convict innocent victims...
-
You have never been a victim of an injustice, so I don't expect you to know anything about legalised dishonesty and forgery by these criminals in wigs and gowns who think they are more honest than the victims they help to frame and convict...
These crooked morons need to be prosecuted when there is clear evidence that they have fabricated, edited, forged and decieved whatever it is they did or have done - they are a lower life form than many of the innocent people they convict by adipting these dishonest tactics...
They are fallen angels, devils in other words....
Part of the system designed to look after the favoured few amongst us...
So, please, tell us about your own miscarriage of justice, how the system stitched you up, and how this crime impacted upon your own life?
Mike, you have NO idea what miscarriages of justice have been suffered by others. You have no idea what they've caused others to live with -how it's changed the course of where their lives may have gone. We ALL have a tendency to believe we're alone with whatever life has thrown at us. I had a HUGE 'MOJ' done to me. Absolutely and unequivocally NO fault of my own. There is no redress. I have no choice than to live with the consequences. I COULD say "Poor me" but it would change nothing. There are MANY in the same position as I. Why? Coz just like you claim you've been, we were in the wrong place at the wrong time. WE broke no laws, but we paid for the moral laws considered to have been broken by others.
-
A lie, a forgery, a deception, an edit, a fabrication, a manipulation, a swap, it is all part of the system 'they' use to convict innocent victims...
All of these features leave everlasting scars in the lives of the victims the system convicts and sentences victims of miscarriages of justice - why would such a victim who has had their life altered detrimentally by such lies, forgeries, deceptions, editing, fabrications, manipulations and swaps, suddenly forget the injustice that has been worked on them, suddenly become a so called law abiding citizen when they were always a law abiding citizen in the first instance! It's all aload of codswallop! The law is interpreted differently for different people! It's complete bollocks!!
-
Mike, you have NO idea what miscarriages of justice have been suffered by others. You have no idea what they've caused others to live with -how it's changed the course of where their lives may have gone. We ALL have a tendency to believe we're alone with whatever life has thrown at us. I had a HUGE 'MOJ' done to me. Absolutely and unequivocally NO fault of my own. There is no redress. I have no choice than to live with the consequences. I COULD say "Poor me" but it would change nothing. There are MANY in the same position as I. Why? Coz just like you claim you've been, we were in the wrong place at the wrong time. WE broke no laws, but we paid for the moral laws considered to have been broken by others.
Ok, that being the case, why is it that you cannot bring yourself to accept that 'a dodgy case' has been brought against Jeremy Bamber, in the prosecution of him?
Victims of MOJ should be sympathetic to other cases involving other people who claim that they have been wrongly accused, prosecuted, and convicted of something, which they declare for whatever reason that they did not do, or were not involved in...
It's not a case of crying 'poor me', at all, its a case of giving someone the benefit of doubt, until you come up against evidence which can only lead to the inevitable conclusion that what this person has said, or what this person is saying, cannot possibly be true! In Jeremy Bambers case, based on my experiences with the criminal Justice system I have not yet come up against or been challenged by, any evidence which means that he did kill his family (including Sheila)! In fact, the contrary is true, everything points to 'Sheila having shot the other four victims', and the cops having involvement in her death, and the stage managing of her death scene, on the bedroom floor!
-
The other aspect of any case, obviously rests upon the proviso - (a) did the accused commit the offence, and, or (b) is there evidence to prove that the accused committed the offence?
-
The other aspect of any case, obviously rests upon the proviso - (a) did the accused commit the offence, and, or (b) is there evidence to prove that the accused committed the offence?
For anyone to say, or to suggest, that I have no idea whether or not anyone has suffered a MOJ, or not, is not entirely true! Because in the first instance, I have aided hundreds of prisoners, and individuals, in such cases! Many of the alleged MOJ have turned to be justified in the sense, from my experiences (a) I believe that they did commit the offence, or had involvement in the commissioning of the offence, and or, (b) there was evidence to prove that they had committed the offence, of had been involved in one form or another, in the commissioning of such an offence convicted of...
However, I do not profess to know whether or not a person committed an offence, if that person does not confide in me the truth, and or, answers any question I may ask of them...
-
I am 62 years old (next Birthday), and I would like to believe and I think that during my involvement in one form or another with the Criminal Justice System, and the 'players' involved in the running of that system, that I know whether or not someone is trying to 'pull the wool' over anyones eyes...
For the benefit of doubt, I should just say without naming names, that I have been successfull in helping people convicted of murders, manslaughter, terrorism (IRA, UDA), fraud and deception, armed robberies, etc, etc, etc...
The 'devil is in the detail', as I always say...
-
I am 62 years old (next Birthday), and I would like to believe and I think that during my involvement in one form or another with the Criminal Justice System, and the 'players' involved in the running of that system, that I know whether or not someone is trying to 'pull the wool' over anyones eyes...
For the benefit of doubt, I should just say without naming names, that I have been successfull in helping people convicted of murders, manslaughter, terrorism (IRA, UDA), fraud and deception, armed robberies, etc, etc, etc...
The 'devil is in the detail', as I always say...
As a point of interest, I would just like to say, that without being involved in the Hillsboro' disaster cover up investigation, that based on my personal experience that I know that South Yorkshire police are culpable for the falsification of, and editing of witness statements intended to improve the case of South Yorkshire police in this matter - my experience tells me that cops lied, and that a miscarriage of justice occurred...
-
As a point of interest, I would just like to say, that without being involved in the Hillsboro' disaster cover up investigation, that based on my personal experience that I know that South Yorkshire police are culpable for the falsification of, and editing of witness statements intended to improve the case of South Yorkshire police in this matter - my experience tells me that cops lied, and that a miscarriage of justice occurred...
I know that this is / was true...
-
I know that this is / was true...
In the same way, I know that the case against Jeremy Bamber was a false one!
-
Ok, that being the case, why is it that you cannot bring yourself to accept that 'a dodgy case' has been brought against Jeremy Bamber, in the prosecution of him?
Victims of MOJ should be sympathetic to other cases involving other people who claim that they have been wrongly accused, prosecuted, and convicted of something, which they declare for whatever reason that they did not do, or were not involved in...
It's not a case of crying 'poor me', at all, its a case of giving someone the benefit of doubt, until you come up against evidence which can only lead to the inevitable conclusion that what this person has said, or what this person is saying, cannot possibly be true! In Jeremy Bambers case, based on my experiences with the criminal Justice system I have not yet come up against or been challenged by, any evidence which means that he did kill his family (including Sheila)! In fact, the contrary is true, everything points to 'Sheila having shot the other four victims', and the cops having involvement in her death, and the stage managing of her death scene, on the bedroom floor!
A) Because I no longer believe that Jeremy is innocent. That a "dodgy case" may have been bought against him is an entirely separate question which by no means makes him innocent.
B) I'm entirely sympathetic to those who have genuinely suffered MOJ's, but I remain aware that there are probably FAR more who continue to jump on the MOJ bandwagon. CLAIMS of innocence won't create innocence out of guilt.
C) If we give benefit of doubt to ALL those MOJ's claimed, there would, in all probability, be more guilty than innocent, released. In my opinion, nothing, other than Sheila's rather convenient illness, suggests that she murdered her family and then committed suicide. It's very possible that I MAY have gone on believing Jeremy innocent but for your own claims that the police were responsible for shooting Sheila and taking lurid pictures of her body, and that a phone call from Nevill had deliberately been withheld, both of which sound so far fetched that it smacks of saying anything to get Jeremy released. Nevertheless, I await, with interest, any further developments.
-
Ok, that being the case, why is it that you cannot bring yourself to accept that 'a dodgy case' has been brought against Jeremy Bamber, in the prosecution of him?
Victims of MOJ should be sympathetic to other cases involving other people who claim that they have been wrongly accused, prosecuted, and convicted of something, which they declare for whatever reason that they did not do, or were not involved in...
It's not a case of crying 'poor me', at all, its a case of giving someone the benefit of doubt, until you come up against evidence which can only lead to the inevitable conclusion that what this person has said, or what this person is saying, cannot possibly be true! In Jeremy Bambers case, based on my experiences with the criminal Justice system I have not yet come up against or been challenged by, any evidence which means that he did kill his family (including Sheila)! In fact, the contrary is true, everything points to 'Sheila having shot the other four victims', and the cops having involvement in her death, and the stage managing of her death scene, on the bedroom floor!
Because there is no motivation for the police knowingly fitted up an innocent man.
-
It is good that you are committed to proving Jeremy's innocence Mike. Creating this forum & Youtube videos.
Lookout, David, Nugs, JackieD & Buddy have joined the forum & agree with you that Jeremy is innocent.
-
You can take anything out of context. Pamela says in her statement 16 September 1985:
June did not confide in me her innermost feelings to do with Jeremy and Sheila.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8973.msg425518.html#msg425518
Could it be that June was rather envious of Pamela's domestic life as she and Nevill perceived how their children were turning out, how all the money in the world spent on the most expensive schools could not transform them into characters who could both make their own way in the world and be accepted by the local community? How love at a distance does not work, to which the heartfelt letter to be opened after her death does attest, a letter which Jeremy screwed up disdainfully and which Sheila never got to read?
-
You can take anything out of context. Pamela says in her statement 16 September 1985:
June did not confide in me her innermost feelings to do with Jeremy and Sheila.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8973.msg425518.html#msg425518
Could it be that June was rather envious of Pamela's domestic life as she and Nevill perceived how their children were turning out, how all the money in the world spent on the most expensive schools could not transform them into characters who could both make their own way in the world and be accepted by the local community? How love at a distance does not work, to which the heartfelt letter to be opened after her death does attest, a letter which Jeremy screwed up disdainfully and which Sheila never got to read?
Steve, I'm inclined to think we're ALL, when things aren't going as well for us as we believe we deserve them to, inclined to think that the same things are going perfectly for everyone else. I feel sure she saw -imagined- Pam to have a better relationship with Ann and David than she had with Sheila and Jeremy. It would never have occurred to her that perhaps Pam had a very different style of mothering, only that her children were more like the children she may have wished her own were.
-
You can take anything out of context. Pamela says in her statement 16 September 1985:
June did not confide in me her innermost feelings to do with Jeremy and Sheila.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8973.msg425518.html#msg425518
Could it be that June was rather envious of Pamela's domestic life as she and Nevill perceived how their children were turning out, how all the money in the world spent on the most expensive schools could not transform them into characters who could both make their own way in the world and be accepted by the local community? How love at a distance does not work, to which the heartfelt letter to be opened after her death does attest, a letter which Jeremy screwed up disdainfully and which Sheila never got to read?
We can only speculate on the details. But one thing is certain, June was a rather unpleasant person.
Jeremy describes her a religious nut.
Sheila's friends/acquaintances claim she hated June.
Then Colin said he would have killed June himself.
For whatever reason we will never know the exact details.
-
We can only speculate on the details. But one thing is certain, June was a rather unpleasant person.
Jeremy describes her a religious nut.
Sheila's friends/acquaintances claim she hated June.
Then Colin said he would have killed June himself.
For whatever reason we will never know the exact details.
None of her friends, who I know, have described her as being the life and soul of the party, a good laugh when she'd had a few drinks, or liking bawdy jokes, however, none have described her as other than kind, serious. shy, lacking in humour, devout, gentle. I see nothing there which would label her as "unpleasant". I can quite see, though, that Jeremy would have called her "a religious nut". I think "hate" may have been far too strong a feeling for gentle Sheila to have held about her mother, but it would have been dependent on how much she loved her. Colin, as an atheist, certainly wouldn't have had time for June's faith, especially in the light of how she treated his boys. HOWEVER, I see NOTHING which makes her "unpleasant". She was a woman who tried, very hard, to do what she believed to be right. Much of which had probably been indoctrinated in her by an overbearing mother.
-
We can only speculate on the details. But one thing is certain, June was a rather unpleasant person.
Jeremy describes her a religious nut.
Sheila's friends/acquaintances claim she hated June.
Then Colin said he would have killed June himself.
For whatever reason we will never know the exact details.
The irony was that it was June herself who tried and failed to live up to the high moral standard she set herself in pursuit of the holy grail, and it was her children who fell victim to these moral strictures as they matured: Jeremy was warned off Suzette at the risk of losing his inheritance and Sheila was labelled the Devil's child, then induced to marry with the gift of a London flat. Money became a means of control instead of a source of enjoyment, June being ill herself at critical points in the story couldn't see the dangers, and neither could Nevill, who had the disposition to brush it all off.
-
None of her friends, who I know, have described her as being the life and soul of the party, a good laugh when she'd had a few drinks, or liking bawdy jokes, however, none have described her as other than kind, serious. shy, lacking in humour, devout, gentle. I see nothing there which would label her as "unpleasant". I can quite see, though, that Jeremy would have called her "a religious nut". I think "hate" may have been far too strong a feeling for gentle Sheila to have held about her mother, but it would have been dependent on how much she loved her. Colin, as an atheist, certainly wouldn't have had time for June's faith, especially in the light of how she treated his boys. HOWEVER, I see NOTHING which makes her "unpleasant". She was a woman who tried, very hard, to do what she believed to be right. Much of which had probably been indoctrinated in her by an overbearing mother.
People dont act and behave the same way in a social setting than they do in the family home.
-
People dont act and behave the same way in a social setting than they do in the family home.
And their children will judge them very differently from the way in which their contemporaries do. The difference being that the former is a parent/child relationship, the latter, an adult/adult relationship.
-
And their children will judge them very differently from the way in which their contemporaries do. The difference being that the former is a parent/child relationship, the latter, an adult/adult relationship.
The difference being is that people who live under the same roof with someone for many years will get to know them a lot better.
That does not apply to Colin but he would undoubtedly have been told things from Sheila and possibly the twins.
-
The difference being is that people who live under the same roof with someone for many years will get to know them a lot better.
That does not apply to Colin but he would undoubtedly have been told things from Sheila and possibly the twins.
But children of controlling parents will never see their parent(s) on an adult to adult level. In fact, however adult the 'child' presents him/herself as being in society, the moment they visit the family home, they immediately return to being the child they'd been. Sheila will undoubtedly have given Colin her own perspective of June.
-
Because there is no motivation for the police knowingly fitted up an innocent man.
Lyes, there was motivation - its called saving their own lousy necks!
-
Lyes, there was motivation - its called saving their own lousy necks!
Saving their own necks from what? Oh of course, they shot Sheila and now Nevile - sorry, don't buy any of that so there was no motivation.
-
Saving their own necks from what? Oh of course, they shot Sheila and now Nevile - sorry, don't buy any of that so there was no motivation.
Just shows you how very little you pay attention to the detail, since it has never been my suggestion that cops shot and killed Sheila and Neville, I have only mentioned the shooting of Neville on the footing that Sheila was never downstairs in the kitchen as it clearly states in the police radio message log version of the events (two dead bodies in kitchen, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, one of these deaths a murder, and the other ...a suicide)
-
Just shows you how very little you pay attention to the detail, since it has never been my suggestion that cops shot and killed Sheila and Neville, I have only mentioned the shooting of Neville on the footing that Sheila was never downstairs in the kitchen as it clearly states in the police radio message log version of the events (two dead bodies in kitchen, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, one of these deaths a murder, and the other ...a suicide)
The 'Officers Report' (1612, refers, first part of investigation - SC/688/85) 'shooting in kitchen on entry'...
Now, either there was (a) a shooting in the kitchen which didn't involve any victim, (b) there was a shooting in kitchen involving one of the victims...
Lets also not forget the magical moment when a fragmented bullet (PV/20) grew and became a whole bullet so thaat the prosecutions Ballistic expert could say that in his opinion the Whole bullet in question (PV/20) had been loaded and fired via the anshuzt rifle (of course it had, but unfortunately, it was loaded and fired from the anshuzt rifle during unreported, unofficial test firings of the anshuzt rifle andd comntrol ammunition, control ammunition which was usedd in a substitution exercise, so that the prosecutions case at trial could lead with the assumption that the killings of the five victims had been as a result of a one gun crimke, where the same gun had fired all 25 / 24 shots...
-
Just shows you how very little you pay attention to the detail, since it has never been my suggestion that cops shot and killed Sheila and Neville, I have only mentioned the shooting of Neville on the footing that Sheila was never downstairs in the kitchen as it clearly states in the police radio message log version of the events (two dead bodies in kitchen, the body of one dead male, and the body of one dead female, one of these deaths a murder, and the other ...a suicide)
Right! So yu woz just 'avin a larrf every time you've mentioned Sheila pulling the police weapon into her own neck, and the police accidentally firing the second shot, and you threw in the suggestion that they killed Nevill to raise debate? S'okay! Just as long as we're clear.
-
The 'Officers Report' (1612, refers, first part of investigation - SC/688/85) 'shooting in kitchen on entry'...
Now, either there was (a) a shooting in the kitchen which didn't involve any victim, (b) there was a shooting in kitchen involving one of the victims...
Lets also not forget the magical moment when a fragmented bullet (PV/20) grew and became a whole bullet so thaat the prosecutions Ballistic expert could say that in his opinion the Whole bullet in question (PV/20) had been loaded and fired via the anshuzt rifle (of course it had, but unfortunately, it was loaded and fired from the anshuzt rifle during unreported, unofficial test firings of the anshuzt rifle andd comntrol ammunition, control ammunition which was usedd in a substitution exercise, so that the prosecutions case at trial could lead with the assumption that the killings of the five victims had been as a result of a one gun crimke, where the same gun had fired all 25 / 24 shots...
I think what we have here is the indiscriminate use of the English language. It properly should have read "On entry THERE HAD BEEN a shooting (incident?) in the kitchen".
-
Right! So yu woz just 'avin a larrf every time you've mentioned Sheila pulling the police weapon into her own neck, well, no I wasn't since that was what did happen... and the police accidentally firing the second shot My account is totally accurate and true..., and you threw in the suggestion that they killed Nevill to raise debate? No, I was merely making out the case for if any of you cannot bring yourelves to accept the true version of events that the only other alternative was that Cops must have shot Neville Bamber upon entering the kitchen, because there was a shooting incident in the kitchen upon entry of the cops! I am glad to hear that no-one buys into tht scenario - that being the case, tghen what shooting incident is being referred to in the 'officers report' (1612 of SC/688/85)? S'okay! Just as long as we're clear. Make no mistake about it, how else could Sheila be beleived to have been dead in the kitchen, her death referred to to on countless occassions during individual police radio message logs
-
I think what we have here is the indiscriminate use of the English language. I was surprised to learn that PS Bews copuld even tell the correct time to be honest, his messages timed at 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am and 8.10am have caused me to revise my opinion that anybody who worked for Essex police in that era could not know or tell the correct time of day or night! Additionally, they were always referring to a trick of this or a trick of that whatever needed to be said. If cops can't record basic things in basic english in a log, or an officers reportr, why should anyone believe a word any of them say, or have said, or what they could say, or what they could have said (its a tricky situation)!!! It properly should have read "On entry THERE HAD BEEN a shooting (incident?) in the kitchen". Whether it should, or it shouldn't, it didn't...
The evidence is what it is, no need to try and alter it in favour of the prosecutions case, why not alter it in favour of the defendant? Oh, I get it, you favour the criminals in wigs and gowns and uniforms, enough said...
-
Since there clearly HAD been a shooting incident in the kitchen, prior to the police entering, no one has ever suggested anything to the contrary...................until you tried to apply new meaning to the words "Shooting in kitchen on entry".
-
Since there clearly HAD been a shooting incident in the kitchen, prior to the police entering, no one has ever suggested anything to the contrary...................until you tried to apply new meaning to the words "Shooting in kitchen on entry".
There clearly was a shooting incident in kitchen upon entry, and a second body, who could only have been Sheila (7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am,) downstairs in that kitchen! Sheila was shot in the kitchen, hence why her body was reported as being present in the kitchen! She was suspected of being dead, her apparent death being spoken about in terms of a suicide by 7.45am! Sheila was the only victim who's death can be presented as being a suicide! The first shot across her neck had to be tampered with by the police so that the whole bullet that replaced the piece of a badly fragmented bullet (the original PV/20) could be presented as having been fired via the anshuzt rifle along with the fatal bullet (PV/20), that the shooting of Sheila was a one gun crime!
The problem cops were faced with was that originally that the two bullets subject of the shooting of Sheila Caffell, were fired from two entirely different guns...
-
There clearly was a shooting incident in kitchen upon entry, and a second body, who could only have been Sheila (7.35am, 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am, 7.45am,) downstairs in that kitchen! Sheila was shot in the kitchen, hence why her body was reported as being present in the kitchen! She was suspected of being dead, her apparent death being spoken about in terms of a suicide by 7.45am! Sheila was the only victim who's death can be presented as being a suicide! The first shot across her neck had to be tampered with by the police so that the whole bullet that replaced the piece of a badly fragmented bullet (the original PV/20) could be presented as having been fired via the anshuzt rifle along with the fatal bullet (PV/20), that the shooting of Sheila was a one gun crime!
The problem cops were faced with was that originally that the two bullets subject of the shooting of Sheila Caffell, were fired from two entirely different guns...
Jeremy must have done a good enough job of A) presenting her murder as suicide B) convincing police that she was mentally fragile enough to do it. That a TEAM of shooters can accidentally shoot someone, casually assume they're dead, and step over them is incomprehensible.....................especially as ONE shot from a high calibre police weapon would very likely have done more damage than that of the two shots she sustained, put together. She certainly wouldn't have got up and walked away from that one.
-
Jeremy must have done a good enough job of A) presenting her murder as suicide B) convincing police that she was mentally fragile enough to do it. That a TEAM of shooters can accidentally shoot someone, casually assume they're dead, and step over them is incomprehensible.....................especially as ONE shot from a high calibre police weapon would very likely have done more damage than that of the two shots she sustained, put together. She certainly wouldn't have got up and walked away from that one.
Your speculating without any concrete proof that Sheila wasn't and could not have been the dead (as called) body of one dead female in the kitchen from as early as 7.35am, followed by other timed messages at 7.37am, 7.38am, 7.42am and of course by 7.45am! Cops don't make such glaring mistakes or errors when it comes to passing contemporaneously recorded and timed messages, not on so many occasions without at least somebody at some stage quering what had been told and said by one of their own on as it were several differently timed occasions - cops wouldn't have had sufficient time nor opportunity to falsify these police radio message logs, unlike the contents of their witness statements which could be chopped, changed and edited days, weeks, or months later by which time they could advised about what to leave out, or as the case may be, put in...
The truth of the matter was that Sheila was shot just as cops entered the kitchen and was rendered unconscious immediately, and presumed dead!!!
The fact that the blood flow from the initial shot across the neck appears feint like in its appearance, and vertical in fashion is testimony to the fact that there was only a small amount of bloodflow eminating from the first wound because Sheila was rendered unconscious instanteneously! There was obviously a somewhat protracted delay between Sheila being shot twice because no sooner was she shot a second time blood gushed and flowed from the wound site beneath Sheila's chin! It would appear that there was some truth in what Professor Knight had to say regarding there having been such a potentially lengthy delay in-between both shots! Of course, Sheila wasn't moving around during the entire period in-between shot 1 and shot 2 being inflicted, such a delay was governed by the amount of time Sheila had been rendered unconscious a after the first shot!