Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Jane on February 27, 2018, 09:50:AM
-
These, surely would have been a few of the questions asked by the relatives of a murdered family. Let's take a minute to look at what we'd have wanted to hear in the first minutes of hearing such terrible information. Would we have wanted to learn that mother and daughter had been shot to a bloody pulp and left, like discarded rag dolls on the floor, or might we have preferred to hear that they were laying side by side, on the bed. It makes them no less dead, but may conjure up a slightly more acceptable image, in the same way that it was appropriate to tell them that one of the little boys still had his thumb in his mouth, as opposed to telling them that the child's head was destroyed. The whole truth of the terrible injuries could wait until such time that the relatives could properly process it. It seems to me, that what was done as an act of kindness -to soften an horrendous blow- has been distorted beyond all recognition and turned into an act of deliberate deception.
-
And only a mad/insane person would create a carnage such as was found. Was JB the mad /insane one ?
The answer is NO !
Not enough background questions were ever asked of the relatives. Their own business and financial backgrounds,etc. Neither did they ask any questions except about their lines of inheritance.
From the word go JB was vilified without question.
Jane,it cuts no ice with me that you've made a veiled attempt to try and cover up the fact that both women were found on the bed instead of admitting that the bodies had been moved. I like a straight person,not one who says something because it sounds more acceptable,but one who speaks the truth because I'm immediately on my guard from someone who paints a different picture------it's not the truth,which then makes you wonder how much of what they say or tell you is going to be the truth.
No matter how bad something is,or sounds,it's far better to give a straight and honest account than " add sugar " to it. My trust would well and truly have fizzled at that point. It's no better than the media creating sensationalism through their fabrications of a situation.
It wasn't " kind " to have described how/where everyone died. It was a downright lie told by someone whose brain was distorted and whose goal it had been to have the relatives on his side. What a crafty and cunning trick SJ had played !!
-
And only a mad/insane person would create a carnage such as was found. Was JB the mad /insane one ?
The answer is NO !
Not enough background questions were ever asked of the relatives. Their own business and financial backgrounds,etc. Neither did they ask any questions except about their lines of inheritance.
From the word go JB was vilified without question.
Jane,it cuts no ice with me that you've made a veiled attempt to try and cover up the fact that both women were found on the bed instead of admitting that the bodies had been moved. I like a straight person,not one who says something because it sounds more acceptable,but one who speaks the truth because I'm immediately on my guard from someone who paints a different picture------it's not the truth,which then makes you wonder how much of what they say or tell you is going to be the truth.
No matter how bad something is,or sounds,it's far better to give a straight and honest account than " add sugar " to it. My trust would well and truly have fizzled at that point. It's no better than the media creating sensationalism through their fabrications of a situation.
It wasn't " kind " to have described how/where everyone died. It was a downright lie told by someone whose brain was distorted and whose goal it had been to have the relatives on his side. What a crafty and cunning trick SJ had played !!
Lookout, your first two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the point I was trying to make, ie what was the best way of describing, to relatives, the crime scene.
As usual, you're making this about you, but surely, by now, you must understand that you come across as being rather different from others -in fact, you pride yourself in so being. You're taking the view that there was a deliberate attempt to hide that bodies may have been moved, whereas I see it as temporarily concealing a truth which may have been too difficult to take at that time. Something, I feel, MOST would be grateful for -we don't give a 4yr old a full breakdown of how conception occurs. We tell them what they can accept at that stage- because most aren't immediately as suspicious of others as you claim to be. I honestly can't see any harm being done by softening a blow, and I can't see that so doing would have made any adverse difference.
I don't believe -unless there is evidence of him having done similar on previous occasions- there was any 'monster' who deliberately deceived relatives in order to get them 'on side'. I see him as a man who acted with compassion towards people who probably could barely take on board what had befallen their family.
-
Lookout, your first two paragraphs have absolutely nothing to do with the point I was trying to make, ie what was the best way of describing, to relatives, the crime scene.
As usual, you're making this about you, but surely, by now, you must understand that you come across as being rather different from others -in fact, you pride yourself in so being. You're taking the view that there was a deliberate attempt to hide that bodies may have been moved, whereas I see it as temporarily concealing a truth which may have been too difficult to take at that time. Something, I feel, MOST would be grateful for -we don't give a 4yr old a full breakdown of how conception occurs. We tell them what they can accept at that stage- because most aren't immediately as suspicious of others as you claim to be. I honestly can't see any harm being done by softening a blow, and I can't see that so doing would have made any adverse difference.
I don't believe -unless there is evidence of him having done similar on previous occasions- there was any 'monster' who deliberately deceived relatives in order to get them 'on side'. I see him as a man who acted with compassion towards people who probably could barely take on board what had befallen their family.
Maybe it is that I have a better understanding than you have in most matters. Your way is to skim over the nitty-gritty and present something which is far removed from the actual facts.
The relatives took EP at their every word,whereas those who like myself would have at least asked questions,particularly as it was about a family member ( JB ) I'd have wanted to have known every twist and turn before committing myself in agreeing with SJ and the EP in general.
Considering the relatives knew nothing at all about JB or his family as they never saw each other much between Christmas's,how could they have immediately laid blame on JB ? So without knowing about Sheila and her problems,the relatives had been more than happy to focus their attention on JB------for VERY obvious reasons .
-
Maybe it is that I have a better understanding than you have in most matters. Your way is to skim over the nitty-gritty and present something which is far removed from the actual facts.
The relatives took EP at their every word,whereas those who like myself would have at least asked questions,particularly as it was about a family member ( JB ) I'd have wanted to have known every twist and turn before committing myself in agreeing with SJ and the EP in general.
Considering the relatives knew nothing at all about JB or his family as they never saw each other much between Christmas's,how could they have immediately laid blame on JB ? So without knowing about Sheila and her problems,the relatives had been more than happy to focus their attention on JB------for VERY obvious reasons .
Lookout, you have less understanding of all things than -almost- anyone else I've ever known, if only because you use yourself and how you'd feel and react as your guideline and yardstick. You eagerness for the full facts from the off may suggest a lack of feelings. Whatever, I suspect it's not a true reflection of most, under those circumstances.
Given how much you claim to know of Jeremy -having known nothing of him until after the murders- I feel certain that the relatives have somewhat more inclusive knowledge of him, than you. I feel perfectly confident that the person you claim to know so very well, is a very different person from the one they experienced.
-
Lookout, you have less understanding of all things than -almost- anyone else I've ever known, if only because you use yourself and how you'd feel and react as your guideline and yardstick. You eagerness for the full facts from the off may suggest a lack of feelings. Whatever, I suspect it's not a true reflection of most, under those circumstances.
Given how much you claim to know of Jeremy -having known nothing of him until after the murders- I feel certain that the relatives have somewhat more inclusive knowledge of him, than you. I feel perfectly confident that the person you claim to know so very well, is a very different person from the one they experienced.
How can you say that I lack understanding and feeling ? On the contrary,it's you with your scathing comments/accusations that makes you the candidate, which is typical of those with their " Holier than thou " attitudes.
Lack of feelings because I happen to demand the full facts ? If someone was being hanged,wouldn't you want to know the full facts beforehand ?
My job was to get the full facts from the patients. What's wrong with that ?
Don't you know that everyone is different in every way ? Or don't they fit into your circle if they don't conform ?
Besides the relatives knowing a bit more about JB,they'd also know all about Sheila too as well as the underhandedness of JM ( although if they knew at the offset about JM it wouldn't have mattered to them as she came in handy )
-
How can you say that I lack understanding and feeling ? On the contrary,it's you with your scathing comments/accusations that makes you the candidate, which is typical of those with their " Holier than thou " attitudes.
Lack of feelings because I happen to demand the full facts ? If someone was being hanged,wouldn't you want to know the full facts beforehand ?
My job was to get the full facts from the patients. What's wrong with that ?
Don't you know that everyone is different in every way ? Or don't they fit into your circle if they don't conform ?
Besides the relatives knowing a bit more about JB,they'd also know all about Sheila too as well as the underhandedness of JM ( although if they knew at the offset about JM it wouldn't have mattered to them as she came in handy )
With your belief in your unchallengeable rightness in all things, along with your unique brand of empathy, I fail to see just how much more 'Holier than YOU" it's possible to be!!
Lookout, I'm FULLY aware that everyone is different -whether it be YOUR patients, or MY clients. The marked difference is that I don't expect my clients to think, feel or act in any other way than how it feels right for them, whereas your own view seems to be that your way -and ONLY your way- is correct. I also believe that to cement that 'correctness' there's a strong possibility that you'll throw in a few 'truths' of your own and hope you'll get away with not be challenged on them.
Regarding what you clearly believe the relatives knew -or didn't- please explain, if they never saw Jeremy, how was it that they were in such close cahoots with Julie? How would they have got to know her? They could hardly have 'reined' her in immediately post murders as she was on Jeremy's side and appeared to cling to him like glue. I'm no mind reader so I won't speculate on what relatives thought about Julie.
-
Why didn't you post that little gem in the right thread ?
That " the relatives were in cahoots with Julie ". Strange how they weren't the other day when discussing solicitors ::)
At least I'm not patronising !! I bet you thoroughly enjoy telling your " clients " what to do----in your way !!
-
Why didn't you post that little gem in the right thread ?
That " the relatives were in cahoots with Julie ". Strange how they weren't the other day when discussing solicitors ::)
At least I'm not patronising !! I bet you thoroughly enjoy telling your " clients " what to do----in your way !!
Are you suggesting that any conversation, they may have had with Julie, is an indication of them being in cahoots with her? Really?
It appears that you're unaware of the irony in you referring to me as being patronizing ;D ;D Which of the two of us claims superiority in all things? Patient care? Psychiatry? Psychology? Motherhood? Might it be I? Hell, NO!! I'm still learning. The day I believe there's nothing more for me to learn will be the day when the time has come to give up.
It's not the job of counselors to tell clients what to do. MANY seek counseling as a result of being told what to do. The aim is to help them find a way that's right for them.
-
Are you suggesting that any conversation, they may have had with Julie, is an indication of them being in cahoots with her? Really?
It appears that you're unaware of the irony in you referring to me as being patronizing ;D ;D Which of the two of us claims superiority in all things? Patient care? Psychiatry? Psychology? Motherhood? Might it be I? Hell, NO!! I'm still learning. The day I believe there's nothing more for me to learn will be the day when the time has come to give up.
It's not the job of counselors to tell clients what to do. MANY seek counseling as a result of being told what to do. The aim is to help them find a way that's right for them.
YOU said they were in cahoots with her-----not me !
I think you misunderstand my use of the word patronising. It's about your attitude when you name-drop. A trait which to me is cringeworthy. Your persona is high up there on your pedestal------looking down. I can't see you being any other way.
-
YOU said they were in cahoots with her-----not me !
I think you misunderstand my use of the word patronising. It's about your attitude when you name-drop. A trait which to me is cringeworthy. Your persona is high up there on your pedestal------looking down. I can't see you being any other way.
I certainly did, but it's a word which suggests a collusion I don't believe existed between them because I doubt they knew each other well enough.
Let's look at what you believe to be "your attitude when you name-drop". What is it that disturbs you? Something does. I'm no more responsible for my friends than are you, for yours but I'm surrounded by the Bamber's friends -all, now, getting close to the last stages of life- who, as such, have opinions. Apart from which, I have friends who are magistrates. I have friends who are doctors. I have a friend who's a psychiatrist. I have friends who are counselors. I also have a friend who, along with her family, is very close to Julie's family. I have friends who have no links, whatsoever to WHF, but they all have opinions. I also have ONE friend who believes that Jeremy is innocent..................I don't recall that I EVER gave you their names so remain clueless about what you mean by "name-dropping".
-
These, surely would have been a few of the questions asked by the relatives of a murdered family. Let's take a minute to look at what we'd have wanted to hear in the first minutes of hearing such terrible information. Would we have wanted to learn that mother and daughter had been shot to a bloody pulp and left, like discarded rag dolls on the floor, or might we have preferred to hear that they were laying side by side, on the bed. It makes them no less dead, but may conjure up a slightly more acceptable image, in the same way that it was appropriate to tell them that one of the little boys still had his thumb in his mouth, as opposed to telling them that the child's head was destroyed. The whole truth of the terrible injuries could wait until such time that the relatives could properly process it. It seems to me, that what was done as an act of kindness -to soften an horrendous blow- has been distorted beyond all recognition and turned into an act of deliberate deception.
Questions that any concerned individual would rightly pose, yet not once asked by Jeremy. Oh he had realized that in the aftermath he would be quizzed by relatives, in particular by Ann Eaton, but thought that she would be assuaged by gaining control of the caravan park, and of course never expecting the formal trial he was subjected to.
And how he played his part that first morning at Goldhanger, blubbering so loudly he could be heard from the streets, yet cynically laughing behind closed doors over the graves of the five individuals he killed, and whose corpses were necessary to end the torture he endured on a daily basis, a torture which in itself exhibited a madness no less severe than the one manifested by his sister when left unmedicated.
-
Maybe it is that I have a better understanding than you have in most matters. Your way is to skim over the nitty-gritty and present something which is far removed from the actual facts.
The relatives took EP at their every word,whereas those who like myself would have at least asked questions,particularly as it was about a family member ( JB ) I'd have wanted to have known every twist and turn before committing myself in agreeing with SJ and the EP in general.
Considering the relatives knew nothing at all about JB or his family as they never saw each other much between Christmas's,how could they have immediately laid blame on JB ? So without knowing about Sheila and her problems,the relatives had been more than happy to focus their attention on JB------for VERY obvious reasons .
Really? You have had a lot longer than EP to find out every twist and turn and yet just yesterday you asked this .....
I'm still baffled by June's position in relation to Sheila's.
The door from where June was found was open in the opposite direction to the door where Sheila was ?
Were these pics mirror images ?
How long would you have needed to 'get you man/woman'? ::)
-
Really? You have had a lot longer than EP to find out every twist and turn and yet just yesterday you asked this .....
How long would you have needed to 'get you man/woman'? ::)
Certainly not as long as it took. I'd have used a different approach too,with EVERYONE in the picture !
-
EVERYONE would have been a suspect until I'd worked things out.
-
EVERYONE would have been a suspect until I'd worked things out.
Given that all this time later, you didn't even know where the bodies were, I think you might have been kicked off the case quite some time ago! Besides, how can 'everybody' be a suspect? Think about it!
-
Given that all this time later, you didn't even know where the bodies were, I think you might have been kicked off the case quite some time ago! Besides, how can 'everybody' be a suspect? Think about it!
Where there are relatives etc,of course you have to investigate them too. Police know that this type of murder usually involves a family member.
Also farm workers and those who might have had grudges during Nevill's time as a magistrate. There are umpteen areas of investigation which EP never even bothered with.
Obviously you wouldn't have bothered either.
-
Where there are relatives etc,of course you have to investigate them too. Police know that this type of murder usually involves a family member.
Also farm workers and those who might have had grudges during Nevill's time as a magistrate. There are umpteen areas of investigation which EP never even bothered with.
Obviously you wouldn't have bothered either.
What utter PIFFLE!!! You'd have investigated everyone. You -probably more than the rest of us put together- would have done exactly what the police did at the time and suck up -like a sponge- every word Jeremy said. Not that I'm blaming them for it. There was no one else there. Jeremy had total control of what was happening from the moment he first spoke to police. They had no reason not to believe his every word. As he, himself said, it's important to tell as much of the truth as possible, and he did.
-
Where there are relatives etc,of course you have to investigate them too. Police know that this type of murder usually involves a family member.
Also farm workers and those who might have had grudges during Nevill's time as a magistrate. There are umpteen areas of investigation which EP never even bothered with.
Obviously you wouldn't have bothered either.
It did involve a family member and why would they be looking at the relatives when Jeremy said he received a call from his father saying Sheila had gone crazy and had a gun? Sheila was found with said gun across her body. So you would ignore all of that and head for the relatives? What a head shaker! ;D
-
It did involve a family member and why would they be looking at the relatives when Jeremy said he received a call from his father saying Sheila had gone crazy and had a gun? Sheila was found with said gun across her body. So you would ignore all of that and head for the relatives? What a head shaker! ;D
So it wouldn't have entered your head that it could have been anyone other than Nevill who'd called ?
-
So it wouldn't have entered your head that it could have been anyone other than Nevill who'd called ?
I doubt it's entered yours OTHER than as a means of laying it anywhere other than Jeremy. When you make your mind up of innocence from seeing a picture before you even know the story, I guess anyone will do.
-
I doubt it's entered yours OTHER than as a means of laying it anywhere other than Jeremy. When you make your mind up of innocence from seeing a picture before you even know the story, I guess anyone will do.
Oh,there goes the echo---------I wasn't talking to you so butt out !
-
Oh,there goes the echo---------I wasn't talking to you so butt out !
Such vulgarity! Tut tut.
-
So it wouldn't have entered your head that it could have been anyone other than Nevill who'd called ?
No, because such a caller couldn't be sure Jeremy wouldn't call the police.
-
No, because such a caller couldn't be sure Jeremy wouldn't call the police.
From WHF ?
-
From WHF ?
What?
-
From WHF ?
Jeremy was in Goldhanger when the alleged call happened..
-
Jeremy was in Goldhanger when the alleged call happened..
Exactly.
-
Exactly.
I think lookout might benefit from checking up on who was where, and on what she said, and when. Maybe she's confused OR is deliberately trying to confuse us by pretending she is.
-
It's difficult when you're finding something in a book,trying to concentrate on the forum----while watching the news as well.
-
It's difficult when you're finding something in a book,trying to concentrate on the forum----while watching the news as well.
So you do one thing at a time. You still haven't provided the page number of Colin's book yet.
-
So you do one thing at a time. You still haven't provided the page number of Colin's book yet.
.Had my lunch an hour ago,fed the cats,let them out then back in again,watched Family at War,made a cup of drinking chocolate,ate half a box of Maltesers-----------------give me a chance. I wish I'd bookmarked the damn page.
-
.Had my lunch an hour ago,fed the cats,let them out then back in again,watched Family at War,made a cup of drinking chocolate,ate half a box of Maltesers-----------------give me a chance. I wish I'd bookmarked the damn page.
If you have an idea of where in the book it might be (beginning, middle, end or what he was talking about when he mentioned it?) I will help you look.
-
Because Colin's story jumps from one thing to another it's hard to tell if it was the beginning,middle or end.
-
Page 35. 10 round ammunition case nearby---------where Sheila had lain. A police witness also had this in his statement.
-
These, surely would have been a few of the questions asked by the relatives of a murdered family. Let's take a minute to look at what we'd have wanted to hear in the first minutes of hearing such terrible information. Would we have wanted to learn that mother and daughter had been shot to a bloody pulp and left, like discarded rag dolls on the floor, Er, yes, if that was how the victims bodies had been found, surely everybody of sound mind would appreciate being told the truth, particularly if such people were asking the police for the specifics in question - you would not expect the police to tell you a pack of lies about Sheila and Junes bodies being laid side by side on top of the bed, with a Bible on top of Sheila's chest, and the gun resting on the bed in-between both bodies, if the bodies were languishing upon the bedroom floor either side of the bed, one with multiple gun shot wounds, the other shot twice! Now, it seems somewhat pertinent to me, that for one reason or another, the cops that told Ann Eaton and the others at Jeremy's cottage that Sheila only had been shot once,
told them that because when Jones and Clark had seen Sheila's body laid on top of the bed, that she had quite literally only been shot just the once by that stage!If you have an idea of where in the book it might be (beginning, middle, end or what he was talking about when he mentioned it?) I will help you look.
[/color][/i]or might we have preferred to hear that they were laying side by side, on the bed. Only if they were laid on top of the bed, side by side one another! It makes them no less dead, but knowing the truth, and reporting the truth is what has to be told, otherwise make an excuse not to want to talk about it, because it's still under investigation! Make no mistakes about it, when Jones and Clark visited the main bedroom scene the bodies of Sheila and June were laid out side by side on top of the bed, the gun resting on the bed in-between both bodies, and Sheila had a Bible on top of her chest!but may conjure up a slightly more acceptable image, I can't believe that anyone is trying to condone the police telling deliberate lies!!in the same way that it was appropriate to tell them that one of the little boys still had his thumb in his mouth, because he did.. as opposed to telling them that the child's head was destroyed. anyone who wanted to know the gory details would find out later at the inquest!The whole truth of the terrible injuries could wait until such time that the relatives could properly process it. Condoning police officers to tell deliberate lies is not acceptable, it's like suggesting that the cops who edited and tampered with the witness statements in the Hillsboro's tragedy cover up did nothing wrong or dishonest! It seems to me, that what was done as an act of kindness -to soften an horrendous blow- has been distorted beyond all recognition and turned into an act of deliberate deception. No, you have got that all wrong, since what Jones and Clark both saw they reported it accurately to Ann Eaton and the others, Jones and Clark did not know that back at the scene, senior officers were restaging the circumstances of Sheila Caffell's death on the bedroom floor, as opposed to on the bed where Jones and Clark had both seen it! The senior officers concerned, did not know or expect Jones and Clark to tell anybody anything about the positions of bodies at the scene! The officers in question have never offered up such a pathetic explanation along the lines you are suggesting - surely the police can speak for themselves,
can't they?
-
How puzzling, also, that Ann Eaton has never mentioned this discrepancy in the account given to her by Jones and Clark on the first morning of the police investigation, when by the time of the inquest and the trial, she must have found out that police were saying that the bodies of Sheila and June were not on the bed, but on the floor either side of the bed?
Ann Eaton kept handwritten notes about anything and everything, yet for some inexplicable reason, she chooses to remain mute on the matter!!
Imagine how she must have felt when she found out that according to the police radio message log contents, Sheila's body was neither found upon the bed, or upon the bedroom floor upstairs, but rather downstairs in the kitchen (she'd have run out of notepaper or cards, and pens documenting all these conflicting accounts regarding where the body of Sheila had been reported as being dead)! How many different versions of where cops found Sheila's body would be acceptable to anyone wanting to know the truth?
-
How puzzling, also, that Ann Eaton has never mentioned this discrepancy in the account given to her by Jones and Clark on the first morning of the police investigation, when by the time of the inquest and the trial, she must have found out that police were saying that the bodies of Sheila and June were not on the bed, but on the floor either side of the bed?
Ann Eaton kept handwritten notes about anything and everything, yet for some inexplicable reason, she chooses to remain mute on the matter!!
Imagine how she must have felt when she found out that according to the police radio message log contents, Sheila's body was neither found upon the bed, or upon the bedroom floor upstairs, but rather downstairs in the kitchen (she'd have run out of notepaper or cards, and pens documenting all these conflicting accounts regarding where the body of Sheila had been reported as being dead)! How many different versions of where cops found Sheila's body would be acceptable to anyone wanting to know the truth?
And then there is her father, Robert Boutflour, surely no-one is brazen enough to suggest that this wazzerk never heard all the various accounts about where cops found Sheila's body - downstairs in the kitchen, upstairs on top of the bed, and on the bedroom floor at the side of the bed!
This wazzerk would have played merry hell and written out chapter and verse regarding all these contradictory features concerning the alleged whereabouts of Sheila's body, at this time, or that time, or whenever!
-
Page 35. 10 round ammunition case nearby---------where Sheila had lain. A police witness also had this in his statement.
Reading through some posts,one giving reference to 5 mystery bullets that hadn't belonged to the ones which had been fired. No fingerprinting done. No serial numbers given. These were not from the box of 50.
-
Why have the relatives kept silent about all this inconsistent accounts in the police evidence concerning the whereabouts of Sheila Caffell's body at different stages of the proceedings?
-
Why have the relatives kept silent about all this inconsistent accounts in the police evidence concerning the whereabouts of Sheila Caffell's body at different stages of the proceedings?
They have remained tight lipped about all these inconsistencies because these are the very grounds they relied upon to force Essex police to prosecute Jeremy Bamber as the killer!
-
They have remained tight lipped about all these inconsistencies because these are the very grounds they relied upon to force Essex police to prosecute Jeremy Bamber as the killer!
It's called, 'blackmail', which was what they relatives did to get Jeremy Bamber convicted as the killer - the relatives know that Sheila's body was originally reported dead downstairs in the kitchen, and that later on she was pronounced dead on the far side of the bed in the main bedroom, and they knew that Sheila ended up on the main bedroom floor dead with an additional bullet wound in her throat, and that cops shot Sheila in the bedroom!
-
It's called, 'blackmail', which was what they relatives did to get Jeremy Bamber convicted as the killer - the relatives know that Sheila's body was originally reported dead downstairs in the kitchen, and that later on she was pronounced dead on the far side of the bed in the main bedroom, and they knew that Sheila ended up on the main bedroom floor dead with an additional bullet wound in her throat, and that cops shot Sheila in the bedroom!
Robert Boutflour contacted Dr Craig and got confirmation from him that Sheila had only got a single bullet wound to her throat when he viewed her body on the far side of the bed and pronounced her as being dead at 8.44am! That was all part f the pressure the relatives heaped upon Essex police to force them to stitch Jeremy Bamber up as the killer!
All the relatives knew and know that Sheila's body was reported in three separate locations inside the farmhouse as being dead, at different stages of the police investigation between 7.35am and 10.00am - this convinced the relatives that the cops had shot and killed Sheila, and that the relatives knew that the staging of Sheila's body in possession of the rifle on the bedroom floor by the cops, was done for the simple purpose of trying to cover up police involvement in Sheila Caffell's death!
-
Why do you think that despite it becoming more and more well known in public circles, that there are serious inconsistencies regarding the whereabouts of Sheila Caffell's body at different stages in the police investigation (kitchen, on top of bed and on bedroom floor) that none of the relatives have jumped on the bandwagon publicly screaming for Jeremy's convictions to be relooked at?
-
Why do you think that despite it becoming more and more well known in public circles, that there are serious inconsistencies regarding the whereabouts of Sheila Caffell's body at different stages in the police investigation (kitchen, on top of bed and on bedroom floor) that none of the relatives have jumped on the bandwagon publicly screaming for Jeremy's convictions to be relooked at?
The reason you get no response from any of the relatives about these disturbing inconsistencies, is because they played that trump card themselves three decades ago, to get Essex police to prosecute Jeremy as the killer!
-
More disturbingly, was the manner with which Essex police and the relatives combined efforts to utilize the death of Sheila Caffells body on the main bedroom floor, to make out the case that she could not have killed herself because with the silencer fitted to the barrel of the rifle, the overall length of the gun would have been too long to enable Sheila to shoot and kill herself even if she had wanted to...
The blood in the silencer turning out to be the icing on the cake, since it was successfully argued at trial that once Sheila sustained the second fatal shot, she could not have removed the silencer from the gun and taken it downstairs to conceal it in a cupboard in the den!
-
I've read that RWB is alleged to have contacted Dr Craig and got confirmation that Sheila had only been shot once. Perhaps he also gave him confirmation that the others had only been shot once because that was all he noted at the time.
-
Page 35. 10 round ammunition case nearby---------where Sheila had lain. A police witness also had this in his statement.
The 10 round ammunition case is the magazine!
-
The 10 round ammunition case is the magazine!
??? ??? ??? ???
-
??? ??? ??? ???
;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Okay-------so what was it doing there and whose prints were on it ?
-
It was nearby.What was it doing nearby ? Would Jeremy have left it there ? NO !!
Now have a bloody good laugh at that !! Because I will when you fumble for your excuses.
-
Okay-------so what was it doing there and whose prints were on it ?
What was it doing there? You can't use the rifle without it!
-
It was nearby.What was it doing nearby ? Would Jeremy have left it there ? NO !!
Now have a bloody good laugh at that !! Because I will when you fumble for your excuses.
Colin just got it wrong, there was no magazine near Sheila! It was ON the rifle. This is how baby conspiracies start ;D ;D ;D
-
Colin just got it wrong, there was no magazine near Sheila! It was ON the rifle. This is how baby conspiracies start ;D ;D ;D
Yeah,everyone's wrong in your eyes,aren't they ? What about the cop who'd told him ? Was he wrong also ?
-
Yeah,everyone's wrong in your eyes,aren't they ? What about the cop who'd told him ? Was he wrong also ?
A cop didn't tell him, he said a cop started to tell him but he stopped him. He then goes on to recall what HE REMEMBERS from the trial. If you can find anything that was mentioned in trial about the magazine being found next to Sheila, I will eat MY hat - in fact, I will buy one specially. If the magazine wasn't on the rifle - then Sheila most defo did NOT shoot herself! Please explain how she would manage to kill herself then remove the magazine?
-
A cop didn't tell him, he said a cop started to tell him but he stopped him. He then goes on to recall what HE REMEMBERS from the trial. If you can find anything that was mentioned in trial about the magazine being found next to Sheila, I will eat MY hat - in fact, I will buy one specially. If the magazine wasn't on the rifle - then Sheila most defo did NOT shoot herself! Please explain how she would manage to kill herself then remove the magazine?
So it had obviously been removed by EP.
-
So it had obviously been removed by EP.
Obviously ;D ;D ;D ;D ::)
-
Without wearing gloves !
-
A cop didn't tell him, he said a cop started to tell him but he stopped him. He then goes on to recall what HE REMEMBERS from the trial. If you can find anything that was mentioned in trial about the magazine being found next to Sheila, I will eat MY hat - in fact, I will buy one specially. If the magazine wasn't on the rifle - then Sheila most defo did NOT shoot herself! Please explain how she would manage to kill herself then remove the magazine?
There was a magazine found near to Sheila Caffells body!
Cops knew it, and it was captured in the crime scene video taken by DC Henderson and or DC Oakey...
-
There was a magazine found near to Sheila Caffells body!
Cops knew it, and it was captured in the crime scene video taken by DC Henderson and or DC Oakey...
I can prove it beyond denial...
-
There are those amongst us, who are humanoids, brainwashed by the powers that be who are all humanoids, themselves! These persons will believe everything, and anything that the powers that be say, in whatever format, or whatever circumstance...
I am only one of the others, but in the Worlds population there are about 2% of people like myself who have alien DNA in our profiles...
-
There are those amongst us, who are humanoids, brainwashed by the powers that be who are all humanoids, themselves! These persons will believe everything, and anything that the powers that be say, in whatever format, or whatever circumstance...
I am only one of the others, but in the Worlds population there are about 2% of people like myself who have alien DNA in our profiles...
My sisters 'DNA' changes, frequently, from test to test - its been labelled as 'Hashimotto's disease, but irrespective of that / this, the powers that be throughout the entire flat earth, all know the true significance of these disparities in the 'DNA' of persons existing upon the flat earth, at any moment in time!
-
My sisters 'DNA' changes, frequently, from test to test - its been labelled as 'Hashimotto's disease, but irrespective of that / this, the powers that be throughout the entire flat earth, all know the true significance of these disparities in the 'DNA' of persons existing upon the flat earth, at any moment in time!
We, are 'hybrids' amongst the human race...
-
On behalf of all the other 'hybrids' upon the flat earth, I am demanding that the powers that be, recognise publicly, that we are all not the same...
There are those amongst us, who 'will accept lies' as 'the truth', and people like my sister, and me who will know the truth...
-
I can prove it beyond denial...
Sheila's body was originally found or reportedly found downstairs in the kitchen!
-
Sheila's body was originally found or reportedly found downstairs in the kitchen!
It will come as no surprise, therefore, to discover that the only magazine on any of the rooms of the farmhouse (downstairs or upstairs) was on the kitchen floor!!!
-
It will come as no surprise, therefore, to discover that the only magazine on any of the rooms of the farmhouse (downstairs or upstairs) was on the kitchen floor!!!
A magazine in close proximity to the plastic bucket containing Sheila Caffells bloodstained knickers! Close to the telephone with its handset off its cradle, and close to the loose ammunition upon the kitchen worktop...
-
A magazine in close proximity to the plastic bucket containing Sheila Caffells bloodstained knickers! Close to the telephone with its handset off its cradle, and close to the loose ammunition upon the kitchen worktop...
Is it any wonder, then that the police officer stopped himself from saying anything further about the magazine which was found close to Sheila Caffells body?
That copper must have known about the fact that Sheila's body had originally been reportedly found on the kitchen floor in the vicinity of the magazine...
-
Now, if you please - study the general route, from the inner kitchen door through which the first police officer came into the kitchen?
Next - locate the position of the magazine on the kitchen floor!
Next - observe the disturbance of the kitchen table and chairs and stools along that route, from 'that' door to 'that' magazine?
Ask yourselves, what does the disturbance of these items of furniture suggest to you, as an observer?
-
Now, if you please - study the general route, from the inner kitchen door through which the first police officer came into the kitchen?
Next - locate the position of the magazine on the kitchen floor!
Next - observe the disturbance of the kitchen table and chairs and stools along that route, from 'that' door to 'that' magazine?
Ask yourselves, what does the disturbance of these items of furniture suggest to you, as an observer?
Well, to me it paves the way for Sheila Caffells body to have ended up on the kitchen floor in the vicinity of that magazine, the plastic bucket containing her bloodstained knickers, the telephone handset off its cradle and the loose ammunition.
-
Well, to me it paves the way for Sheila Caffells body to have ended up on the kitchen floor in the vicinity of that magazine, the plastic bucket containing her bloodstained knickers, the telephone handset off its cradle and the loose ammunition.
Does anyone think I am reporting such observations with bias?
-
Does anyone think I am reporting such observations with bias?
And, if I am correct in my observation, does this not fit in with the contents of the police radio message log contents, timed variously between 7.35am and 8.10am, that morning (two bodies in the kitchen, one dead male and one dead female)?
-
It will come as no surprise, therefore, to discover that the only magazine on any of the rooms of the farmhouse (downstairs or upstairs) was on the kitchen floor!!!
-
We now know with certainty, that the second team of SOCO did not take any video footage whatsoever of the farmhouse crime scenes, PC Bird only took photographs from 10.00 onwards...
It was either DC Henderson or DC Oakey (first team of SOCO) who captured the farmhouse on video footage, and took photographs!
The image of the magazine which was originally close to Sheila Caffell's body on the kitchen floor, was captured on the crime scene video at around 9.00am, when the first team of SOCO began recording the various scenes downstairs in the kitchen and upstairs in the bedrooms during that first hour long period between 9.00 am and 10.00am...
-
We now know with certainty, that the second team of SOCO did not take any video footage whatsoever of the farmhouse crime scenes, PC Bird only took photographs from 10.00 onwards...
It was either DC Henderson or DC Oakey (first team of SOCO) who captured the farmhouse on video footage, and took photographs!
The image of the magazine which was originally close to Sheila Caffell's body on the kitchen floor, was captured on the crime scene video at around 9.00am, when the first team of SOCO began recording the various scenes downstairs in the kitchen and upstairs in the bedrooms during that first hour long period between 9.00 am and 10.00am...
The bloodied fingermarks on the edge of the kitchen worktop in that general sort of area also must now take on new meaning and purpose because it now seems highly likely that once Sheila had got shot in the neck by the police officer, that after the fingers of her right hand went to the wound site on her neck, that she lowered her right arm and attempted to steady herself during her fall to the kitchen floor in the region of that magazine!
-
There didn't look to be anything in the bucket at that point ?
-
There didn't look to be anything in the bucket at that point ?
Are you suggesting that cops removed Shella's panties and placed them in that plastic bucket?
-
There didn't look to be anything in the bucket at that point ?
So why would one fill a bucket three quarters full of water and put nothing in it?
-
The rather disturbing facts in this matter, are that there were three sets of bloodied fingermarks which were either on Sheila's neck, on her nightdress, or on the edge of the kitchen worktop, which for reasons only best known to Essex police, they chose not to want to have to identify or to speak about! - sets alarm bells ringing!
Since, if Sheila was responsible for making two of these three sets of bloodied fingermarks, or more, it paints an entirely different picture to that relied upon by the police and the prosecution during the trial...
-
The rather disturbing facts in this matter, are that there were three sets of bloodied fingermarks which were either on Sheila's neck, on her nightdress, or on the edge of the kitchen worktop, which for reasons only best known to Essex police, they chose not to want to have to identify or to speak about! - sets alarm bells ringing!
Since, if Sheila was responsible for making two of these three sets of bloodied fingermarks, or more, it paints an entirely different picture to that relied upon by the police and the prosecution during the trial...
There is also the partial bloodied palm print on the pages of the Bible?
-
Are you suggesting that cops removed Shella's panties and placed them in that plastic bucket?
No. I was just wondering where the soaking clothes were.
No sign of discoloured water in that green bucket.
-
No. I was just wondering where the soaking clothes were.
No sign of discoloured water in that green bucket.
There is NO way of telling, from the picture, what colour the water is, and having gone back and checked, I'm not even certain how full the bucket is.
-
The existence of all these bloodied fingermarks, or partial palm prints, here, there, and everywhere, tells us all something which we might well have been overlooking for one reason, or another!
Since, let's assume for arguments sake, that in the absence of any evidence produced by Essex police to the contrary, that Sheila was responsible for making all of the bloodied fingermarks, on her neck, on the front lower part of her nightdress, on the edge of the kitchen worktop and on the pages of the Bible, does this not indicate in the strongest terms imaginable, that Sheila had use f her right arm, downstairs in the kitchen in the region of the kitchen telephone, loose bullets, and the magazine on the kitchen floor at a time when she had blood on her right hand fingers, she also had use of her right hand and the fingers of her right hand prior to her being shot on the second occasion once she had been removed from the bed onto the floor, and she had use of a movement of her right hand and fingers prior to her dying as a result of being shot on the second occasion because she might have thrust her bloodied fingers towards her neck causing the bloodied fingermarks there, and that somewhere amidst all of this she was able to grasp the pages of a Bible, prior to her dying, or in other words, all of these examples of bloodied fingermarks and a partial hand print were all made by Sheila prior to the moment that somebody shot that last bullet underneath her chin which immediately terminated her existence upon this earth!
On these circumstances, a presence of Sheila's body downstairs in the kitchen as per the contents of the police radio message logs becomes a reality! A presence of Sheila's body laid on top of the bed with a Bible on her chest becomes a reality, and her body ending up dead on the bedroom floor after Jones and Clark left the scene also becomes a reality!
-
There is NO way of telling, from the picture, what colour the water is, and having gone back and checked, I'm not even certain how full the bucket is.
I can see through my magnifier----clear water. I remember AE in her statement telling of 3 buckets. Two would have contained said clothes,but the third,nothing. How many articles of clothing would have needed soaking ? Boys trousers and a couple of pairs of drawers.
-
I can see through my magnifier----clear water. I remember AE in her statement telling of 3 buckets. Two would have contained said clothes,but the third,nothing. How many articles of clothing would have needed soaking ? Boys trousers and a couple of pairs of drawers.
I'm not sure that a magnifier makes clear a blurry picture. What IS becoming clear, however, is that there were -and still VERY definitely ARE- things being said about what occurred, that if nothing else, are gross -and possibly defamatory, but certainly INflammatory- errors.
-
I'm not sure that a magnifier makes clear a blurry picture. What IS becoming clear, however, is that there were -and still VERY definitely ARE- things being said about what occurred, that if nothing else, are gross -and possibly defamatory, but certainly INflammatory- errors.
The magnifier is old,but excellent,along with a jewellers one which I also have and both are efficient whether something's blurred or not.
-
The existence of all these bloodied fingermarks, or partial palm prints, here, there, and everywhere, tells us all something which we might well have been overlooking for one reason, or another!
Since, let's assume for arguments sake, that in the absence of any evidence produced by Essex police to the contrary, that Sheila was responsible for making all of the bloodied fingermarks, on her neck, on the front lower part of her nightdress, on the edge of the kitchen worktop and on the pages of the Bible, does this not indicate in the strongest terms imaginable, that Sheila had use f her right arm, downstairs in the kitchen in the region of the kitchen telephone, loose bullets, and the magazine on the kitchen floor at a time when she had blood on her right hand fingers, she also had use of her right hand and the fingers of her right hand prior to her being shot on the second occasion once she had been removed from the bed onto the floor, and she had use of a movement of her right hand and fingers prior to her dying as a result of being shot on the second occasion because she might have thrust her bloodied fingers towards her neck causing the bloodied fingermarks there, and that somewhere amidst all of this she was able to grasp the pages of a Bible, prior to her dying, or in other words, all of these examples of bloodied fingermarks and a partial hand print were all made by Sheila prior to the moment that somebody shot that last bullet underneath her chin which immediately terminated her existence upon this earth!
On these circumstances, a presence of Sheila's body downstairs in the kitchen as per the contents of the police radio message logs becomes a reality! A presence of Sheila's body laid on top of the bed with a Bible on her chest becomes a reality, and her body ending up dead on the bedroom floor after Jones and Clark left the scene also becomes a reality!
Alarm bells are ringing from my point of view - why wasn't the prosecution interested in presenting the bloodied fingermarks evidence on (a) the front lower part of Sheila's night dress, (b) the bloodied fingermarks on the the edge of the kitchen worktop, (c) the bloodied fingermarks on Sheila's neck, and (d) the bloodied partial palm print on the pages of the Bible?
Everything points to Sheila having made all of these marks, otherwise the prosecution and it's experts would have broken their necks to mention each and everyone of these, individually and collectively, the fact they didn't says a lot!
Sheila was the source, downstairs in the kitchen, and upstairs in the bedroom, it speaks volumes about what had really taken place!
-
As someone who knows he is an hybrid version of a human being, I know where the truth lies, and I know the difference between where lies don't add up to the truth!
Sheila was shot downstairs in the kitchen, and later she was shot upstairs in the bedroom after her body was transferred from on top of the bed, onto the bedroom floor!
Everything, no matter which way you look at it, points to Sheila's body being in three key positions, downstairs (once), and upstairs (twice), at different times of the police operation after 7.35am, until after 10.00am...
-
As someone who knows he is an hybrid version of a human being, I know where the truth lies, and I know the difference between where lies don't add up to the truth!
Sheila was shot downstairs in the kitchen, and later she was shot upstairs in the bedroom after her body was transferred from on top of the bed, onto the bedroom floor!
Everything, no matter which way you look at it, points to Sheila's body being in three key positions, downstairs (once), and upstairs (twice), at different times of the police operation after 7.35am, until after 10.00am...
Essex police are corrupt!
They acted dishonestly, and were supported by the local CPS, who were also dishonest and corrupted!
There can be, and is no doubt whatsoever, regarding this!
Why didn't the local CPS pick up on the three locations inside whf where Sheila Caffell's body was reported as being present, by the police themselves, in one form or another?
-
Essex police are corrupt!
They acted dishonestly, and were supported by the local CPS, who were also dishonest and corrupted!
There can be, and is no doubt whatsoever, regarding this!
Why didn't the local CPS pick up on the three locations inside whf where Sheila Caffell's body was reported as being present, by the police themselves, in one form or another?
Are the Essex CPS basically, brain dead?
-
Are the Essex CPS basically, brain dead?
You see, if I can pinpoint these three locations inside the farmhouse, where the police themselves are saying in one form or another, that Sheila's body was present, for example, in the kitchen downstairs (7.35am, onward), on the bed upstairs (from 8.44am), and them on the bedroom floor upstairs (from 9.13am, onwards), how come the local CPS can't even provide an explanation for why these inconsistencies even exist?
What we are dealing with here, is 'malfeance in public office'...
-
You see, if I can pinpoint these three locations inside the farmhouse, where the police themselves are saying in one form or another, that Sheila's body was present, for example, in the kitchen downstairs (7.35am, onward), on the bed upstairs (from 8.44am), and them on the bedroom floor upstairs (from 9.13am, onwards), how come the local CPS can't even provide an explanation for why these inconsistencies even exist?
What we are dealing with here, is 'malfeance in public office'...
Everyone involved in this miscarriage of justice, needs to be prosecuted for their part in allowing it to happen!
-
Everyone involved in this miscarriage of justice, needs to be prosecuted for their part in allowing it to happen!
Heads need lopping off, lengthy terms of imprisonment imposed, pension payments revoked or stopped, there can be no sympathy for any of these monsters!!!
-
Heads need lopping off, lengthy terms of imprisonment imposed, pension payments revoked or stopped, there can be no sympathy for any of these monsters!!!
Your 'hybrid humans' are effecting Jeremy's release, hope you know that.
-
Your 'hybrid humans' are effecting Jeremy's release, hope you know that.
I prefer to suggest that humanoids are at the hub of reasoning which keeps Jeremy Bamber incarcerated!
Jeremy himself, is almost certainly a 'hybrid human', misunderstood, disliked, and feared...
-
I prefer to suggest that humanoids are at the hub of reasoning which keeps Jeremy Bamber incarcerated!
Jeremy himself, is almost certainly a 'hybrid human', misunderstood, disliked, and feared...
Albeit, highly intelligent, manipulative, and intuitive...