Bamber guilty, surely!

[sika]

Hello All,

I'm sure that this has been covered elsewhere before so forgive me.  Does anyone agree that the telephone evidence is very incriminating?   Although arguments can be made to explain the sequence of telephone events that night, I would suggest that if you received a call informing you that your family were being slaughtered, you would react in a very different way to how Jeremy did.  You would phone the police immediately ( I note that in earlier police interviews he did indeed claim this to be the case) and then you would dial 999 rather than the local police station. Why would you first call Julie Mugford? There is also strong evidence that puts the time of this call at a couple of minutes around 3am! I know that you can't convict a man on the strength of this but this is just the tip of the iceberg as far as I am concerned.  It's very easy to nit pick and argue the finer points, especially as the police, at least initially, completely bungled their investigation, but I can't escape the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that exists in this case.  I really don't want to upset anyone on this forum (too late I guess!) but your case against JB's conviction just doesn't add up to me.  I would be interested to learn if you think that there is a conspiracy to keep the 'truth' covered up.  If so, why?  Many convictions have been overturned in the past with police authorities castigated and left highly embarrassed.  There would hardly be a public outrage if he turned out to be innocent.  I sincerely hope that his case is referred to the appeal court, if only in the hope that more doubters would be convinced of his guilt.  I will however, be putting my life savings on them not referring this back to the courts.  Again I am sorry if my views upset anyone  and if my opinions are not welcome I will bugger off.   

[G]

Hello sika. I would have taken and still would take your position in believing he was guilty if there was so much "evidence" that just doesn't add up, particularly the two silencer scenario and Julie Mugfords testimony which changed several times as she was groomed by the police in interviews which totalled over 30 times in all.
But if you main problem is the timing of the phone calls then just ask yourself one question. Why would Jeremy Bamber phone the police in just a short space of time even if he did phone his girlfriend first? For he must have realised like you that it would probably take much longer for things to happen.
If he did it (1) Why didn't he wait a bit longer and give himself much more time and then phone at his leisure? and (2) Why would he phone the police at all? Surely if he did it then in keeping quiet would give him a much stronger alibi? For in effect he has no alibi. If he was guilty and planned it all any murderer with any common sense would surely give himself an alibi? Especially a "cunning" one as the police testified he was. (3) Note just how short a time it took police to arrive. Less that 20 minutes. I don't know about you, but when I have dialed 999 police often take much longer to arrive at a scene. So it would not have made much difference if he had dialed 999? I think we must accept that people do things in different ways. One may have done one thing and another would have behaved in an entirely different manner.

[lebaleb]

Why should Jeremy have called 999? When Nevill called there was no indication that anyone had been shot or that it was an emergency. It was to Jeremy's credit that he had the foresight to call the police at all. Nevill was calling someone else as Jeremy tried to call back but got the engaged tone. Julie Mugford changed the time of the call and Susan Battersby [Mugford's partner in crime] claimed to have remebered the exact time of a phone call in the night from over 1 month before. She was never prosecuted for admitted cheque fraud [deal?]

[bob]

Why should Jeremy have called 999? When Nevill called there was no indication that anyone had been shot or that it was an emergency. It was to Jeremy's credit that he had the foresight to call the police at all. Nevill was calling someone else as Jeremy tried to call back but got the engaged tone. Julie Mugford changed the time of the call and Susan Battersby [Mugford's partner in crime] claimed to have remebered the exact time of a phone call in the night from over 1 month before. She was never prosecuted for admitted cheque fraud [deal?]

Of course you would phone 999.

Nevill says "your sister's gone berserk with the gun", and you say " there was no indication that anyone had been shot or that it was an emergency"?!

[elphick]

Of course you would phone 999.

Nevill says "your sister's gone berserk with the gun", and you say " there was no indication that anyone had been shot or that it was an emergency"?!

Bob, yes I agree with you. This also doesn't sit well with the claim that Ralph had phoned the police too, and that he had also used the local number and not 999. It is hard to understand that both Ralph and Jeremy called the Police using a local number in those circumstances.

Unless, of course, Ralph didn't call the police at all.

[susan]

Bob

Sorry can,t agree with your theory if Sheila was ranting and raving with a gun Neville would never have anticipated that she would actually use it and he would not want to cause too much fuss calling 999.

[elphick]

Bob

Sorry can,t agree with your theory if Sheila was ranting and raving with a gun Neville would never have anticipated that she would actually use it and he would not want to cause too much fuss calling 999.

Why did Ralph call the police at all then? http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/nevill-s-call-to-police

[susan]

Bob  He would be in a state of panic and had to get the situation under control.  He would never have envisaged that she would shoot the whole family and he  like to keep family matters close to home.

[maggie]

Bob  He would be in a state of panic and had to get the situation under control.  He would never have envisaged that she would shoot the whole family and he  like to keep family matters close to home.

  So Jeremy claimed Ralph phoned his local police station which is a possibility. As a magistrate living in a small community Ralph may very well have known the local police station number and therefore it may have been an automatic reaction. Apparently Ralph had been threatened in the past and no doubt had plenty of dealings with the local police.  Jeremy had been working on the harvest and out in the fields for about 14 hours for the past few days, if he was deeply asleep when the phone rang there would be a certain amount of confusion, surely?  He may have followed his father's example and either known or had the number of the local police station close at hand. True, the idea of him routing through the telephone directory for the number of the local station is far fetched. Again this is all surmise.  There are so many conflicting questions and answers that we cannot really know the answers, only hard facts will give us those.  I would question why on earth Jeremy would choose a time when he was putting out so much energy in harvesting that he would be extrememly tired at night.  The other argument could be that he chose that time because he would expect Ralph to be particularly tired and deeply asleep.

[Newbury1]

Whilst we are being picky over the wording JB states Nevill used in the infamous alleged phone call the small thing that strikes me about it is the word "please"

Bamber, R v [2002] EWCA Crim 2912 (12 December 2002)

In the early hours of Wednesday, 7 August the appellant telephoned Chelmsford Police Station on a direct line number as opposed to the 999 emergency call system and spoke to PC West. He said, "You've got to help me. My father has just rung me and said, "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun." Then the line went dead".

'Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun'

The politeness seems to clash with the urgency - never mind the convenience (if JB did it) of the line going dead.

I would have thought something like "Jeremy come over now. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun" would have been more appropriate.

Totally subjective, and wildly speculative of course - but it crossed my mind!!


Never mind the thought that a healthy uninjured man would not spend time dialling and waiting for a reply (when one might not come), whilst a mad woman was loose with a gun??

The whole concept of the Nevill /JB call does not "ring" true to me 

[lebaleb]

Of course you would phone 999.

Nevill says "your sister's gone berserk with the gun", and you say " there was no indication that anyone had been shot or that it was an emergency"?!

If you read Jeremy's statement you would see that Nevill didn't say she had gone berserk, just that she had got the gun. A huge difference.

[curiousessex]

Bob, yes I agree with you. This also doesn't sit well with the claim that Ralph had phoned the police too, and that he had also used the local number and not 999. It is hard to understand that both Ralph and Jeremy called the Police using a local number in those circumstances.

Unless, of course, Ralph didn't call the police at all.

It is the defence who allege that Nevill called the police.

The evidence suggests otherwise if one takes the trouble to read the telephone call log which the defence claim allegedly relates to a telephone call being made from Nevill to the police.

The 03.26 telephone call log clearly states 'Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber, after phone went dead. Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and 410s'

On the subject of Jeremy's telephone call to Julie Mugford on the morning of 7th August 1985 three of Julie's flat mates who are neither police or relatives testified the telephone was heard ringing between 02.58 a.m. and 03.15 a.m.

Jeremy can be heard in recorded interviews (available on the Mirror website) stating;
When Nevill had allegedly called Jeremy the telephone went dead.
Jeremy immediately rang WHF and got the engaged tone.
Jeremy rang WHF a number of times by using the memory redial and got an engaged tone.
And that is when Jeremy rang the police.

In my opinion, in the absence of any consistent and detailed explanation from the defence in relation to the timing and sequence of the telephone calls on the morning of 7th August 1985, it would appear the purpose of the telephone calls would be to sow seeds in wrong footing the police whilst also being the creation of an alibi.

I have always stated it is the timings and sequence of the telephone calls on the morning of 7th August 1985 which hold the key to the guilt or innocence question.

It is the telephone calls which limit the suspects down to either Sheila or Jeremy.

Even Jeremy is convinced it was Sheila. However, in the eyes of the law it is Jeremy who was found guilty having accepted it was either Jeremy or Sheila.

On the subject of knowing 'local' police telephone numbers. Jeremy admits he had to look the telephone number up in the telephone directory.

Edit

I also believe (I could be mistaken) Jeremy at one point claimed he had tried to call Witham police station prior to ringing Chelmsford police station. I think Jeremy claimed the telephone was not answered in Witham. However it was later revealed that whilst the police station was closed at that time there were actually police officers at the station. I think it was the police officers from Witham who were contacted by Chelmsford who then met Jeremy at WHF just before 04.00 a.m. (I think 03.52 a.m. from memory)

[maggie]

Thanks curiousessex I wasn't sure if Jeremy had stated he looked the number up. Certainly a bit strange!
Will have to look at the telephone log again.

[curiousessex]

Thanks curiousessex I wasn't sure if Jeremy had stated he looked the number up. Certainly a bit strange!
Will have to look at the telephone log again.

Maggie

You are most welcome.

[sika]

Hello sika. I would have taken and still would take your position in believing he was guilty if there was so much "evidence" that just doesn't add up, particularly the two silencer scenario and Julie Mugfords testimony which changed several times as she was groomed by the police in interviews which totalled over 30 times in all.
But if you main problem is the timing of the phone calls then just ask yourself one question. Why would Jeremy Bamber phone the police in just a short space of time even if he did phone his girlfriend first? For he must have realised like you that it would probably take much longer for things to happen.
If he did it (1) Why didn't he wait a bit longer and give himself much more time and then phone at his leisure? and (2) Why would he phone the police at all? Surely if he did it then in keeping quiet would give him a much stronger alibi? For in effect he has no alibi. If he was guilty and planned it all any murderer with any common sense would surely give himself an alibi? Especially a "cunning" one as the police testified he was. (3) Note just how short a time it took police to arrive. Less that 20 minutes. I don't know about you, but when I have dialed 999 police often take much longer to arrive at a scene. So it would not have made much difference if he had dialed 999? I think we must accept that people do things in different ways. One may have done one thing and another would have behaved in an entirely different manner.

I believe he set up this telephone exchange in order to demonstrate an alibi.  If indeed he had committed these crimes, including the execution of those two little boys as they lay asleep in their beds, how could he have had an alibi?  I believe that Jeremy's past misdemeanors show that he is capable of being cunning.  It is clear that Mugford could also be accused of being cunning and her evidence is obviously tarnished as a result,  but to suggest, as an earlier poster did, that Mugford's house mate was also complicit in this cover up is stretching it a little.  Why would this witness lie? If my phone rang at 3am and I then later learned, probably that same day, that 5 members of a family that I had a link to, albeit a tenuous one, had been murdered,  I would have been able to recall the circumstances of that phone call exactly.  Furthermore, I would suggest that if most people are awoken by a telephone in the middle of the night, their initial reaction is to look at the time, especially if there is an illuminated clock by their side.  On the subject of the 999 call, the response time is irrelevant,  I just don't believe that your natural reaction would be  to reach for the phone book rather than dial 999.  Did he call the local police because he feared being identified as the 999 caller from the farmhouse, who was supposedly his father?  Ironically, I note that JB is using this very 999 call as part of his defence.  I quite obviously am no where near as informed as most other posters on this forum so I welcome any further opinions regarding these calls.