the hitman

[susan]

april exactly a psychopath would feel nothing and be able to act the part.  I always remember watching a film on Ted Bundy he appeared to be everything Society cou  ld wish for

[Jane]

jansus/april

I think Jeremy Bamber may have boasted of what he was going to do maybe acting the big man acting macho like breaking into the caravan park shows he was capable of acting underhand to people who had been so good to him I have never thought he actually discussed killing his family with Julie in a serious way she would have been afraid of him thinking she was going to be next. MacDonald as a hitman is a joke IMO.

Susan, I think if he mentioned it once, even in a jovial way, there would have been times when it came back to her and she'd have had doubts, even if it was about her own safety.

[No-Bits]

april exactly a psychopath would feel nothing and be able to act the part.  I always remember watching a film on Ted Bundy he appeared to be everything Society cou  ld wish for

Even his reaction when arrested was pretty cool, all of his "well that's what you have to find out" type comments to the police.

I think I'd be a little more emotive had I just been arrested for murder. 

[Jane]

april exactly a psychopath would feel nothing and be able to act the part.  I always remember watching a film on Ted Bundy he appeared to be everything Society cou  ld wish for

Then it must have been a dilemma for him, Susan. He could have acted it either way, tough or tearful. It seems that more emotion was expected of him from some but others say he exhibited emotion. I think it must depend on who's telling the story and what were their own expectations of someone in that situation.

[susan]

Harters I agree his attitude in Court was not normal for a man on trial for murdering his entire family it should have been a time of sadness not being cocky and arrogant.  I think he was putting on a "show" for the newspaper deal he thought he was going to get and he did show himself in a very bad light.

[scipio_usmc]

Harters I agree his attitude in Court was not normal for a man on trial for murdering his entire family it should have been a time of sadness not being cocky and arrogant.  I think he was putting on a "show" for the newspaper deal he thought he was going to get and he did show himself in a very bad light.

Julie's comments are veyr illustrative in thig regard.

She said that at one point she threatened to go to police and he said go ahead it would do nothing because he was what we would call today "bulletproof". 

He seemed to honestly believe they would not be able to make a case against him so he saw no reason not to act like an arrogant jerk and even to toy with police.

He grossly overestimated the competence of his frame job and let his natural personality come out.

Had it not been for the evidence that he didn't think of the arrogance would not have been enough to convict him.  So he saw no harm in it.  In a way he was right.

That arrogance did not lead to evidence that ended up convicting him (save being seen entering through windows which he admitted to anyway) so it merely serves to further illustrate his personality to people interested in the case.   

[Jan]

I did ask posters - whatever your belief to look at this from both angles - some posters seem unable to do that . 


to me it seems odd from both sides of the coin

What made the police believe it so much that they were willing to arrest this man - the judge intimated it was impossible for anyone else to be involved - so why were the police at one stage not so sure of that fact?

[Caroline]

If you cant be broadminded enough to answer from both sides then please don't comment

1) if Jeremy was guilty and Julie was telling the truth - why would he tell her the story about the hit man? He previously had no problem with telling her he was going to kill his family by drugging them  and burning the house down. He had told her on the phone that "tonight is the night" . She had lain in bed and in her own words she knew he had done it. So why would he tell her that a hit man was involved . In the eyes of the law  the intent was the same So why would he do that?

2) If he is innocent who came up with the hit man story and why? Did it fit the crime in some way? And especially to come up with a name ?

If guilty I guess the hitman story was one of Jeremy's embellishments. Also having someone else do the killing probably (in his mind) made him look 'less' responsible and if Julie did ever mention anything, the police would investigate and find that there was no hitman and as such, his claims that she was lying about him, would seem more credible.

If innocent, perhaps Julie invented the hitman because she only wanted revenge and didn't think he would actually get convicted. Once the hitman story didn't check out, perhaps she thought the case against Jeremy wouldn't hold?

[Caroline]

I did ask posters - whatever your belief to look at this from both angles - some posters seem unable to do that . 


to me it seems odd from both sides of the coin

What made the police believe it so much that they were willing to arrest this man - the judge intimated it was impossible for anyone else to be involved - so why were the police at one stage not so sure of that fact?

Julie was their star witness, it was part of her accusation and so they had a duty to check it out.

[nugnug]

If you cant be broadminded enough to answer from both sides then please don't comment

1) if Jeremy was guilty and Julie was telling the truth - why would he tell her the story about the hit man? He previously had no problem with telling her he was going to kill his family by drugging them  and burning the house down. He had told her on the phone that "tonight is the night" . She had lain in bed and in her own words she knew he had done it. So why would he tell her that a hit man was involved . In the eyes of the law  the intent was the same So why would he do that?

2) If he is innocent who came up with the hit man story and why? Did it fit the crime in some way? And especially to come up with a name ?

i belive the hitman theory was invented to explain away the the phonecall.

[scipio_usmc]

I did ask posters - whatever your belief to look at this from both angles - some posters seem unable to do that . 


to me it seems odd from both sides of the coin

What made the police believe it so much that they were willing to arrest this man - the judge intimated it was impossible for anyone else to be involved - so why were the police at one stage not so sure of that fact?

At what stage were police unsure?  Before the evidence was fully processed and appreciated.  After all the evidence was processed and there was no victim blood or GSR on SHeila or her clothing and the other evidence proving she can't have killed herself it became clear Jeremy did.

[nugnug]

when they failed to time jeremys movements around the phone call that is when i believe they came up with the hitman thoery

when there chosen hitman had a cast iron albi and they couldn't find a replacement there removed the phonecall from the theory.

[tyler]

Just wanted to point out that I don't think it is certain that JM actually 'named' Matthew MacDonald. It is possible that she just gave the name 'Matthew',as,for a while EP were 'watching' Matthew Hampton - a guy that the Eaton's employed to help with the harvest following the murders. AE described him as 'odd' and although people said that Jeremy knew Hampton,Hampton himself denied this. (Source - AE's COLP statement)

[nugnug]

im guesing he must of had an albi as well.

[No-Bits]

Just wanted to point out that I don't think it is certain that JM actually 'named' Matthew MacDonald. It is possible that she just gave the name 'Matthew',as,for a while EP were 'watching' Matthew Hampton - a guy that the Eaton's employed to help with the harvest following the murders. AE described him as 'odd' and although people said that Jeremy knew Hampton,Hampton himself denied this. (Source - AE's COLP statement)

She definatly named Mcdonald.