The Week of the Murders

[lookout]

Neither Sheila nor Jeremy could do any right in the eyes of their mother.
When Sheila was divorced,it hit June with such a terrible blow,as divorce had never been heard of in the family. Then the worry of the twins arose as to what sort of a home they'd have. It was Junes' worst nightmare.
Sheila began to feel the evil inside herself and wondered too if her ex-husband and mother sensed it because of the lack,or inability to express any love and/or understanding towards her,which is when Sheila started to look for her birth mother a year later.

Jeremy,too,came in for criticism after his parents bought him the cottage at Goldhanger,as he continued to work in bars,until he finally gave in and went to work on the farm. The problem was---------that Julie also made herself at home there too,washing,cooking,cleaning and ironing and fussed around Jeremy like a mother hen. June did not like the arrangement and called Julie  " that harlot " whenever she spoke to Jeremy,complaining several times about the relationship. Because of this atmosphere,Jeremy had decided that in order to keep the peace it was best not to talk to his mother.

Both Sheila and Jeremy took cocaine on their nights on the town. ( how weak to follow the in-crowd  ! ) 

[lookout]

 The relationship started to fizzle when Julie began her teaching course at Goldsmiths,as she would now spend most of her time with her flatmates at the South London flat that they all shared. So it wasn't just a matter of who dumped who,as Jeremy too took that opportunity to live his life with a steady stream of women callers at his Goldhanger cottage.
He travelled to London occasionally and while there would stay with either Julie or Sheila,as she had settled in her London flat,bought for her by her parents.

[lookout]

Was anyone aware that Jeremy allegedly had previously " tried out a plan " by tranquilising his parents,but it didn't work ?

JB had told officers about this.

[nugnug]

its pretty obvious that tranquilizers wernt used or ralph wouldn't of woke up.

[lookout]

The above posts,using my own phrases/words,were from extracts of Claire Powells' book.
Being extremely anti,it certainly does Jeremy no favours whatsoever,as the more you read what she's written-------------the more I feel that Jeremy is innocent. It's a pretty damaging book,as apparently it states that" Julie,of course,knew that Jeremy had done it ".  Did she now ??

JM faced being questioned,minus her makeup,the dark eyeliner,etc,so she'd look like death warmed-up. A favourite trick,eh ?   

[lookout]

its pretty obvious that tranquilizers wernt used or ralph wouldn't of woke up.

That was allegedly a dummy-run before the murders,nugs. Apparently,Allegedly.

[nugnug]

a dummy run but then they dident use it at all that's a bit strange there planning to use tranquilizers but then don't.

[lookout]

Why,according to Bob Woffinden,that the great deal of evidence which BW furnished,couldn't it have been given, because it was hearsay ? Wasn't most of what was presented at trial,hearsay anyway ?

[nugnug]

no legally speaking it wasn't hearsay.

i know to the us it might seem like hearsay but leggaly speaking its not.

hearsay is when you say well ive heard this roumour about so and so.

[No-Bits]

Hi Janus, stan jones agreed and was portrayed as a hero who stood up to his bosses never wavering in his belief of Bambers guilt. He agreed to go on record and be interrigated for the book, a lot of the serving officers would not cooperate with the book because of Bambers complaint about the force and his attempts to appeal at the time was live.

Toilet

[No-Bits]

Toilet

Sorry, I meant horlicks, you know bollocks! !!!

[Alias]

Ah well,the " real " Jack the Ripper has been revealed after 126 years. DNA from an old shawl identifies him. Case remains open while the Met solves the mystery. I suppose 126 years isn't so bad to get your man. There's hope for Jeremy yet.

I saw that on the news (am in London now). Problem is EP (against court orders) destroyed all physical evidence in the Bamber case back in 1996 (right when forensic DNA was gaining ground....), so nothing will be cleared up there, will it?!
Harters called this an interesting case. It is. Only unsolved cases are interesting - this is basically an unsolved case.
Who cares about a solved case?

[guest154]

Harters called this an interesting case. It is. Only unsolved cases are interesting - this is basically an unsolved case.
Who cares about a solved case?

 

You can call it a case in which innocence is still claimed. But strange to call it an unsolved case really.

[Alias]

You can call it a case in which innocence is still claimed. But strange to call it an unsolved case really.

Mat, to me it is. There are so many unexplained, unclear things about it.
One thing I know, the cases that "won´t go away", are cases where people have doubts and pending questions in some way - a culprit hasn´t been found, or a body - or there is doubt if the convicted one/s are in fact the guilty ones. Something unresolved. Otherwise people lose interest, naturally. A solved case is not interesting. I think everyone will agree about that.
Guilters use hour upon hour, day upon day, week upon week to try to argue that JB is guilty. Well, HELLO, he was tried and convicted and has the most severe sentence possible where he happens to live.
Why use so much time to prove a case that is over and done with, thirty years old to boot.
Don´t tell me you don´t have doubts.

[Caroline]

Mat, to me it is. There are so many unexplained, unclear things about it.
One thing I know, the cases that "won´t go away", are cases where people have doubts and pending questions in some way - a culprit hasn´t been found, or a body - or there is doubt if the convicted one/s are in fact the guilty ones. Something unresolved. Otherwise people lose interest, naturally. A solved case is not interesting. I think everyone will agree about that.
Guilters use hour upon hour, day upon day, week upon week to try to argue that JB is guilty. Well, HELLO, he was tried and convicted and has the most severe sentence possible where he happens to live.
Why use so much time to prove a case that is over and done with, thirty years old to boot.
Don´t tell me you don´t have doubts.

Hi Alias, hope you're enjoying London!!

I guess I am one of those dreaded 'guilters' now and I still post because my interest is still there. You don't change your mind and then lose interest. I guess if I had always thought him guilty, I wouldn't have bothered joining the site or even gave him a second thought. I'm pretty convinced he's guilty now and especially after going through the phone call evidence but I suppose you can never be 100% sure.