Effect of June's Mental Illness on Sheila circa 1959

[Holly Goodhead]

So why didn't Moses turn into a psychotic serial killer?  >@@(*&)

Or perhaps he did but never got caught!

Lol.  My understanding of the fable is that Moses, the adopted son, murdered an Egyptian?! 

I do believe there's a psychology peculiar to adoption as set out in the following book but I don't believe it's pathological.  If it is how come so many adoptees self-actualise/are 'successful' eg Steve Jobs?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Psychology-Adoption-David-Brodxinsky/dp/0195082737

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kv_GkEcITkE

Its very unlikely that Steve Job's adoptive mother suffered from depression/mental illness as a result of her decision to adopt him. 

The scientific evidence across all relevant disciplines marks out the Bamber family/WHF murders not based on adoption per se but June's mental illness circa 1959 caused by her decision to adopt SC and its likely negative impact on SC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF3j5UVCSCA&list=PLuKMerO1zya_3krFpcOKgaeB2_2zQgYua

Imo this can be further evidenced by looking across all aspects of SC's life not just her mental illness per se:

- Under achieving at school despite hailing from a birth family of academics and attending a fee paying school

- Unable to hold down a job

- Difficulty in forming and maintaining relationships

- Difficulty in parenting her children

- Drug abuse

- Low self-esteem

- Depression

- Highly strung

- Violent

- Quick Temper

- Worry over small problems

- Jumpy

- Uptight and panicky

The above words were sourced from the WS's of Dr F, CC and FE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n3QI_d5c80

 >@@(*&)

[Holly Goodhead]

http://www.businessinsider.com/most-mass-murderers-arent-mentally-ill-2012-12

Thanks for the link Scipio.

The article actually states "Mass murderers are not, according to statistics, mentally ill in the psychiatric sense.  That is to say they are not living outside reality".

It then goes on to say:

"The most common characteristics are social isolation, introversion, withdrawal and a relative deficit in social skills and relationships.  At the same time, signs of paranoia can also be observed.  These people often believe that people are after them, bullying them or ignoring them".

"These features of course do not make someone a murderer.  For a person to commit an act as extreme as mass murder, these characteristics have to be very intense.  On top of the paranoid behaviour, there is also megalomania and self-centeredness".

The above doesn't sound 'normal' to me Scipio?

Random one-off incidents of murder are usually brought about by crimes of passion, anger, substance abuse, where a person feels under threat etc.  Over and above this eg the case of Adam Lanza and WHF as far as I can see there is always some underlying mental illness and/or personality disorder.

[scipio_usmc]

Thanks for the link Scipio.

The article actually states "Mass murderers are not, according to statistics, mentally ill in the psychiatric sense.  That is to say they are not living outside reality".

It then goes on to say:

"The most common characteristics are social isolation, introversion, withdrawal and a relative deficit in social skills and relationships.  At the same time, signs of paranoia can also be observed.  These people often believe that people are after them, bullying them or ignoring them".

"These features of course do not make someone a murderer.  For a person to commit an act as extreme as mass murder, these characteristics have to be very intense.  On top of the paranoid behaviour, there is also megalomania and self-centeredness".

The above doesn't sound 'normal' to me Scipio?

Random one-off incidents of murder are usually brought about by crimes of passion, anger, substance abuse, where a person feels under threat etc.  Over and above this eg the case of Adam Lanza and WHF as far as I can see there is always some underlying mental illness and/or personality disorder.

You skipped the part about how Schizophrenics typically lack the skillset to plan and carry out mass murders.

Moreover, the quote "The most common characteristics are social isolation, introversion, withdrawal and a relative deficit in social skills and relationships.  At the same time, signs of paranoia can also be observed.  These people often believe that people are after them, bullying them or ignoring them". doesn't reflect have mental disorders but rather simply being shy, introverted, socially awkward and things along those lines. 

It went on to point out though that most people with these issues do not try to kill and that many people with such characteristics who committed mass murder killed because of, "megalomania and self-centeredness".

Killing for money like Jeremy did is self-centeredness.  Hating his family so being willing to kill them for greed because he would not miss them is about satisfying himself and not caring about them.

   

[Holly Goodhead]

You skipped the part about how Schizophrenics typically lack the skillset to plan and carry out mass murders.

Moreover, the quote "The most common characteristics are social isolation, introversion, withdrawal and a relative deficit in social skills and relationships.  At the same time, signs of paranoia can also be observed.  These people often believe that people are after them, bullying them or ignoring them". doesn't reflect have mental disorders but rather simply being shy, introverted, socially awkward and things along those lines. 

It went on to point out though that most people with these issues do not try to kill and that many people with such characteristics who committed mass murder killed because of, "megalomania and self-centeredness".

Killing for money like Jeremy did is self-centeredness.  Hating his family so being willing to kill them for greed because he would not miss them is about satisfying himself and not caring about them.

I didn't skip the bit about schizophrenics typically lacking the skill set to plan and carry out mass murders.  The article is referring to the Adam Lanza's of this world, not a domestic such as WHF where the weaponry, victims etc were on site so to speak. 

In any event I am not even convinced that SC's diagnosis of schizophrenia was the correct one.

I do not believe that JB was anymore self-centered than Joe Average or that he hated any member of his family. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Dr Daniel J Siegal:

http://www.drdansiegel.com/about/biography/

"The various causative factors for disorganised attachment, and how this can lead to violent behaviour".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGDqJYEi_Ks

"A coherent explanation of how one is triggered to go down the emotional "low road", leading to behaviours one would never engage in during "normal" or "high road" emotional states".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkEcpBU3TpE

The second video clip again centres on 'disorganised attachment' in children leading to unresolved grief/trauma in adulthood and a vulnerability to violence.

Until I can see something from professionals discounting June's mental illness circa 1959 and its likely negative impact on SC including a propensity to violence I will continue to believe JB is the victim of a MoJ.  Especially when there's no evidence JB was a violent person pre prison. Post prison he has been subjected to various assessments by different professionals over different time periods and no one has identified any mental illness or personality disorder.

In a case that has been dogged by controversy for almost 3 decades, the psychological evidence overwhelmingly points to SC being the perpetrator.  The statistical chances of this not being the case must be near zero: one sibling had numerous caregivers where one  was seriously mentally ill and as a result likely to have provided inadequate care; the other sibling had fewer caregivers where none were mentally ill and provided adequate care  No brainer  >@@(*&)

[Myster]

Until I can see something from professionals discounting June's mental illness circa 1959 and its likely negative impact on SC including a propensity to violence I will continue to believe JB is the victim of a MoJ.  Especially when there's no evidence JB was a violent person pre prison. Post prison he has been subjected to various assessments by different professionals over different time periods and no one has identified any mental illness or personality disorder.

In a case that has been dogged by controversy for almost 3 decades, the psychological evidence overwhelmingly points to SC being the perpetrator.  The statistical chances of this not being the case must be near zero: one sibling had numerous caregivers where one  was seriously mentally ill and as a result likely to have provided inadequate care; the other sibling had fewer caregivers where none were mentally ill and provided adequate care  No brainer  >@@(*&)

Neither was Roderick Newall who beat his parents to death with a pickaxe and rice flail to get his hands on their £1 million estate, or Stephen Seddon who blasted both his parents to death with a shotgun for his £230,000 inheritance.

I don't see any difference between these two despicable murderers and Jeremy Bamber - i.e. in their insatiable greed to get loads'a money before it was due to them.

[Holly Goodhead]

Neither was Roderick Newall who beat his parents to death with a pickaxe and rice flail to get his hands on their £1 million estate, or Stephen Seddon who blasted both his parents to death with a shotgun for his £230,000 inheritance.

I don't see any difference between these two despicable murderers and Jeremy Bamber - i.e. in their insatiable greed to get loads'a money before it was due to them.

In the cases you mention the juries did not have to decide between two siblings. In the WHF case the jury was told it was either SC or JB (the official line for the first month being SC).  The chances of the sibling who suffered numerous changes in primary caregivers where one caregiver was seriously mentally ill and where that sibling then went on to exhibit a whole range of behaviour indicative of an attachment disorder not then being responsible for the murders/suicide is statistically very unlikely.  Especially when the other sibling has always been psychologically normal.  Lets not forget too that the jury were not told about June's mental illness circa 1959 and the likely negative impact on SC as a result of an attachment disorder eg lack of empathy, propensity to violence and suicide etc.  On the contrary Dr F told the court that SC was not a suicide risk and that he did not feel she would be someone who would actually be violent to her children or towards her father.  I have provided numerous links to world class experts in the fields of psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience/biology all confirming inadequate caregiving leading to a disorganised attachment are very likely to give rise to lack of empathy, propensity to violence and suicide.

Based on the links I have provided the motivation for the murders/suicide had nothing whatsoever to do with greed but rather a disorganised attachment and unresolved grief and trauma. 



 

[Holly Goodhead]

Given the level of violence involved in the WHF murders I think it is important that an explanation is found.

The following podcast is from a series entitled 'The bomb in the brain' by podcaster Stefan Molyneux.  Part 3 is based on the biology of violence.  All claims supported by appropriately qualified persons and decades of research:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIDvdzjzSto&feature=youtube_gdata_player

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

[John]

Not in a million years could Sheila have attacked Nevill and ended up without a mark on her (except for the two gunshot wounds) or a drop of his blood spattered on her or her nightdress.  In real life these things just don't happen.

[puglove]

Not in a million years could Sheila have attacked Nevill and ended up without a mark on her (except for the two gunshot wounds) or a drop of his blood spattered on her or her nightdress.  In real life these things just don't happen.

I think the fact that June very obviously received her first shots as she lay in bed, and Ralph was also shot in the bedroom but had managed to scramble out of bed as the shootings started (you can clearly see the indentation of his head on the pillow) proves that a) Bamber thought that he could shoot them both as they slept, but underestimated the power of the gun (hence the overkill to the boys) and b) that there HAD to be blood on the phone. Ralph must have been injured before he went downstairs, or June surely wouldn't have her head on her pillow when she was shot. Which she clearly did. That can't be denied. June would hardly have lain in bed while Ralph tried to cope with Sheila "going crazy with a gun."

The first question that I ever asked of Mike, moons ago, was.....why was there no blood on the phone? You needed 2 hands to operate that old-fashioned phone. Ralph's blood trail went from the bedroom, down the stairs, into the kitchen, on the cupboard doors, and STOPPED. Just before the poor man was allowed to reach the phone. Just before he was beaten into submission.

All this stuff, and the image of Sheila, and other bits and bobs, made me realise that I'd been madly wrong to believe for 25 years that Bamber was innocent. And in the last 4 years, nothing has made me change my mind.

[puglove]

Sorry, I've been up since 5....underestimated should read overestimated.     

[puglove]

Sorry, I've been up since 5....underestimated should read overestimated.     

I know that Scipio has covered this much better than I ever could, but.....what exactly was going on when Ralph took time out of the desperate situation to call Bamber? Why would Ralph chance at least 5 minutes while Sheila roamed the house with a loaded gun? What if....Bamber was too knackered from harvest, too stoned to pick up, couldn't hear the phone, had left the answerphone on, was at a girlfriend's house (NOT Julie, before someone gets anal about that), had a lock-in at the local, was sitting outside smoking a joint?

[puglove]

I know that Scipio has covered this much better than I ever could, but.....what exactly was going on when Ralph took time out of the desperate situation to call Bamber? Why would Ralph chance at least 5 minutes while Sheila roamed the house with a loaded gun? What if....Bamber was too knackered from harvest, too stoned to pick up, couldn't hear the phone, had left the answerphone on, was at a girlfriend's house (NOT Julie, before someone gets anal about that), had a lock-in at the local, was sitting outside smoking a joint?

All these factors are relevant variables. Ralph already knew that Bamber had robbed the caravan park, and Ralph was also worried about a shooting accident. The poor man knew that his days were numbered. He just didn't expect Bamber to take the whole family out.

[puglove]

All these factors are relevant variables. Ralph already knew that Bamber had robbed the caravan park, and Ralph was also worried about a shooting accident. The poor man knew that his days were numbered. He just didn't expect Bamber to take the whole family out.

And I think that this reflects on Julie. She loved him, she hated him, she wanted him, she missed him, she wanted to keep him, she wanted to hurt him. She honestly didn't believe that Bamber did what he did, but when it was obvious that he DID kill his family, she couldn't handle it. She actually tried to cope with it for a while. She nearly went along with it. But she did the right thing in the end.

[John]

If the situation which Jeremy claims took place had actually occurred he would have been out of there like a hare and at the farm in five minutes flat.  He didn't need to speak to Julie or dander along at 20mph to let the cops pass or put off more time putting on another cardigan in the middle of the summer.  All of it adds up to one big lie!