More disappointment looming for Bamber?

[Nicholas]

Journalist Roger Wilkes interpretation from ‘Blood relations’

‘’The detectives seemed anxious to probe Jeremy Bamber’s sexual habits and preferences. They learned from Charles Marsden that Jeremy possessed an animal magnetism for women. Marsden said that while he knew of only two serious girlfriends, Suzette Ford and Julie Mugford, Jeremy had had many one night stands.

‘The idea of three-in-a-bed sex excited the detectives curiosity still further

But Charles Marsden was at pains to insist he hadn’t taken part in the sex session. And when Jeremy returned from walking the girl home, Marsden had got up and driven himself home 

 

How many people have fallen for this misogynistic bs?

[Nicholas]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/30/jeremy-bamber-lawyers-seek-review-of-cps-refusal-to-disclose-evidence

Mark Newby a solicitor advocate at Quality Solicitors Jordans, which represents Bamber, said: “Since proceedings were issued it came to our attention that the author of the book the ITV drama was based upon appears to have received material directly from the police.

“It cannot be right that an author has been given material that Mr Bamber’s defence team have not seen, particularly in light of the persistent refusal by the CPS to disclose specific material we have been asking for. It raises the question of whether a work of fiction is more important than justice.”

 

[Nicholas]

I don’t agree with CAL here https://theglobalherald.com/entertainment/television-entertainment/ep-3-the-evidence-the-murders-at-white-house-farm-the-podcast-hbo-max/ at around 28.00 Julie ‘knew’ that the murders he’d been talking about had happened that night

[Myster]

I don’t agree with CAL here https://theglobalherald.com/entertainment/television-entertainment/ep-3-the-evidence-the-murders-at-white-house-farm-the-podcast-hbo-max/ at around 28.00 Julie ‘knew’ that the murders he’d been talking about had happened that night

There were three calls. The first at around 10pm on Tuesday when soon after returning home from the farm, Bamber forwarned Julie that "Tonight's the night" (or similar wording); the second sometime after 3am when Bamber said that there was trouble at the farm, so Julie told him to go back to bed because everything would be alright in the morning; the third after 6am from a call box in Tolleshunt D'Arcy when Bamber told her not to go to work because a police car would pick her up and bring her to his Goldhanger cottage. This last call is the one I think CAL was referring to, when after spending a sleepless night, the penny finally dropped and Julie realised that he'd carried out his plan.

[Nicholas]

There were three calls. The first at around 10pm on Tuesday when soon after returning home from the farm, Bamber forwarned Julie that "Tonight's the night" (or similar wording); the second sometime after 3am when Bamber said that there was trouble at the farm, so Julie told him to go back to bed because everything would be alright in the morning; the third after 6am from a call box in Tolleshunt D'Arcy when Bamber told her not to go to work because a police car would pick her up and bring her to his Goldhanger cottage. This last call is the one I think CAL was referring to, when after spending a sleepless night, the penny finally dropped and Julie realised that he'd carried out his plan.

Thanks Myster - I’m not disputing the phone calls Bamber made to Julie though it’s still my view she wasn’t aware Bamber had ‘carried out his plan’ in the way you appear to be suggesting - or in the way CAL has suggested

You say Bamber ‘forwarned’ Julie - whilst I don’t disagree with hindsight - I don’t think she was aware of his plans to murder on the night

Plus she told police the ‘hitman story’

[Nicholas]

I don’t agree with CAL here https://theglobalherald.com/entertainment/television-entertainment/ep-3-the-evidence-the-murders-at-white-house-farm-the-podcast-hbo-max/ at around 28.00 Julie ‘knew’ that the murders he’d been talking about had happened that night

With some hindsight and time away from Bamber Julie ‘knew’ - but not at the time of the phone calls

[Nicholas]

There were three calls. The first at around 10pm on Tuesday when soon after returning home from the farm, Bamber forwarned Julie that "Tonight's the night" (or similar wording); the second sometime after 3am when Bamber said that there was trouble at the farm, so Julie told him to go back to bed because everything would be alright in the morning; the third after 6am from a call box in Tolleshunt D'Arcy when Bamber told her not to go to work because a police car would pick her up and bring her to his Goldhanger cottage. This last call is the one I think CAL was referring to, when after spending a sleepless night, the penny finally dropped and Julie realised that he'd carried out his plan.

If Julie ‘realised’ at that moment Bamber had carried out his plan - I think she’d have confided in one of her flat mates and wouldn’t have gone to Goldhanger

Am of the view Julie’s ‘realisation’ is not as clear cut as some observers seem to think

Bamber had already eroded Julie’s reality by the time of ‘the three calls’  https://thoughtcatalog.com/shahida-arabi/2017/11/50-shades-of-gaslighting-the-disturbing-signs-an-abuser-is-twisting-your-reality/

If Julie had interpreted Bamber’s ’tonight’s the night’ comment as meaning he planned to kill his family - why would she tell him during the next call to ‘go back to bed’?

By this stage of their relationship - as the linked article ‘50 shades of gaslighting’ suggests - I doubt Julie was able to ‘trust herself or her instincts’

[Nicholas]

I don’t agree with CAL here https://theglobalherald.com/entertainment/television-entertainment/ep-3-the-evidence-the-murders-at-white-house-farm-the-podcast-hbo-max/ at around 28.00 Julie ‘knew’ that the murders he’d been talking about had happened that night

CAL also says in this interview it was a ‘couple of days’ later when Bamber had Crispy put down.

It was the following day - the 8th August 1985 when he chose to do this

[Nicholas]

Journalist Roger Wilkes interpretation from ‘Blood relations’

‘’The detectives seemed anxious to probe Jeremy Bamber’s sexual habits and preferences. They learned from Charles Marsden that Jeremy possessed an animal magnetism for women. Marsden said that while he knew of only two serious girlfriends, Suzette Ford and Julie Mugford, Jeremy had had many one night stands.

‘The idea of three-in-a-bed sex excited the detectives curiosity still further

But Charles Marsden was at pains to insist he hadn’t taken part in the sex session. And when Jeremy returned from walking the girl home, Marsden had got up and driven himself home 

 

How many people have fallen for this misogynistic bs?

I’ve not read either versions of Roger Wilkes book ‘Blood Relations’ but did read the ‘preamble’ here

For those who haven't read Roger Wilkes' original book... some preamble and parts of the first two chapters of the republished edition here...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=RSbCDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT7&source=kp_read_button&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

I’d like to know how and why Roger Wilkes interpreted Bamber’s alleged violent act of drug/date rape of Sarah - as a ‘sex session’ and whether or not he’s read Carol Ann Lee’s book on the case and reflected on the contents of his own book?

[Nicholas]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/30/jeremy-bamber-lawyers-seek-review-of-cps-refusal-to-disclose-evidence


Mark Newby a solicitor advocate at Quality Solicitors Jordans, which represents Bamber, said: “Since proceedings were issued it came to our attention that the author of the book the ITV drama was based upon appears to have received material directly from the police.

“It cannot be right that an author has been given material that Mr Bamber’s defence team have not seen, particularly in light of the persistent refusal by the CPS to disclose specific material we have been asking for. It raises the question of whether a work of fiction is more important than justice.”

Bamber, speaking from Wakefield prison, told the Guardian: “It is disgusting that a third party was provided with documents and sensitive photographs when Essex police and the CPS have been unwilling to hand over material to our own forensic experts to prove that two silencers were recovered from the scene.

“Despite court orders being in place for them to make full disclosure to us, which they deliberately chose to ignore, when Carol Ann Lee requested material she was given it without a second thought. Where is my justice?”

A spokesperson for Essex police said: “We are aware of the claim made by Jeremy Bamber and can confirm that this matter forms part of an ongoing judicial review. As this matter is therefore the subject of a forthcoming legal hearing it would not be appropriate for us to comment further.”

Bamber was clearly angered by the contents of Carol Ann Lee’s book

I suspect it was because more facts about him, his crimes and his ‘pattern of behaviour’ were brought to light by her

‘It is disgusting that a third party was provided with documents and sensitive photographs’ - Yet Bamber had no qualms handing out ‘documents and sensitive photographs’ to convicted fraudster Mike Teskowski

[Nicholas]

CAL also says in this interview it was a ‘couple of days’ later when Bamber had Crispy put down.

It was the following day - the 8th August 1985 when he chose to do this

The same day he coerced Julie into identifying the bodies

What do Julie’s witness statements say about Crispy?

And what do they say about Bamber going for a chat and a pint with Charles Marsden ?

[Nicholas]

The police spoke to Sarah in 1985 - as per evidenced in CAL’s book

As a victim to such a violent act she may not have wanted to relive it and/or it may have been agreed upon by her and the police to let it sit on Bamber’s records (Because it’s clearly there)

But it’s possible Sarah’s evidence may have been relied on by the psychiatrist who assessed Bamber pre trial and diagnosed him as a psychopath

“If I see her I will go for her!”

When Julie told Jeremy what Sarah had said, he got angry and said “If I see her I will go for her!”  That’s scary isn’t it? it definitely shows how he loses his temper and how he’d attack a woman who “got in his way”...

[Nicholas]

Has it ever been Jeremy's prerogative to decide what gets into public domain? I'm hazarding a guess that either
A) Sarah's claims weren't taken seriously
B) Her claim was discussed at local level, the conclusion being there wasn't enough evidence to take it further
C) It was sent to the DPP who decided there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute

That it didn't become public knowledge in other ways, may, as you say, have been because Sarah had been traumatised. I feel certain some of the papers would have loved to have got their hands on such information.

This ‘information’ re Sarah was placed in the public domain by Carol Ann Lee in 2020

But Bamber’s false narrative of events has been perpetuated for over 3 decades - so it’s possible there’s a lot of cognitive dissonance to wade through?

[Nicholas]

The same day he coerced Julie into identifying the bodies

What do Julie’s witness statements say about Crispy?

And what do they say about Bamber going for a chat and a pint with Charles Marsden ?

Ten days later - by the 18th August 1985 Bamber had started seeing Angela Greave’s

[Nicholas]

I don’t agree with CAL here https://theglobalherald.com/entertainment/television-entertainment/ep-3-the-evidence-the-murders-at-white-house-farm-the-podcast-hbo-max/ at around 28.00 Julie ‘knew’ that the murders he’d been talking about had happened that night

‘She said he looked worried and she felt sorry for him’

If Julie ‘knew’ Bamber had murdered his family on the night - I doubt she’d have been feeling sorry for him here..

Sheila's Flat - Maida Vale - Wed 4 Sept 1985

According to Julie Mugford, she telephoned Bamber at Sheila's flat in Maida Vale on Tuesday 3 September 1985.  She called round the following day. She said it appeared that he was staying at the flat with a friend, Richard Deckers.  She arrived at the flat at 2.50pm and sat waiting in the doorway. He arrived with Brett at about 3.40pm, he got out of the car before Brett and came over and gave her a hug. She asked to see him alone and we walked to a cafe across the road.

In the cafe she asked about their relationship.  Bamber said he had been sold out and was it a matter of continuing the relation ship or her going to the police. Bamber said that he didn't want to continue the relationship and wanted his freedom. Brett arrived at the cafe and discussed some business with Jeremy.  Julie states that they she then suggested moving some of her belongings to her new address before all three again left for Sheila's flat.

At the flat Brett attended to a man who had just arrived. The phone rang and Jeremy answered it.  Julie says that he seemed speak in an overly friendly manner to the caller so she asked him who it was and he replied Virginia.  Virginia was previously acquainted with both Jeremy and Richard Decker.  Julie states that she terminated the call before the phone rang again, it was Virginia. Julie was angry with Jeremy as he had asked out another woman.  She states that she walked out of the room into a bedroom where she picked up a Chinese box and threw it against a mirror, smashing it.  With that Jeremy came into the room with the phone before ending the call.

Jeremy asked why she had did it and she told him that it was cruel to ask out another woman while she was there, Bamber became really cross and Julie had slapped his face.  Julie recalls that he grabbed her right arm and pushed it up her back and shoved her onto the bed and made to strike her.  Julies states that she goaded him daring him to hit her.  She said she told him that she would go straight to Essex Police and they would listen to her. Bamber said that the case was so watertight that they would never listen to her.

Bamber let go of her and lay on the bed very quiet. Julie said she asked him to speak to her and why he was so quiet. She said he looked worried and she felt sorry for him. They started talking again normally and she told him that he could trust her and that she wouldn't say anything. Jeremy eventually gave her a lift home to her flat.


Brett Collins was a friend whom Bamber had met while in New Zealand.


Julie Mugford witness statement page 27
Julie Mugford witness statement page 28
Julie Mugford witness statement page 29
Julie Mugford witness statement page 30
Julie Mugford witness statement page 31
Julie Mugford witness statement page 32

‘Coercive control is a behavioural regime & strategic pattern of behaviour in a relationship & throughout relationships to dominate, exploit & entrap’ (Laura Richards - 2021)