Jeremy Bamber and the Truth

[jackiepreece]

I continue to believe the Bamber case to be a miscarriage of justice.  Luckily I had the chance to ask Jeremy numerous questions directly to him unlike Keira aka Caroline)  I asked him anything I wanted and he was never stuck for an answer.  I am still searching for answers to Sheilas feet were not clean, why was evidence destroyed when there was always an ongoing appeal etc etc.  I now have the contact details of someone that was there in Whitehouse Farm the night of the murders and he needs to go to the police but is reluctant to do so for obvious reasons.  He 100% believes Jeremy is innocent and has a full dossier on the case.

I am dealing with some personal issues at the moment and they will be sorted soon and then I intend to restart my twitter campaign.  I intend to turn 2,000 followers into 10,000 and then 10,000 followers into 20,000.  Public support will get my questions answered and that is a fact.

[Tim Invictus]

Not another anonymous mystery man who was at WHF and knows all the answers and has all the evidence! Haven't we had enough of that rubbish with Tesco's 'Z'? Gladys too has his occasional informant who knows this and that! All utter bollox of course!

I hope your new campaign will stick to the facts Jackie and not involve stalking anyone who doesn't believe you or that Bamber is innocent! Luckily John runs this forum so decency will be assured. Credit to you too Jackie, you seem to have changed your old errrmm obsessive ways!

You did an amazing job for Bamber last time Jackie! You're the only person who ever got any results. It's just a real shame all those 100's of hours of great work was wasted on a sick child killer!

[ActualMat]

I think if you added together all of the mystery men that came forward since that night to bark about Bambers innocence, you'd have around 3000 by now...... More than were actually there on the night.

How do you speak to him Jackie, Email? Twitter, phone? Why would he get in touch with you when you're on the outs with Bamber and the campaign team? Why would he tell you things but not want to come forward - when you're known for spilling the beans on online forums?


I'm sure he enjoys the phone calls.

[jackiepreece]

One I have never spoken to this person by phone and I became aware of him when I needed hospital treatment and his closest friend of 30 years treated me.
That's all I need to say on an open forum.

I find your believe in Mugfords evidence quite extraordinary

No different to my believe that Jeremy could be innocent

Just to remind you he was convicted on circumstantial evidence

When I put my mind to something I never give up and I certainly don't need the Official Bamber lot to help me.

[ActualMat]

One I have never spoken to this person by phone and I became aware of him when I needed hospital treatment and his closest friend of 30 years treated me.

Wow, that was PERFECT timing. The friend of someone who was at the scene just happens to treat one of Bamber's supporters. What are the odds.

I think I've heard all I need to, to make up my mind......You're bullshitting again aren't you? 

[Tim Invictus]

Jackie get this into your head dear, once and for all! The word 'circumstantial' does not mean substandard or dodgy; it does not mean it is second rate evidence! In fact most forensic evidence given in court by experts is considered circumstantial. Fingerprint evidence is a good example!

And as the trial judge said, there is a mountain of circumstantial evidence that proves Bamber is guilty!

Interesting you say Bamber 'could' be innocent! Are you no longer sure?

[Myster]

I continue to believe the Bamber case to be a miscarriage of justice.  Luckily I had the chance to ask Jeremy numerous questions directly to him unlike Keira aka Caroline)  I asked him anything I wanted and he was never stuck for an answer.  I am still searching for answers to Sheilas feet were not clean, why was evidence destroyed when there was always an ongoing appeal etc etc.  I now have the contact details of someone that was there in Whitehouse Farm the night of the murders and he needs to go to the police but is reluctant to do so for obvious reasons.  He 100% believes Jeremy is innocent and has a full dossier on the case.

I am dealing with some personal issues at the moment and they will be sorted soon and then I intend to restart my twitter campaign.  I intend to turn 2,000 followers into 10,000 and then 10,000 followers into 20,000.  Public support will get my questions answered and that is a fact.

That's twice you've mentioned about wanting to discuss Sheila Caffell's feet. If the only photograph available to the support team is the same one that the press received and published, then I see no blood spots on it - just the normal appearance of a bare sole similar to anyone's walking about on an unswept carpet, and reddish/flushed through general wear and tear from shoe insoles. Unless the two minor circled marks on the ball are blood, easily explained if it was picked up as she was walking through spots on the carpet in her parent's bedroom.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2932.msg109983#msg109983

Tell us where you see any copious blood or a lot of dirt/grit/pieces of glass if she'd walked around and been involved in a violent struggle in the kitchen. Why didn't she have her blue slippers on when they were available ready for use at the side of the second bed with all her effects on it? Was it not because Sheila was woken up, drowsy and unprepared when she was led from her room to the side of her parent's bed?

What's your opinion on it, Jackie?

[Tim Invictus]

That's twice you've mentioned about wanting to discuss Sheila Caffell's feet. If the only photograph available to the support team is the same one that the press received and published, then I see no blood spots on it - just the normal appearance of a bare sole similar to anyone's walking about on an unswept carpet, and reddish/flushed through general wear and tear from shoe insoles. Unless the two minor circled marks on the ball are blood, easily explained if it was picked up as she was walking through spots on the carpet in her parent's bedroom.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2932.msg109983#msg109983

Tell us where you see any copious blood or a lot of dirt/grit/pieces of glass if she'd walked around and been involved in a violent struggle in the kitchen. Why didn't she have her blue slippers on when they were available ready for use at the side of the second bed with all her effects on it? Was it not because Sheila was woken up, drowsy and unprepared when she was led from her room to the side of her parent's bed?

What's your opinion on it, Jackie?

Isn't it amazing that while beating her father down in a life or death struggle Sheila got no damage to her feet or hands. No cuts from the broken glass or sugar that was spread all over the kitchen. Not a single bruises or a chipped nail.

They suggest Sheila had the strength of 10 because she was in the middle of a psychotic episode. Even if remotely possible, that frail 8 stone girl would still never have been a match for 6ft 4in, 14 stone Neville; a working farmer. A man who had already seen his wife shot and new his grandsons were in mortal danger if not already shot!

Neville may already have been shot during the fight but it still took a beating so hard his jaw was smashed and the butt of the rifle used to beat him was split in two! Doesn't all logic and common sense tell you it took a powerful man to subdue Neville who was fighting for the lives of his family!

I find it almost impossible to believe Sheila could have overcome Neville. I find it absolutely ludicrous to believe she could have done so without sustaining a single scratch or bruise!

[John]

It is arguable that the evidence which convicted Jeremy Bamber in 1986 and continues to keep him inside is real and not circumstantial.  What the detractors always forget is that Bambers invention of the daddy phone call blaming Sheila effectively clears Sheila...how about that for irony? 

The crime scene evidence is all real as are the forensics and the ballistic reports. The events can be followed from the entry via the unsecured window, upstairs to the master bedroom and then downstairs to the scuffle in the kitchen.  The absence of incriminating evidence on Sheila and on her clothing is evidence in itself.  By default therefore Bamber stuck himself right in it.  Not circumstantial but real!

[Tim Invictus]

It is arguable that the evidence which convicted Jeremy Bamber in 1986 and continues to keep him inside is real and not circumstantial.  What the detractors always forget is that Bambers invention of the daddy phone call blaming Sheila effectively clears Sheila...how about that for irony? 

The crime scene evidence is all real as are the forensics and the ballistic reports. The events can be followed from the entry via the unsecured window, upstairs to the master bedroom and then downstairs to the scuffle in the kitchen.  The absence of incriminating evidence on Sheila and on her clothing is evidence in itself.  By default therefore Bamber stuck himself right in it.  Not circumstantial but real!

John, for once you are as wrong as Jackie! "Not circumstantial but real!"

The evidence that convicted Bamber IS 100% circumstantial and IS 100% real! You too confuse the definition of 'circumstantial evidence'!

The only direct evidence given in the Bamber trial was Jetemy's direct evidence of what he testified he did and saw that night and it has been proven to be a pack of lies. All the circumstantial evidence completely refutes Bamber's direct evidence and proves beyond reasonable doubt Bamber is guilty!

Ironically there is one piece of direct evidence which is crucial to the conviction and yet is a proven lie. That is Bamber's testimony saying his father had called him and told him that Sheila had gone nuts with a gun! With that lie Bamber proved either Sheila did it or he must be guilty.

Please don't fall into the trap of thinking because the evidence is considered circumstantial it carries any less weight or is less valid than direct evidence! Evidence stands or falls on its own merit or validitty; all the direct evidence in the Bamber case was comprehensively disproved by the overwhelming weight of the circumstantial evidence!

For example, in 2002 in the Hanratty case, DNA tests on the hankerchief the murder weapon was found wrapped in matched DNA taken from James Hanratty's exhumed corpse. Thus proving, in the Court Of Appeals words, Hanratty was guilty "beyond doubt"!

The controversy and doubt over James Hanratty's conviction was finally answered and dispelled by compelling and irrefutable new CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence!

[Holly Goodhead]

Page 10 of the following gives a good explanation re circumstantial evidence:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284166/Evidencev3_0EXT.pdf

What concerns me is that much of the circumstantial evidence seems to have emanated from RB based on the content of his diary.  I don't doubt for one moment that the relatives genuinely believed, and continue to believe JB guilty, but according to CC they had no understanding of the severity of SC's mental illness:

RB's diary entry dated 11th Aug '85:

"I spent the whole night trying to construct what had happened from the facts given by the media, Jeremy's statement and my inspection of the house; which together with the memories of conversations with both Jeremy and Nevill, I convinced myself I knew who had committed the MURDERS.  It was a story started when Jeremy was at school, he had confided in his best friend that he was an adopted child, the friend, in turn broke the confidence and announced to the entire school that he was a b........, from which time he was nic-named 'The b........' - He never made another friend".

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=246.0;attach=635

The above text is taking from RB's diary entry above.  He then continues his character assassination.

Excerpt From Colin Caffell's Book

"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam.  Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden.  Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it?  I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence.  They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong.  These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".

"Their lack of awareness was probably a tremendous blessing, because without a full appreciation of her illness -   which, for me, had acted like a smoke-screen to the truth - they were absolutely convinced Bambs couldn't have done it and, unbeknown to me then, were already pressing the police into further investigations, albeit with little initial success."

[scipio_usmc]

Page 10 of the following gives a good explanation re circumstantial evidence:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284166/Evidencev3_0EXT.pdf

What concerns me is that much of the circumstantial evidence seems to have emanated from RB based on the content of his diary.  I don't doubt for one moment that the relatives genuinely believed, and continue to believe JB guilty, but according to CC they had no understanding of the severity of SC's mental illness:

RB's diary entry dated 11th Aug '85:

"I spent the whole night trying to construct what had happened from the facts given by the media, Jeremy's statement and my inspection of the house; which together with the memories of conversations with both Jeremy and Nevill, I convinced myself I knew who had committed the MURDERS.  It was a story started when Jeremy was at school, he had confided in his best friend that he was an adopted child, the friend, in turn broke the confidence and announced to the entire school that he was a b........, from which time he was nic-named 'The b........' - He never made another friend".

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=246.0;attach=635

The above text is taking from RB's diary entry above.  He then continues his character assassination.

Excerpt From Colin Caffell's Book

"One of the most striking things about that day, although not altogether surprising for me, was the fact that, the more I talked to June and Nevill's relations, the more I realised none of them actually knew anything had been seriously wrong with Bambs - not even June's sister Pam.  Many of them said that had they known, they would have been more than willing to help and share the burden.  Why hadn't I contacted them and told them all about it?  I couldn't believe what I was hearing and could only reply by saying that I didn't feel it had been my business to betray the Bamber's confidence.  They were very private people whose decisions I had to respect - whether right or wrong.  These people had no idea how much I'd need them as allies to convince June and Nevill of how strongly I felt Bamb's treatment should have been changed".

"Their lack of awareness was probably a tremendous blessing, because without a full appreciation of her illness -   which, for me, had acted like a smoke-screen to the truth - they were absolutely convinced Bambs couldn't have done it and, unbeknown to me then, were already pressing the police into further investigations, albeit with little initial success."

Too bad you can't come up with any evidence to establish that she had any motive to kill anyone or evidence she had any delusions after being put on haloperidol let alone that she had a delusion the night of the murders and killed them for a specific reaosn.

At the end of the day you are babbling away about things that prove nothing at all.

In th emeantime you failed miserably at denting the evidence that establishes Jeremy did it.

[Tim Invictus]

Too bad you can't come up with any evidence to establish that she had any motive to kill anyone or evidence she had any delusions after being put on haloperidol let alone that she had a delusion the night of the murders and killed them for a specific reaosn.

At the end of the day you are babbling away about things that prove nothing at all.

In th emeantime you failed miserably at denting the evidence that establishes Jeremy did it.

I too have Colin's book. The bottom line remains, however much he was concerned for Sheila's mental health and how the twins were treated by June especially at WHF, when he found out the details of the murders he knew beyond doubt Sheila could never have carried them out. Colin, like all Bamber's surviving relatives, has no doubts that he is guilty!

Besides the mountain of incriminating evidence, that fact alone makes me wonder how complete strangers can profess to know better than Bamber's own relatives and the father of the poor murdered lads!

Credit to you though Holly for not believing the utter bollox Tesco theories that his own relatives deliberately threw him to the wolves to steal his share of the bounty!