Author Topic: A very laid-back discussion about...  (Read 2725 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Myster

It's one of them cases, in'it... one of them f*ckin' cases.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2015, 01:30:31 PM »
... the White House Farm case - http://thegenerationwhypodcast.com/white-house-farm-murders/

by... http://thegenerationwhypodcast.com/who-we-are/

Thank you Myster. 

Interesting take on the firearms aspect from a couple of US citizens who obviously have very different levels of knowledge, experience and attitude towards firearms compared to a typical Brit. 

Is the podcast recent?  Sounds like it might have come about as a result of CAL's book?
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Passer-by

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #2 on: September 03, 2015, 01:31:41 PM »
If you get past the beginning (where I think we may be waiting for them to finish a spliff?  ?>)()< ) it's quite a good account, well presented.  A very good starting point for anyone trying to pick this case up.

But I'm disappointed they went with Sheila shooting herself in the kitchen and then walking upstairs:  that's just too ridiculous and there needs to be a better explanation for the 2 bodies allegedly seen in the kitchen - it just sounds like a basket-case response.  Sheila was shot twice in fairly quick succession where she was found in the bedroom:  even the pathologist had dealt with previous multi shot suicide - talking about her walking around actually discredits the suicide theory and it should be dropped.

I completely agree with them that the crime scene was so contaminated by dozens of people tramping through it I'm amazed any evidence from it was admissible in court.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2015, 02:33:04 PM »
If you get past the beginning (where I think we may be waiting for them to finish a spliff?  ?>)()< ) it's quite a good account, well presented.  A very good starting point for anyone trying to pick this case up.

But I'm disappointed they went with Sheila shooting herself in the kitchen and then walking upstairs:  that's just too ridiculous and there needs to be a better explanation for the 2 bodies allegedly seen in the kitchen - it just sounds like a basket-case response.  Sheila was shot twice in fairly quick succession where she was found in the bedroom:  even the pathologist had dealt with previous multi shot suicide - talking about her walking around actually discredits the suicide theory and it should be dropped.

I completely agree with them that the crime scene was so contaminated by dozens of people tramping through it I'm amazed any evidence from it was admissible in court.

According to CAL's book and her interview with Dr V he is now adamant that SC did not move after the first shot.  I don't think there's any evidence that SC's wounds were still wet with running blood other than dodgy photos in the public domain.  Dr Craig stated at trial in his opinion SC had taken her own life.  Surely if he could have added to this by confirming her wounds were still wet with blood running he would do so?  He said the victims could have died anytime the previous night.  Dr V also stated there was nothing about SC's appearance indicating she died significantly later than the other victims. 

I'm not sure how the investigation could have been improved on had the soc/investigation been text book perfect based on UK 1985 standards?  The prosecution case didn't  really involve any exhibits from soc other than the silencer and SC's person ie I don't think contamination of the soc overall was an issue?  Imo the silencer should  not have been allowed as an exhibit due to its history and/or the defence should have been in a position to easily repudiate it? 

151. The prosecution relied upon the following areas of evidence:

i) The appellant's expressed dislike of his family;

ii) His speaking of his plans to kill his family and thereafter his confessions to his girlfriend, Julie Mugford;

iii) The finding of his mother's bicycle at Goldhanger;

iv) The appellant's admitted ability to effect covert entry into and exit from the farmhouse and the finding of the hacksaw blade outside the bathroom window. His claim to have entered the house in that way after the first arrest was an attempt to explain these findings;

v) Because on the facts of the case it could only have been the appellant or Sheila Caffell who carried out the killings, the factors below proved they were not the responsibility of the appellant's sister:

a) Although seriously mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or her father;

b) Save for the appellant nobody had seen her use a gun and she had no interest in them. Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so;

c) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen;

d) Her hands and feet were clean. They were not blood stained and neither was there any sugar upon them;

e) Hand swabs from her body did not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions; and

f) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured in the way that might be expected of somebody involved in a struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and undamaged.

vi) The sound moderator had on any view been attached to the rifle during the fight with Nevill Bamber in the kitchen. But if Sheila Caffell had committed suicide it must have been removed before she shot herself. The following aspects of the evidence established it was still in place on the gun when the appellant's sister was murdered:

a) The blood grouping analysis proved (on the particular facts of the case) that Sheila Caffell's blood was inside the moderator; and

b) Had the appellant's sister murdered the other members of her family with the moderator attached to the gun and then discovered she could not reach the trigger to kill herself, the moderator would have been found next to her body. There would have been no reason for her to have removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to commit suicide in her parents' room.

vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:

a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;

b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;

c) As a matter of common sense, Nevill Bamber would have called the police before the appellant;

d) Had the appellant really received such a call, he would have immediately made a 999 call, alerted the farm workers who lived close to the farmhouse and then driven at speed to his parents home; and

e) Instead he had spoken to Julie Mugford before calling the police. When he subsequently contacted the Police, it was not by way of the emergency system.

viii) He stood to inherit considerable sums of money
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2015, 02:46:29 PM »
Is there any truth in WHF used as a training exercise?
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Passer-by

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2015, 02:50:01 PM »
Hmm.  So Nevill was too injured to have spoken to anybody but too strong for Sheila to overcome in the struggle?

And look at the pretty nails on the pretty model.

Plenty of sexism in this one, isn't there?!

Offline Myster

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2015, 10:01:33 AM »
Another American laid-back discussion about the WHF murders... http://thinkingsidewayspodcast.com/
It's one of them cases, in'it... one of them f*ckin' cases.

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #7 on: December 12, 2015, 07:16:50 PM »
Is there any truth in WHF used as a training exercise?

No at most some lab trianees helped analyze the evidence so had their fingerprints submitted to be ruled out which morphed into a firearms team training exercise at WHF with the victims bodies being used as dummies that were shot with blanks.  How did it morph into something so absurd?  Jeremy Bamber has supporters like Mike...and Jeremy is perfectly willing to use such BS to snow the public.

There is a sizable divide between the BS that his supporters spew to the public and the BS raised to the CCRC/COA.  Most of the BS his supporters spew is unable to be raised for legal purposes. It is simply nonsense totally made up like Mike's made up claim that he saw a photo of Sheila dead in her parent's bed. The notion Nevill phoned police is also made up from nothing which is why it could not be raised to the COA.

Unsupported speculation made by experts is insufficient to meet the legal requirements to free Jeremy but at least can be made to the CCRC.  Since such is insufficient it is pointless but at least it is something that can be made. Anything that is so lacking in foundation that it can't even be raised to the CCRC is pretty pointless to even debate.   But that is largely what is debated day in and out because there is nothing legitimate for defenders to raise so they raise old rejected claims and new made up nonsense.

Instead of just saying they believe he is innocent but can't prove it and it is just a gut feeling they expose themselves to be dishonest clowns.  Their outrageous claims attract attention, that got my attention.  But these same claims fell apart on inspection. They only fool people who are gullible and don't look deeper.  I don't really know what they accomplish by fooling some people as it won't help free Jeremy.  I think they just like having a following and are doing things more for themselves than for Jeremy.


 
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2015, 08:59:47 AM »
No at most some lab trianees helped analyze the evidence so had their fingerprints submitted to be ruled out which morphed into a firearms team training exercise at WHF with the victims bodies being used as dummies that were shot with blanks.  How did it morph into something so absurd?  Jeremy Bamber has supporters like Mike...and Jeremy is perfectly willing to use such BS to snow the public.

There is a sizable divide between the BS that his supporters spew to the public and the BS raised to the CCRC/COA.  Most of the BS his supporters spew is unable to be raised for legal purposes. It is simply nonsense totally made up like Mike's made up claim that he saw a photo of Sheila dead in her parent's bed. The notion Nevill phoned police is also made up from nothing which is why it could not be raised to the COA.

Unsupported speculation made by experts is insufficient to meet the legal requirements to free Jeremy but at least can be made to the CCRC.  Since such is insufficient it is pointless but at least it is something that can be made. Anything that is so lacking in foundation that it can't even be raised to the CCRC is pretty pointless to even debate.   But that is largely what is debated day in and out because there is nothing legitimate for defenders to raise so they raise old rejected claims and new made up nonsense.

Instead of just saying they believe he is innocent but can't prove it and it is just a gut feeling they expose themselves to be dishonest clowns.  Their outrageous claims attract attention, that got my attention.  But these same claims fell apart on inspection. They only fool people who are gullible and don't look deeper.  I don't really know what they accomplish by fooling some people as it won't help free Jeremy.  I think they just like having a following and are doing things more for themselves than for Jeremy.

Thanks.   I agree with much of your post but still think he's innocent. 
« Last Edit: December 14, 2015, 09:20:40 AM by Holly Goodhead »
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: A very laid-back discussion about...
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2015, 09:16:30 AM »
Another American laid-back discussion about the WHF murders... http://thinkingsidewayspodcast.com/

Thanks.

They are clearly wrong on some points but what is interesting is their overall attitude ie less emotive/subjective and more objective compared with the UK regardless of which camp.  Similar to what I found on the IA forum.  Probably due to being new to the case ie not recalling it from when it was in the press 30 years ago and all that has gone on since.   Also having a different take on firearms with gun ownership so widespread in US. 
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?