Colin Caffell - We've been given a life sentence of despair!

[John]

As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...

‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

‘Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow. The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.



Victims: Colin Caffell with his twin sons Daniel and Nicholas in the early 1980s before the boys were brutally murdered.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

‘It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.’



Victims:  Sheila Caffell pictured with her twin sons shortly before all three were murdered by Jeremy Bamber.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz

20

[Anna]

As part of her research, in July 2013 Carol Ann Lee contacted Colin Caffell, Sheila’s former husband and the father of her twins. It came shortly after the European Court of Human Rights ruled against the ‘whole life’ sentence imposed on Bamber and two others. Here is his moving reply...

‘I have remained silent through many years of Jeremy Bamber’s perennial intrusions into our lives because I have been endeavouring to create a normal life for my new family who have nothing to do with my tragic past.

‘Despite my best endeavours to shield them, however, they have had to live under its shadow. The new ruling by the European Court of Human Rights, against the setting of “whole life tariffs” as “inhumane”, not only potentially places the lives of myself, my family and the families of all those who fought for Jeremy’s conviction in very real danger (and the public in general in the case of other dangerous “whole lifers” who are also seeking parole) but undermines our democracy and strikes at the very heart of what is globally recognised as one of the finest and fairest justice systems in the world.



Victims: Colin Caffell with his twin sons Daniel and Nicholas in the early 1980s before the boys were brutally murdered.

‘It is perhaps a blessing for my family that, despite a fair trial in 1986 and a later appeal before three judges who determined that new evidence made Bamber’s original conviction “even safer”, he has refused to admit his guilt and therefore does not meet the Strasbourg court’s criteria of “progressing towards rehabilitation”.

‘Bamber has proved himself an extremely dangerous and devious man who will clearly remain that way, having shown no sign of remorse or contrition for murdering five members of his family for financial gain. That is “inhumane”. Any “depression and despair” he has said that he feels may be the beginning of him coming to terms with the fact that he has lost his spurious battle with justice; something most “lifers” begin to accept much earlier on in their sentences. It is not inhumane to have to face that – they need to – but it is inhumane to make victims and their families live a life sentence of uncertainty. The victims’ families have to truly face overwhelming loss, depression and despair.

‘It is also inhumane that our daughter and her friends, at the age of 11, Googled her name only to be confronted with Bamber’s website that included photographs of bullet wounds to my former wife’s neck. My daughter would understandably like to change her name.’



Victims:  Sheila Caffell pictured with her twin sons shortly before all three were murdered by Jeremy Bamber.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166636/Bamber-slaughtered-family-25-bullets-told-girlfriend-s-going-years-investigation-leading-author-tell-exactly-happened-night-White-House-Farm-massacre.html#ixzz3h5SsUNQz

This is a very sad case and an 11 year old is also suffering because of it. 
Why do cases drag on the way that they do. Causing more pain to those left behind?
I hope she can change her name and be free of all the awful details connected to this crime.....But will she?

[Admin]

The name should not concern her, Sheila Caffell and her sons were the innocent victims of a callous murderer.  If anything she should be proud to carry the name forward.

[Holly Goodhead]

The internet obviously has advantages and disadvantages.  Young people need parental guidance when accessing the internet to protect against all manner of things. 

CC paints an unflattering, albeit honest, self-portrait in his book, In Search Of The Rainbow's End, which no doubt his daughter will read at some stage.  Eg Colin's admission that he disappeared at his wife's/SC 21st birthday party with a girl from his office who he then had sex with before returning to the party.  His wife, SC, was so distressed she then punched her wrist through a pane of glass requiring hospital treatment.  CC was so drunk he was unable to take SC to hospital and JB obliged.  Interestingly I note how in CAL's book she made much of this event, referring to CC's book, but stopped short of telling readers that CC actually admitted to having sex with the woman.  Why?

It think it's pretty clear that JB is going absolutely nowhere without substantial new evidence making his case unsafe which he will need to demonstrate to the CCRC and 3 appeal court judges.  I think we can all sleep easy.

[Anna]

It has nothing whatsoever to do with pride. What is there to be proud about in children related to you, being murdered? And as to her Surname carried on from her father. If there is now a book describing her father as being an adulterer……………………………….

However, after considering carefully, ways that life can be a improved for this child. Without her disturbing episodes on the internet or elsewhere. I really can’t see how it can be remedied or kept from her friends, even if she does change her name. It will make no difference… Well not until she is older and living elsewhere at least.  Surely her father realises this.

[Holly Goodhead]

I think the hub of this is that CC is unhappy that his daughter found a photo of Colin's former wife, SC, with two gunshot wounds to her neck on the internet?

On page 29 of PH's book Deviant:

"My cynicism was aroused that Bamber was toying with me and trying to manipulate my research when he volunteered, without any provocation, that he felt it would be of no benefit in me viewing crime scene or post mortem images of the murdered children, since these images were as such irrelevant to my investigation and research.  This struck me as odd, I had never once mentioned images of any description, and since he knew I was an ex-police officer, and through my profession had seen and attended countless post-mortems and violent scenes of death, it felt as thought he was trying to manage and control what I saw.  The message he tried to portray was of someone showing consideration for my feelings, but why should he do that?  In reality it is in fact a trait among child killers that they don't like to discuss the brutality of their crimes on a defenceless child.  Bamber, from the outset, was setting his own parameters and letting me know he didn't want to discuss the murder of the children.  Child killers attempt to dissociate from any or all direct or visual evidence of their acts, they know it is difficult, if not impossible, to justify the consequences of their crimes against a child since such acts arouse public revulsion, and for someone like Bamber who seeks public support and sympathy, it puts him at a distinct disadvantage".

"Conversely his strategy permitted him to seemingly believe it acceptable for me to see the crime scene images of the other (adult) victims, and whilst these people may not be children they were his closest family.  This displays a total lack of sensitivity and personal empathy with the victims who he continues to use to his advantage even in death.  It was a devious act employed by the killer and provided an early insight into what I was dealing with"

As far as I can see there are no contentious issues as such surrounding the twins unlike the other victims?  Eg the twins were shot in their sleep as they slept in their beds and hopefully knew nothing of the unfolding horrors within WHF.  They were shot 8 times in total and 8 cartridges were found in their bedroom.  I cant see any benefit in reviewing the soc of photos and post mortem images of the twins?   

Was JB avoiding a discussion about the twins and manipulating PH or trying to protect their memory, Colin and others from sensitive photos and images falling into the wrong hands and ending up all over the internet?

[Holly Goodhead]

If CC's young daughter was upset by images of his former wife with two gunshot wounds to her neck I would imagine she would be doubly upset by crime scene photos and post-mortem images of the 6 year old twins, her half-brothers. 

I hope these photos and images are not released into the public domain. 

[Anna]

Thanks Holly,

I cant quite get to grips with the JB story, so if you think it is worth it, I will buy the book. I think there is more than one though.

[Holly Goodhead]

Thanks Holly,

I cant quite get to grips with the JB story, so if you think it is worth it, I will buy the book. I think there is more than one though.

Hi Anna.  I've just typed out a long reply (mine always are  )  and lost it    Anyway I will try again but post it in the thread entitled: 'The Murders At White House Farm by Carol Ann Lee'.  Catch ya there   

[Passer-by]

I think it is interesting to note that CC and JB both went out to restaurants and drank heavily in the aftermath of the killings, and neither wished to view their families' bodies.  I believe CC also went on a 'holiday' to Cornwall to escape press intrusion and to deal with the shock?  But the press typecaste the ex-Public School Boy as a hedonistic materialist with homosexual tendencies - a stereotype very much in vogue in those days - even though his behaviour quite mirrored the other closely affected relative the same way.  I wonder what would have been made of JB sending photos of his dead children?  But I also wonder why JB doesn't seem to  mention them much, if ever?

[Holly Goodhead]

I think it is interesting to note that CC and JB both went out to restaurants and drank heavily in the aftermath of the killings, and neither wished to view their families' bodies.  I believe CC also went on a 'holiday' to Cornwall to escape press intrusion and to deal with the shock?  But the press typecaste the ex-Public School Boy as a hedonistic materialist with homosexual tendencies - a stereotype very much in vogue in those days - even though his behaviour quite mirrored the other closely affected relative the same way.  I wonder what would have been made of JB sending photos of his dead children?  But I also wonder why JB doesn't seem to  mention them much, if ever?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carole-brody-fleet/mourning-are-you-grieving-right_b_2532395.html

Under no circumstances should JB release any personal info into the public domain re the twins.  He has no right to as he was not their next of kin.  If the info is deemed necessary for any appeal etc then it should all be handled by his solicitors.

JB does talk fondly about the twins from time-to-time.  I guess after 30 years incarcerated and the fact they were only part of his life for 6 years the memories have faded.

[Passer-by]

I think that's so desperately sad:  if he is innocent, no photographs, no-one to talk about older times, no-one to recall funny family incidents, private jokes, 'that Christmas when . . . ' - nothing to help jog the mind and keep the neural pathways to those memories open.  And presumably his cousins will have got rid of all his old childhood things, school reports, drawings etc.  It does seem exceptionally cruel:  even if he ever did get out the long-term consequences are pretty appalling.

[Holly Goodhead]

I think that's so desperately sad:  if he is innocent, no photographs, no-one to talk about older times, no-one to recall funny family incidents, private jokes, 'that Christmas when . . . ' - nothing to help jog the mind and keep the neural pathways to those memories open.  And presumably his cousins will have got rid of all his old childhood things, school reports, drawings etc.  It does seem exceptionally cruel:  even if he ever did get out the long-term consequences are pretty appalling.

The real sadness is that he might have lost his liberty for some 30 years as a result of a MoJ.

Nostalgia and memorabilia are inconsequential compared with the above and loss of life and grieving relatives.

[John]

Can posters please remain on topic. TY

[Passer-by]

Apologies John.

Back to your original post:  I don't think CC can say it undermines our democratic system to have someone given 25yrs on a 10-2 majority verdict but then be told it is increased to life try to appeal that.  From what I can see, JB is virtually the only person in his position who isn't a serial killer, motivated by psychosis.  If he has never been found to have psychopathic traits and he has served his whole sentence I think there is a reasonable argument that he has done his time.  Other child killers have been let out, it would not be a new departure.  I don't like the idea of a democratic system wher you can essentially be locked up without appeal on the whim of a politician.

It must be terrible for CC - but he wrote a book, so his daughter was bound to find out.  If it had been me, I might well have changed my family name.