UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: Robittybob1 on May 19, 2020, 03:37:47 AM
-
"But Julie is still haunted by the murders almost 35 years ago and still suffers from nightmares."
Jeremy Bamber's girlfriend haunted by murders in her dramatically different new life.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-bambers-girlfriend-haunted-murders-21476661
Headline: https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/jeremy-bamber-girlfriend-now-julie-mugford-what-happened-white-house-farm-itv-series-1367513
"Jeremy Bamber's girlfriend: how Julie Mugford was involved in the White House Farm murders trial"
"A key witness in the trial
Despite supporting Bamber as he cried uncontrollably at the funeral of his parents, sister and nephews, Mugford later came forward as a witness against him.
Police initially believed Bamber’s story that his mentally ill sister had shot her parents and young twin sons, before then turning the gun on herself.
However, new evidence came to light about Bamber allegedly bragging about the murders.
When the inquest opened on 14 August 1985 - a week after the murders took place - police gave evidence in relation to the murder-suicide theory.
Almost a month later, on 7 September, Mugford changed her statement to police and later testified against him in court."
-
https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/
https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg Her story seems to change. Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?
"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone." That seems to be an error IMO. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/
-
https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/
https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg Her story seems to change. Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?
"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone." That seems to be an error IMO. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/
I would not place too much reliance on an "Officialbambervideo", Rob.
-
https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/
https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg Her story seems to change. Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?
"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone." That seems to be an error IMO. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/
That's a CT video - nuff said.
-
It is disappointing to note that despite numerous warnings, some members continue to use crude and totally uncalled-for language when responding to other members. This will no longer be allowed to continue.
I have instructed the moderation team to clamp down heavily on rule breakers from now on.
There will be no exceptions!
-
I would not place too much reliance on an "Officialbambervideo", Rob.
I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.
What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.
-
JM lied consistently and changed her mind and her statements .
She consistently lied!!
-
I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.
What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.
And I suspect one of the reasons why Bamber keeps on failing to overturn his murder convictions on a technicality
-
JM lied consistently and changed her mind and her statements .
She consistently lied!!
She didn’t Aunt Agatha
Though it’s possible she may have suffered some cognitive dissonance given her situation at the time - the long term abuse by Bamber, his constant gaslighting and manipulation of her
The trauma of the nightmare she found herself in when he phoned her from a pay phone that morning to tell her the police would be picking her up
Did he tell her his family had been murdered or did he leave it to the police to inform her ?
-
And I suspect one of the reasons why Bamber keeps on failing to overturn his murder convictions on a technicality
It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.
Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.
Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.
Why wait 4 hrs?
Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.
Give me a break!!!
He has an impossible task on his hands.
He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.
-
It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.
Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.
Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.
Why wait 4 hrs?
Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.
Give me a break!!!
He has an impossible task on his hands.
He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.
It is protocol to wait in a situation like that, they not only have those in the house to look out for they have their own people. They would have been aware that SC knew the outlay of the house and had to familiarise themselves also, which is why they asked Jeremy to draw the plan.
Jeremy wasn't told that there was one dead male and one dead female, that is what the person wrote on the log and the clarification for that came long before his trial.
-
It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.
Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.
Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.
Why wait 4 hrs?
Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.
Give me a break!!!
He has an impossible task on his hands.
He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.
How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?
And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?
-
I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.
What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.
Of course it would because it all originates from Bamber.
-
How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?
And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?
He isn't
-
It is protocol to wait in a situation like that, they not only have those in the house to look out for they have their own people. They would have been aware that SC knew the outlay of the house and had to familiarise themselves also, which is why they asked Jeremy to draw the plan.
Jeremy wasn't told that there was one dead male and one dead female, that is what the person wrote on the log and the clarification for that came long before his trial.
Caroline, i cannot be sure, i could be wrong here, but i dont think i am.
jeremy was told by someone on site that a male and a female had been either seen, or concluded to be dead.
Dead bodies do not move - unless someone else moves them.
Q: Was she already dead when she was seen in the kitchen? it appears not.
-
Caroline, i cannot be sure, i could be wrong here, but i dont think i am.
jeremy was told by someone on site that a male and a female had been either seen, or concluded to be dead.
Dead bodies do not move - unless someone else moves them.
Q: Was she already dead when she was seen in the kitchen? it appears not.
The only time he was told, was after all five were discovered. If he told you that then he lied. Sorry AA, I can understand why you want to believe him (more than why others do), but Jeremy wouldn't have been party to the raid teams conversations.
-
How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?
And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?
Hes been trying since '85 Holly, and at every step he has been turned down or refused a review, or information and documents on his case - the guy is working blind with his hands tied behind his back.
He needs all our help to get him out.
I will do what little i can to support that, but its not much.
-
Hes been trying since '85 Holly, and at every step he has been turned down or refused a review, or information and documents on his case - the guy is working blind with his hands tied behind his back.
He needs all our help to get him out.
I will do what little i can to support that, but its not much.
AA, Jeremy told me that he had almost all of the withheld documents. I will dig it out and post it. It's ridiculous that he says one thing to one person and something else to another.
-
How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?
And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?
‘cos he isn’t
-
How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?
And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?
And because it’s clear he’s attempting to commit innocence fraud Holly
-
‘cos he isn’t
Oh OK then.
-
The only time he was told, was after all five were discovered. If he told you that then he lied. Sorry AA, I can understand why you want to believe him (more than why others do), but Jeremy wouldn't have been party to the raid teams conversations.
No need to apoloise Caroline, I did state I could be wrong...it was long ago...however I do recall going through the actions outside of the house whilst he was outside.
i think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer.
He was then officially told that the whole family had died.
that is how I recall our chat, I'm sure I've stated that before somewhere.
When I finally got to the Blue Forum I thought you already knew about this as it had been discussed quite a bit.
-
Hes been trying since '85 Holly, and at every step he has been turned down or refused a review, or information and documents on his case - the guy is working blind with his hands tied behind his back.
He needs all our help to get him out.
I will do what little i can to support that, but its not much.
By falsely claiming people on internet forums are part of a cover up ?
Youve been at this a long time Nicholas... This is NOT your average poster. She is here solely to discredit and stop any further debates regarding Jeremy's innocence.
That is not normal forthis forum unless you have anbalteriir motive and I'm suspecting she does.
If I'm correct Nicholas, she is playing you. You're wiser than this... Look at her posts and you'll see a pattern.
There's lots of giveaways... And she's slipped up trying to convince you all that Jeremy is a psychopaths monster who is evil and guilty beyond belief.
How the F*ck does she know that.... She spouts lies and misinformation continually, she totally misinterprets anything meaningful or of any consideration, leading everybody away from the facts that are wanting to be discussed in a deliberate attempt to frustrate and ridicule the poster.
-
AA, Jeremy told me that he had almost all of the withheld documents. I will dig it out and post it. It's ridiculous that he says one thing to one person and something else to another.
Not in 1990 he did not. Thats when we were discussing this.
-
No need to apoloise Caroline, I did state I could be wrong...it was long ago...however I do recall going through the actions outside of the house whilst he was outside.
i think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer.
He was then officially told that the whole family had died.
that is how I recall our chat, I'm sure I've stated that before somewhere.
When I finally got to the Blue Forum I thought you already knew about this as it had been discussed quite a bit.
I accept that you believe what he told you, I don't hold any store in what Jeremy says though. I am sure he also told you about seeing a figure at the window and yet neglected to mention it in his own account - when it actually mattered.
-
Not in 1990 he did not. Thats when we were discussing this.
But he is still claiming it now.
-
I accept that you believe what he told you, I don't hold any store in what Jeremy says though. I am sure he also told you about seeing a figure at the window and yet neglected to mention it in his own account - when it actually mattered.
Yes, we discussed the figure at the window, the conversation with someone in the house, the dog barking, the figure seen running away, the silencer, the phone calls etc....
i would spend time going through what little information (confirmed to date) what we had then and we went through everything repeatedly. we could not figure out how all this happened.
The newspapers did write some nasty things and based solely upon newspapers as there was no internet etc, I questioned him about those things also.
-
Yes, we discussed the figure at the window, the conversation with someone in the house, the dog barking, the figure seen running away, the silencer, the phone calls etc....
When did he tell you about the ‘figure seen running away’
-
Yes, we discussed the figure at the window, the conversation with someone in the house, the dog barking, the figure seen running away, the silencer, the phone calls etc....
i would spend time going through what little information (confirmed to date) what we had then and we went through everything repeatedly. we could not figure out how all this happened.
The newspapers did write some nasty things and based solely upon newspapers as there was no internet etc, I questioned him about those things also.
But he didn't discuss it in his statement or when interrogated. If you saw a figure at the window in his position, would it not be one of the first things you mentioned?
-
When did he tell you about the ‘figure seen running away’
There wasn't much to tell tbh.
The police never followed it up.
-
But he didn't discuss it in his statement or when interrogated. If you saw a figure at the window in his position, would it not be one of the first things you mentioned?
yes, and he regrets that along with other things he failed to mention.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing Caroline.
-
yes, and he regrets that along with other things he failed to mention.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing Caroline.
I am sure he does but it's not something you would forget - seeing the killer alive.
-
I am sure he does but it's not something you would forget - seeing the killer alive.
Oh the killer, sorry, I thought you were talking about the window and pushing that.
He had very little info on it as the police did not follow through with it.
However, the lawyers should.
-
AA, Jeremy told me that he had almost all of the withheld documents. I will dig it out and post it. It's ridiculous that he says one thing to one person and something else to another.
He's a master at it.
-
JM lied consistently and changed her mind and her statements.
She consistently lied!!
At least she seems to say different things at different times. It becomes difficult to tell which version was the truth IMO.
-
Oh the killer, sorry, I thought you were talking about the window and pushing that.
How could you have possibly thought that ? Please explain
-
There wasn't much to tell tbh.
The police never followed it up.
Prove it
-
i think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer.
Is this what Bamber told you or have you just made it up?
-
Prove it
OK what I was hoping to establish in this thread were the occasions where Julie Mugford says one thing and later something else.
I'm particularly interested in knowing more about the phone call Jeremy Bamber is supposed to have made to her that morning?
-
OK what I was hoping to establish in this thread were the occasions where Julie Mugford says one thing and later something else.
Are you referring to cognitive dissonance ?
-
She didn’t Aunt Agatha
Though it’s possible she may have suffered some cognitive dissonance given her situation at the time - the long term abuse by Bamber, his constant gaslighting and manipulation of her
The trauma of the nightmare she found herself in when he phoned her from a pay phone that morning to tell her the police would be picking her up
Did he tell her his family had been murdered or did he leave it to the police to inform her ?
I'd like to know all versions of this story? Does Jeremy admit to ringing her?
-
I'm particularly interested in knowing more about the phone call Jeremy Bamber is supposed to have made to her that morning?
The phone call he makes to Julie from a pay phone ?
-
OK what I was hoping to establish in this thread were the occasions where Julie Mugford says one thing and later something else.
I'm particularly interested in knowing more about the phone call Jeremy Bamber is supposed to have made to her that morning?
Reading this questions I thought how cool it would be if you could ask Jeremy himself to answer these questions, so I've requested a new thread be opened called: ASK, JEREMY BAMBER.
I'm hoping it helps and we can start something new as its not been done before.
-
This by Scott Lomax is interesting:
“This was not the first occasion on which Sheila had 'gone crazy'. The reference to the gun, however, was a cause for concern and so Bamber decided to telephone the police as a precaution. He did not wish to dial 999 in case it was not an emergency situation; the police had never been called in the past and the arrival of vehicles with flashing lights and sirens could make what was perhaps a manageable situation, a dangerous one. Instead he telephoned Chelmsford Police Station and asked them to meet him at White House Farm.
After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy.
Bamber arrived at the farmhouse, shortly after the police, to find that the upstairs lights were switched on, as was the light in the kitchen. Armed police officers arrived at the scene at around 05:30. Time was spent deciding upon how the situation should be best tackled, with a map having been drawn of the layout of the building. Details relating to the telephone call, Sheila's state of mind, and the weapons within the house, were discussed in order to try and fully understand the situation.
Finally, at 07:30, the police battered down the door to gain access to the building. Armed officers stormed in, but there was no longer any danger. A terrible scene of carnage met their eyes.
(From Trial & Error: The case of Jeremy Bamber (2003)
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan042.htm
-
so I've requested a new thread be opened called: ASK, JEREMY BAMBER.
You’ve had 35 years to ask him questions AA
-
The phone call he makes to Julie from a pay phone ?
Who said there was a phone call? Does Jeremy Bamber admit to that?
-
You’ve had 35 years to ask him questions AA
Whats your point Nicholas???
I won't be asking the questions.
Instead of attacking just read the damn post and take it as it's meant to be.
If you dont want to ask him a question directly then plod on. Don't ruin it for everyone else, OK Nicholas.
-
This by Scott Lomax is interesting:
“This was not the first occasion on which Sheila had 'gone crazy'. The reference to the gun, however, was a cause for concern and so Bamber decided to telephone the police as a precaution. He did not wish to dial 999 in case it was not an emergency situation; the police had never been called in the past and the arrival of vehicles with flashing lights and sirens could make what was perhaps a manageable situation, a dangerous one. Instead he telephoned Chelmsford Police Station and asked them to meet him at White House Farm.
After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy.
Bamber arrived at the farmhouse, shortly after the police, to find that the upstairs lights were switched on, as was the light in the kitchen. Armed police officers arrived at the scene at around 05:30. Time was spent deciding upon how the situation should be best tackled, with a map having been drawn of the layout of the building. Details relating to the telephone call, Sheila's state of mind, and the weapons within the house, were discussed in order to try and fully understand the situation.
Finally, at 07:30, the police battered down the door to gain access to the building. Armed officers stormed in, but there was no longer any danger. A terrible scene of carnage met their eyes.
(From Trial & Error: The case of Jeremy Bamber (2003)
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan042.htm
"After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy."
That paragraph makes it sound as if Bamber is admitting to making this call. At this stage, as the story goes, he is not aware of any deaths.
-
"After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy."
That paragraph makes it sound as if Bamber is admitting to making this call. At this stage, as the story goes, he is not aware of any deaths.
I'd agree
-
I'd agree
OK but how many other phone calls did he make to Jullie? Someone mentioned a call made from a payphone.
-
OK but how many other phone calls did he make to Jullie? Someone mentioned a call made from a payphone.
Yes, we need clarity on this
-
OK but how many other phone calls did he make to Jullie? Someone mentioned a call made from a payphone.
Around 10pm Bamber called Julie for around 17mins post murders - known as the 'tonight's the night' call.
Called Julie sometime between 03:10 and 03:25 - the 'somethings wrong at the farm' call
Called Julie again at around 05:45 - told her not to go to work, police would pick her up and bring her to Goldhanger.
-
In the appeal notes, there is mention of another phone call.
"31. Armed officers from the Essex Police Tactical Firearms Unit arrived at the farm at about 5
a.m. There was further conversation with the appellant. At about 5.30 a.m. he said to PS
Adams, “What if anything has happened in there, they are all the family I’ve got”. He
became visibly upset and asked to telephone his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, who was later
driven to Essex from London. "
That doesn't say he actually made a call, just that he asked to make a call.
Around 10pm Bamber called Julie for around 17mins post murders - known as the 'tonight's the night' call.
Called Julie sometime between 03:10 and 03:25 - the 'somethings wrong at the farm' call
Called Julie again at around 05:45 - told her not to go to work, police would pick her up and bring her to Goldhanger.
that second call seems to be the one referred to in the Appeal notes https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 6.
How long would it take to drive from her home to White House Farm?
-
In the appeal notes, there is mention of another phone call.
"31. Armed officers from the Essex Police Tactical Firearms Unit arrived at the farm at about 5
a.m. There was further conversation with the appellant. At about 5.30 a.m. he said to PS
Adams, “What if anything has happened in there, they are all the family I’ve got”. He
became visibly upset and asked to telephone his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, who was later
driven to Essex from London. "
That doesn't say he actually made a call, just that he asked to make a call.
that second call seems to be the one referred to in the Appeal notes https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 6.
How long would it take to drive from her home to White House Farm?
Whether it says or not it states it on Murderpedia - he made the call from a call box.
I have no idea how long it would take, she was picked up by a police officer later that morning.
-
Whether it says or not it states it on Murderpedia - he made the call from a call box.
I have no idea how long it would take, she was picked up by a police officer later that morning.
If we know where she was picked up from, and we know where White House Farm is we could estimate the travel time between them.
Where was she picked up from? It says "Julie Mugford, who was later driven to Essex from London". So how long would that journey take?
-
If we know where she was picked up from, and we know where White House Farm is we could estimate the travel time between them.
Where was she picked up from? It says "Julie Mugford, who was later driven to Essex from London". So how long would that journey take?
1.50-2 hours?
-
The last 5.30 a.m. call was from the only telephone kiosk in the centre of Tolleshunt D'Arcy village. He was accompanied there by PC Robert Lay, but only had a 10 pence coin to make the call. Lay couldn't help out because he arrived without any cash himself. Most likely this call box...
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5382195 (https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5382195)
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5382204 (https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/5382204)
What does PC Robert Lay’s witness statement say about this phone call exactly?
Did he actually hear Bamber on the payphone to Julie ?
Why would Bamber leave the farmhouse at all to phone Julie and also tell her not to go to work?
She must have been exhausted by the time she was picked up by police because she’d hardly had any sleep having been woken by Bamber 3 times in the night
-
Prove it
You prove me wrong!
-
Is this what Bamber told you or have you just made it up?
Why don’t you ask him yourself?
-
Why don’t you ask him yourself?
You stated
I did state I could be wrong...it was long ago...however I do recall going through the actions outside of the house whilst he was outside.
i think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer.
He was then officially told that the whole family had died.
that is how I recall our chat, I'm sure I've stated that before somewhere.
I asked you
Is this what Bamber told you or have you just made it up?
It’s you who’s claimed, ’I think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer’ not Bamber
What’s the official version AA ?
-
"After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy."
That paragraph makes it sound as if Bamber is admitting to making this call. At this stage, as the story goes, he is not aware of any deaths.
That’s precisely why him phoning Julie from a telephone box at approximately 5:30am telling her not to go to work and that the police would be collecting her later and bringing her up to Essex, BEFORE the raid team had gone in the house and BEFORE the police found them all dead, proves he knew they were going to find them all dead.
Some could argue and say that doesn’t prove he knew, but it HIGHLY SUGGESTS he did.
Had the raid team gone in and found them all safe, what would he have needed Julie there for?
Especially as he planned to dump her just days after the funerals...
-
You stated
I asked you
It’s you who’s claimed, ’I think he was in the car when he heard about the first two by an officer’ not Bamber
What’s the official version AA ?
I also stated I could be wrong as it was so long ago.
So, for clarification, why don’t you ask him yourself.
-
What does PC Robert Lay’s witness statement say about this phone call exactly?
Did he actually hear Bamber on the payphone to Julie ?
Why would Bamber leave the farmhouse at all to phone Julie and also tell her not to go to work?
She must have been exhausted by the time she was picked up by police because she’d hardly had any sleep having been woken by Bamber 3 times in the night
As I recall it was the PC who gave Jeremy the only coins he had on him: one 10p
The PC had driven Jeremy to the phone box and waited while he phoned Julie
Julie stated this, the PC stated this, Julie’s flatmates heard the phone call...I don’t truly see the relevance except it’s highly suspicious how Jeremy knew he’d need Julie to come to Essex.
-
As I recall it was the PC who gave Jeremy the only coins he had on him: one 10p
The PC had driven Jeremy to the phone box and waited while he phoned Julie
Julie stated this, the PC stated this, Julie’s flatmates heard the phone call...I don’t truly see the relevance except it’s highly suspicious how Jeremy knew he’d need Julie to come to Essex.
Around 11 days after this, according to Anji Greaves Bamber was talking to her about marriage
Do you think Bamber really needed Julie to come to Essex that morning ?
And could Bamber have made another phone-call from the payphone to the media that morning ?
How were they on the scene so quickly? Who tipped them off?
-
And could Bamber have made another phone-call from the payphone to the media that morning ?
How were they on the scene so quickly? Who tipped them off?
What time did the media turn up at the scene ?
Was it before 7.35am when the raid team made entry to the farmhouse or after ?
-
Around 11 days after this, according to Anji Greaves Bamber was talking to her about marriage
Do you think Bamber really needed Julie to come to Essex that morning ?
And could Bamber have made another phone-call from the payphone to the media that morning ?
How were they on the scene so quickly? Who tipped them off?
He needed her there, but not for the reasons he made out
He needed her there to show the police and family how grief stricken he was, and how he “needed” to be comforted by someone he claimed he loved...
He wouldn’t have called the press, and he didn’t need to. The police notify them.
-
He needed her there, but not for the reasons he made out
He needed her there to show the police and family how grief stricken he was, and how he “needed” to be comforted by someone he claimed he loved...
He wouldn’t have called the press, and he didn’t need to. The police notify them.
Don’t think he needed Julie at all. He was clearly still manipulating her though.
Bamber had an opportunity to contact the media from the payphone . Would be helpful if it could be established what time they turned up at the scene.
Did the police notify the media or did someone else?
-
As I recall it was the PC who gave Jeremy the only coins he had on him: one 10p
The PC had driven Jeremy to the phone box and waited while he phoned Julie
Julie stated this, the PC stated this, Julie’s flatmates heard the phone call...I don’t truly see the relevance except it’s highly suspicious how Jeremy knew he’d need Julie to come to Essex.
If I had a sister with a history of mental health problems, and I knew she was in the house with our parents and her two little boys, and she had a gun, I think I'd be scared of what the police might find when they broke in.
So, whether JB is guilty or innocent, I don't see anything strange about him believing "he'd need Julie to come to Essex."
-
If I had a sister with a history of mental health problems, and I knew she was in the house with our parents and her two little boys, and she had a gun, I think I'd be scared of what the police might find when they broke in.
So, whether JB is guilty or innocent, I don't see anything strange about him believing "he'd need Julie to come to Essex."
Given that scenario I would have been astounded that he did not immediately dial 999 and give the full picture.
-
If we know where she was picked up from, and we know where White House Farm is we could estimate the travel time between them.
Where was she picked up from? It says "Julie Mugford, who was later driven to Essex from London". So how long would that journey take?
For the purpose of?
-
Who said there was a phone call? Does Jeremy Bamber admit to that?
Of course he does @)(++(*
-
If I had a sister with a history of mental health problems, and I knew she was in the house with our parents and her two little boys, and she had a gun, I think I'd be scared of what the police might find when they broke in.
So, whether JB is guilty or innocent, I don't see anything strange about him believing "he'd need Julie to come to Essex."
If I had a sister with history of mental health problems, I’d 100% ABSOLUTELY make sure I didn’t leave a loaded rifle in the kitchen!
He told the police he’d left it out when they were all outside, so he hardly forgot!
In which case, why didn’t he phone Nevill as soon as he got home and say “Dad, sorry, but I left the rifle in the kitchen — had to tell you just in case the children find it in the morning ...”
Your excuse as to why he rang Julie doesn’t wash...just like all the other excuses you make for him
-
This by Scott Lomax is interesting:
“This was not the first occasion on which Sheila had 'gone crazy'. The reference to the gun, however, was a cause for concern and so Bamber decided to telephone the police as a precaution. He did not wish to dial 999 in case it was not an emergency situation; the police had never been called in the past and the arrival of vehicles with flashing lights and sirens could make what was perhaps a manageable situation, a dangerous one. Instead he telephoned Chelmsford Police Station and asked them to meet him at White House Farm.
After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed. After the call had ended, he drove from his cottage in Goldhanger to White House Farm, which is located in the neighbouring village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy.
Bamber arrived at the farmhouse, shortly after the police, to find that the upstairs lights were switched on, as was the light in the kitchen. Armed police officers arrived at the scene at around 05:30. Time was spent deciding upon how the situation should be best tackled, with a map having been drawn of the layout of the building. Details relating to the telephone call, Sheila's state of mind, and the weapons within the house, were discussed in order to try and fully understand the situation.
Finally, at 07:30, the police battered down the door to gain access to the building. Armed officers stormed in, but there was no longer any danger. A terrible scene of carnage met their eyes.
(From Trial & Error: The case of Jeremy Bamber (2003)
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan042.htm
What a load of old hogwash! He didn't mention any of that at the time - he didn't dial 999 because he KNEW it wasn't an emergency as far as anyone being in danger is concerned - they were all dead.
-
I also stated I could be wrong as it was so long ago.
So, for clarification, why don’t you ask him yourself.
So everything you say about him could be wrong if it was all so long ago, and your memory is failing you...
-
What a load of old hogwash! He didn't mention any of that at the time - he didn't dial 999 because he KNEW it wasn't an emergency as far as anyone being in danger is concerned - they were all dead.
Yep
This by Scott Lomax is interesting:
“After telephoning the police, he contacted his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, as he was unsure as to whether or not he had taken the correct action. He was concerned that he may cause embarrassment if the police arrived to find that no threat had been posed.
(From Trial & Error: The case of Jeremy Bamber (2003)
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/legan/legan042.htm
It’s all about impression management
JM has again been used in a pathetic attempt to make Bamber appear victim like *&^^&
-
For the purpose of?
Establishing her alibi.
-
If I had a sister with a history of mental health problems, and I knew she was in the house with our parents and her two little boys, and she had a gun, I think I'd be scared of what the police might find when they broke in.
So, whether JB is guilty or innocent, I don't see anything strange about him believing "he'd need Julie to come to Essex."
PC Myall asked Jeremy Bamber if there was anyone local he wished to have brought to the scene to be with him. His reply was that the only person he wanted was his girlfriend who lived in London. That's why he was taken to the phone box.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,185.msg488.html#msg488
-
Establishing her alibi.
Again, she didn't need an alibi because of Bamber's claim that he father called him.
-
Again, she didn't need an alibi because of Bamber's claim that his father called him.
I can't follow your logic sorry. It is something I've got to prove to myself. I need to be sure the murders couldn't have happened earlier and hence giving Julie had enough time to return to London to get a phone call at 3:00 AM. As someone said the Journey was less than 2 hours.
So where was JM at and before 1:00 AM?
-
I can't follow your logic sorry. It is something I've got to prove to myself. I need to be sure the murders couldn't have happened earlier and hence giving Julie had enough time to return to London to get a phone call at 3:00 AM. As someone said the Journey was less than 2 hours.
So where was JM at and before 1:00 AM?
But Julie was at college in London. Julie didn't drive. There was no convenient railway station near to WHF. Jun's sister phoned WHF around 10.15pm. Who was going to take Julie back to London, 2 hours there, 2 hours back?
-
But Julie was at college in London. Julie didn't drive. There was no convenient railway station near to WHF. Jun's sister phoned WHF around 10.15pm. Who was going to take Julie back to London, 2 hours there, 2 hours back?
Good points. Did she know how to drive? Who says she couldn't drive?
"Jun's sister" who is she?
-
Good points. Did she know how to drive? Who says she couldn't drive?
"Jun's sister" who is she?
Pam is June's elder sister. Even if she could drive, living in London, there'd have been nowhere to park a car. The other consideration is financial. As a student having to finance herself, a car would have been an expense too far.
-
Pam is June's elder sister. Even if she could drive, living in London, there'd have been nowhere to park a car. The other consideration is financial. As a student having to finance herself, a car would have been an expense too far.
Do you mean Pam is Julie Mugford's elder sister?
-
Do you mean Pam is Julie Mugford's elder sister?
Okay! Who hasn't done his assignment? Pam(ela) Boutflour is June Bamber's elder sister, also married to a farmer.
-
Okay! Who hasn't done his assignment? Pam(ela) Boutflour is June Bamber's elder sister, also married to a farmer.
Got you now. "Jun's sister phoned WHF around 10.15pm." Did you say this to prove the murders could not have happened before 10:15?
That is alright, plenty of time between then and 3:00 AM still to account for.
-
Got you now. "Jun's sister phoned WHF around 10.15pm." Did you say this to prove the murders could not have happened before 10:15?
That is alright, plenty of time between then and 3:00 AM still to account for.
No. I said it because you seem determined to involve Julie in the murders. How would Julie's London house mates have explained her absence until silly o'clock? If you carry on down this ridiculous blind ally, I will be inclined to think you're taking the p**s.
-
No. I said it because you seem determined to involve Julie in the murders. How would Julie's London house mates have explained her absence until silly o'clock? If you carry on down this ridiculous blind ally, I will be inclined to think you're taking the p**s.
All I read about her flatmates is that they were woken by the 3:00 AM call. Did "Julie's London housemates have explained her absence until silly o'clock"?
You keep on making suggestions that don't follow on in a logical sequence.
-
All I read about her flatmates is that they were woken by the 3:00 AM call. Did "Julie's London housemates have explained her absence until silly o'clock"?
You keep on making suggestions that don't follow on in a logical sequence.
Unless all of them lied, she spent the evening with them -it's said they smoked some marijuana- She took the first of his calls around 10pm and she was woken up by one of her house mates when he phoned again around 3.15am. Please explain how you think she'd have committed murders in Essex.
-
Unless all of them lied, she spent the evening with them -it's said they smoked some marijuana- She took the first of his calls around 10pm and she was woken up by one of her house mates when he phoned again around 3.15am. Please explain how you think she'd have committed murders in Essex.
I can't explain anything like that, but the idea that I'm exploring is that Jeremy may have been checking that Jullie had got back safely at around 3:00 AM. Once knowing she was back in London he could ring the police and tell them the story about his father ringing him and his sister going berserk with a gun.
He rings Julie before the call from his father/call to the police regarding this call. But his reason for ringing at that hour was to check if he was doing the right thing. But he wouldn't have known about it at that stage.
-
But Julie was at college in London. Julie didn't drive. There was no convenient railway station near to WHF. Jun's sister phoned WHF around 10.15pm. Who was going to take Julie back to London, 2 hours there, 2 hours back?
And if already dead, how did Bamber receive a call from Neville?
-
I can't explain anything like that, but the idea that I'm exploring is that Jeremy may have been checking that Jullie had got back safely at around 3:00 AM. Once knowing she was back in London he could ring the police and tell them the story about his father ringing him and his sister going berserk with a gun.
So how do you propose getting round that she spent the evening in the company of her house mates, and how do you get round that she was in their presence when she received the first phone call, and how do you explain her travelling back to London from Essex when Jeremy's Goldhanger home was miles from the nearest station, and how do you think she'd managed to master a gun well enough to ensure every bullet found a home? More to the point, what reason would she have had? No matter, explore away if it amuses you, but you'll run into a brick wall at each turn.
-
I can't explain anything like that, but the idea that I'm exploring is that Jeremy may have been checking that Jullie had got back safely at around 3:00 AM. Once knowing she was back in London he could ring the police and tell them the story about his father ringing him and his sister going berserk with a gun.
He rings Julie before the call from his father/call to the police regarding this call. But his reason for ringing at that hour was to check if he was doing the right thing. But he wouldn't have known about it at that stage.
This didn't happen.
-
And if already dead, how did Bamber receive a call from Neville?
Yes! We could fill a book with reasons why Julie didn't/couldn't have committed the murders.
-
Yes! We could fill a book with reasons why Julie didn't/couldn't have committed the murders.
Well if my mini theory has any credence there was no phonecall from Neville at 3:30 AM but there may have been one earlier in the night.
Between 10:00 PM and 3:00 AM is 5 hours more than enough time to travel to Essex and back.
How many cars did Bamber own?
-
Well if my mini theory has any credence there was no phonecall from Neville at 3:30 AM but there may have been one earlier in the night.
Between 10:00 PM and 3:00 AM is 5 hours more than enough time to travel to Essex and back.
How many cars did Bamber own?
It doesn't.
-
Well if my mini theory has any credence there was no phonecall from Neville at 3:30 AM but there may have been one earlier in the night.
Between 10:00 PM and 3:00 AM is 5 hours more than enough time to travel to Essex and back.
How many cars did Bamber own?
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 21
"134. At one point during the interviews the appellant said that following the call from his father
he had telephoned Julie Mugford before the police. It was pointed out to him that in his
earlier witness statements he had said he rang the police immediately upon receipt of his
father’s call and only after calling the police had he rung Miss Mugford. He responded that
he may be confused about the sequence of telephone calls. He could not explain why having
received the call from his father he had not immediately telephoned 999. "
In my mini-theory Jeremy had the call from his father before ringing the police and his girlfriend, and he rang Julie first then the police. He admitted being confused but did not explain which version was the correct one.
It is possible the call from his father was as early as 10:00 PM the day before the murders.
-
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf (https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf) page 21
"134. At one point during the interviews the appellant said that following the call from his father
he had telephoned Julie Mugford before the police. It was pointed out to him that in his
earlier witness statements he had said he rang the police immediately upon receipt of his
father’s call and only after calling the police had he rung Miss Mugford. He responded that
he may be confused about the sequence of telephone calls. He could not explain why having
received the call from his father he had not immediately telephoned 999. "
In my mini-theory Jeremy had the call from his father before ringing the police and his girlfriend, and he rang Julie first then the police. He admitted being confused but did not explain which version was the correct one.
It is possible the call from his father was as early as 10:00 PM the day before the murders.
Nevill Bamber's trumped-up call occurred between 3.15 and 3.30 am. according to this horse's mouth...
https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/unknown-album (https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/unknown-album)
-
Nevill Bamber's trumped-up call occurred between 3.15 and 3.30 am. according to this horse's mouth...
https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/unknown-album (https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/unknown-album)
That sounds plausible if Jeremy thought he was speaking to his dad. I notice he says he recognised his dad's voice, so the person on the phone never said it was Nevill Bamber. He then rings his dad's number but as we know the phone is off the hook and he gets the engaged tone. Tries again without any luck.
The 3:15 - 3:30 AM incoming call could have been faked by someone else other than his dad. We can't tell where that call originated.
-
That sounds plausible if Jeremy thought he was speaking to his dad. I notice he says he recognised his dad's voice, so the person on the phone never said it was Nevill Bamber. He then rings his dad's number but as we know the phone is off the hook and he gets the engaged tone. Tries again without any luck.
The 3:15 - 3:30 AM incoming call could have been faked by someone else other than his dad. We can't tell where that call originated.
So who do you think this mysterious assassin-cum-impressionist could be?
-
So who do you think this mysterious assassin-cum-impressionist could be?
Julie putting on a deep voice.
-
So who do you think this mysterious assassin-cum-impressionist could be?
The other aspect that makes me think it wasn't Nevill Bamber on the phone is that he says to Jeremy "your sister". Now a father would be more likely to say her name "Sheila" or "our daughter" rather than the more distant "Your sister".
I don't know who it could be, as I have not studied the case enough yet but from that, I'd say it seems unlikely to be Jeremy's father.
"Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has the gun." Wasn't there more than one gun in the house?
"Please come over" The person is aware of the local situation.
-
The other aspect that makes me think it wasn't Nevill Bamber on the phone is that he says to Jeremy "your sister". Now a father would be more likely to say her name "Sheila" or "our daughter" rather than the more distant "Your sister".
I don't know who it could be, as I have not studied the case enough yet but from that, I'd say it seems unlikely to be Jeremy's father.
"Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has the gun." Wasn't there more than one gun in the house?
"Please come over" The person is aware of the local situation.
Of course if the phone call never happened ,there are no words to have a play on.
-
Of course if the phone call never happened ,there are no words to have a play on.
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf Page 25.
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 farmworkers 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."
The girls at the flat seemed to recall the call by Jeremy was nearer 3:00 AM rather than 3:30. Jeremy called the Police at 3:30 so it wasn't that much delay as they make out.
It is an odd situation to be in, to be requested to come to a house where someone has gone crazy with a gun. Jeremy could have felt he was being set-up and someone was planning to shoot him as well. I too would let the police lead the break in to the farm house.
In the next section:
"vii) In respect of the telephone call from his father, the appellant had not initially
appreciated the seriousness of the situation and then had become frightened to go to
the farm alone."
I think that is highly likely.
-
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf Page 25.
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 farmworkers 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."
The girls at the flat seemed to recall the call by Jeremy was nearer 3:00 AM rather than 3:30. Jeremy called the Police at 3:30 so it wasn't that much delay as they make out.
It is an odd situation to be in, to be requested to come to a house where someone has gone crazy with a gun. Jeremy could have felt he was being set-up and someone was planning to shoot him as well. I too would let the police lead the break in to the farm house.
I think you'll find that "the girls at the flat" couldn't reconcile over the timing of the call. There was something about one clock being 10 minutes fast along with the usual differences raised by several people sleeping in several separate rooms. If the call DID occur at 3am, it occurred before the alleged call from Nevill to Jeremy, and approximately 20 minutes prior to Jeremy calling the police.
I agree the situation isn't a daily one for British police. Even more for those policing the depths of rural Essex. I'd have been happy to allow them to do the job they'd been trained for. The responsibility no longer being mine.
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=287.msg4965#msg4965 Julie Mugford's statement.
-
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 21
"134. At one point during the interviews the appellant said that following the call from his father
he had telephoned Julie Mugford before the police. It was pointed out to him that in his
earlier witness statements he had said he rang the police immediately upon receipt of his
father’s call and only after calling the police had he rung Miss Mugford. He responded that
he may be confused about the sequence of telephone calls. He could not explain why having
received the call from his father he had not immediately telephoned 999. "
In my mini-theory Jeremy had the call from his father before ringing the police and his girlfriend, and he rang Julie first then the police. He admitted being confused but did not explain which version was the correct one.
It is possible the call from his father was as early as 10:00 PM the day before the murders.
That's not possible. Why don't you read up on the case - and I don't mean murderpedia.
-
Of course if the phone call never happened ,there are no words to have a play on.
Let her/him speak. Don't keep interrupting.
Sorry, this doesn't apply directly to you, more so others who won't allow a theory to move forward, which prohibits a true and full debate.
-
Let her/him speak. Don't keep interrupting.
Sorry, this doesn't apply directly to you, more so others who won't allow a theory to move forward, which prohibits a true and full debate.
The theory can't move forward because the poster admits to know nothing about the case, instead of reading up on it, he/she is expecting the rest of us to do the research for them. I'm bowing out of this convo - so carry on.
-
Let her/him speak. Don't keep interrupting.
Sorry, this doesn't apply directly to you, more so others who won't allow a theory to move forward, which prohibits a true and full debate.
Do you think Bamber drugged and assaulted Sarah AA ?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11533.0
-
Do you think Bamber drugged and assaulted Sarah AA ?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11533.0
He most definitely lied to Julie about not having had ‘intercourse’ with her
Did he ever tell you about Sarah when you were in a relationship with him ?
When did this occur do you know ?
-
Let her/him speak. Don't keep interrupting.
Sorry, this doesn't apply directly to you, more so others who won't allow a theory to move forward, which prohibits a true and full debate.
Why do you think Sarah didn’t go to the police
‘She told detectives in 1985 that she had suddenly found herself in Jeremy’s bedroom with him, ‘on top of me having intercourse’.
The following day, the girl wondered whether she had been drugged. Feeling ‘shocked, angry and abused’ after hearing that Jeremy had told Julie about the episode, she called at the cottage while Jeremy was working.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=zV3WCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=charles+marsden+essex&source=bl&ots=jQISI3Diw_&sig=ACfU3U1i336DTUwUTlMThBe2M3Xntg_NJA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwil_JK6psXpAhW-QhUIHRPOAwkQ6AEwBHoECAQQAQ#v=onepage&q=charles%20marsden%20essex&f=false
or did she ?
-
That's not possible. Why don't you read up on the case - and I don't mean murderpedia.
What it is not possible that Jeremy got a call from his dad around 10:00 PM the night before the murders. Nothing impossible about that.
-
What it is not possible that Jeremy got a call from his dad around 10:00 PM the night before the murders. Nothing impossible about that.
And he then waits 5+ hours before calling police? Mmmm?
-
What it is not possible that Jeremy got a call from his dad around 10:00 PM the night before the murders. Nothing impossible about that.
Because Neville he was still working in the field, bringing in the last trailer of rape seed.
June was talking to her sister at that time
Bamber was on the phone to Julie
You scenario still has Bamber being a liar - but it didn't happen so .....
-
And he then waits 5+ hours before calling police? Mmmm?
Remember I proposed that the late call around 3:20 AM wasn't his father, but just someone Jeremy thought was his father. The caller never identified himself.
-
Remember I proposed that the late call around 3:20 AM wasn't his father, but just someone Jeremy thought was his father. The caller never identified himself.
Then it would have had to be someone close enough to Nevill to be able to mimic his voice well enough to fool Jeremy, who was convinced because he told police his father had called. I suspect that would rule Julie out..........that's assuming she knew which end of a gun bullets were ejected from.
-
Then it would have had to be someone close enough to Nevill to be able to mimic his voice well enough to fool Jeremy, who was convinced because he told police his father had called. I suspect that would rule Julie out..........that's assuming she knew which end of a gun bullets were ejected from.
That's right, the call was to mimic Jeremy's father, it didn't have to come from WHF. Was Jeremy going to go around there when there was possibly someone with a gun waiting for him to turn up?
-
That's right, the call was to mimic Jeremy's father, it didn't have to come from WHF. Was Jeremy going to go around there when there was possibly someone with a gun waiting for him to turn up?
Sorry - and the point of this would be what?
-
That's right, the call was to mimic Jeremy's father, it didn't have to come from WHF. Was Jeremy going to go around there when there was possibly someone with a gun waiting for him to turn up?
In which case -whatever time the alleged call happened- surely all he had to do was dial 999. He had no need to put himself in danger.
-
That's right, the call was to mimic Jeremy's father, it didn't have to come from WHF. Was Jeremy going to go around there when there was possibly someone with a gun waiting for him to turn up?
Where's this going, Rob?
-
Where's this going, Rob?
To a song by The Talking Heads.
-
To a song by The Talking Heads.
Quite. And we all know who the Psycho Killer is in this case too.
-
Sorry - and the point of this would be what?
Maybe someone wanted to wipe out the whole family rather than just the 5 that had already died.
-
In which case -whatever time the alleged call happened- surely all he had to do was dial 999. He had no need to put himself in danger.
Yes if he was innocent, but what happens if there had been a plan and it hadn't gone as planned? I'm perplexed by these murders, and I'm struggling.
Initially the police thought it was a murder-suicide, then later Jeremy was charged, but he continues to deny it. So is there another possibility? To his girlfriend, she claims he said a hitman was hired but the fee seemed unbelievably low, just 2 thousand pounds.
-
Yes if he was innocent, but what happens if there had been a plan and it hadn't gone as planned? I'm perplexed by these murders, and I'm struggling.
Initially the police thought it was a murder-suicide, then later Jeremy was charged, but he continues to deny it. So is there another possibility? To his girlfriend, she claims he said a hitman was hired but the fee seemed unbelievably low, just 2 thousand pounds.
Jeremy denies it so it must be a third party? He dienes it because he doesn't want to spend the rest of his natural in prison.
-
Jeremy denies it so it must be a third party? He dienes it because he doesn't want to spend the rest of his natural in prison.
I have never said there must be a third party. All I'm doing is looking for is the possibility of a third party.
Like Jeremy was to inherit quite a sum of property from the tragic events, but had Jeremy also been killed who would have gained the fortune then? Is there always going to be a beneficiary at the end of the tragedy?
-
Yes if he was innocent, but what happens if there had been a plan and it hadn't gone as planned? I'm perplexed by these murders, and I'm struggling.
Initially the police thought it was a murder-suicide, then later Jeremy was charged, but he continues to deny it. So is there another possibility? To his girlfriend, she claims he said a hitman was hired but the fee seemed unbelievably low, just 2 thousand pounds.
Aww! Are you really struggling *%87 Perhaps you should look at the whole story -the one which are behind the words written which are, after all, only facts.
From the very beginning of the events which we're told transpired, there is only Jeremy's word for any of it. It all comes down to "Jeremy claimed............" There was, we're told, a rather heated family discussion about the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements. We're told there was the suggestion of Sheila taking "a rest" in a Christian convalescent home on the South coast. We're told that Jeremy heard/saw rabbits, loaded/cocked(?) the rifle and went out intent on bunny bashing. To no avail, they'd scarpered. We're told he left the gun out. We're told that at some point he ate a sandwich standing up. We're told that when he left Sheila was sitting quietly. We know from Auntie Pam, that Sheila goes to bed at around 10.30. Jeremy goes home. We have it from Julie that he rang at around 10pm -he timed the call- and then, having slept like a log, is allegedly woken by his "panicked" father's telephone call -he eventually told police "he sounded terrified". Does he react immediately? No. He idles his way through the phone book -ignoring the advert bearing the legend that in an emergency call 999- instead, calling a couple of local police stations which aren't manned 24 hours. He then, before phoning a manned police station, phones Julie again to tell her "something is wrong at the farm" It takes him approximately 20 minutes.
Once at the farm, he gives police chapter and verse of Sheila's mental state, embellishing and embroidering as he goes. She's only just come out of a psych hospital and is soon going back, She's gun competent. Has fired every gun in the house. She's attempted suicide. She's been diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic/depressive schizophrenic and had been treated with ECT. It's likely that not one of the operatives at that scene had ever previously dealt with a possible siege situation. They might have gone in earlier but for Jeremy's covert suggestions that they might possibly be facing a mad woman with a loaded gun who wouldn't think twice about using it. They weren't to know that everyone in that farmhouse was already dead.
So you see, for all the unfolding events which transpired we only have Jeremy's word. It was he who set the approximate timescale of events. Can he be believed? By some, certainly. Not by the jury.
-
Do you think Bamber drugged and assaulted Sarah AA ?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11533.0
I don't think ANYTHING of a sort until I see evidence to prove such a serious accusation.
If there were anything in this, the police would have to investigated fully.
Let's see the evidence first before jumping to any conclusions.
-
I have never said there must be a third party. All I'm doing is looking for is the possibility of a third party.
Like Jeremy was to inherit quite a sum of property from the tragic events, but had Jeremy also been killed who would have gained the fortune then? Is there always going to be a beneficiary at the end of the tragedy?
He wasn't killed.
-
He most definitely lied to Julie about not having had ‘intercourse’ with her
Did he ever tell you about Sarah when you were in a relationship with him ?
When did this occur do you know ?
Ive already told you that we did not discuss people outside of his immediate family or those involved in giving evidence.
-
He wasn't killed.
The same result has been achieved by life imprisonment.
-
Aww! Are you really struggling *%87 Perhaps you should look at the whole story -the one which are behind the words written which are, after all, only facts.
From the very beginning of the events which we're told transpired, there is only Jeremy's word for any of it. It all comes down to "Jeremy claimed............" There was, we're told, a rather heated family discussion about the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements. We're told there was the suggestion of Sheila taking "a rest" in a Christian convalescent home on the South coast. We're told that Jeremy heard/saw rabbits, loaded/cocked(?) the rifle and went out intent on bunny bashing. To no avail, they'd scarpered. We're told he left the gun out. We're told that at some point he ate a sandwich standing up. We're told that when he left Sheila was sitting quietly. We know from Auntie Pam, that Sheila goes to bed at around 10.30. Jeremy goes home. We have it from Julie that he rang at around 10pm -he timed the call- and then, having slept like a log, is allegedly woken by his "panicked" father's telephone call -he eventually told police "he sounded terrified". Does he react immediately? No. He idles his way through the phone book -ignoring the advert bearing the legend that in an emergency call 999- instead, calling a couple of local police stations which aren't manned 24 hours. He then, before phoning a manned police station, phones Julie again to tell her "something is wrong at the farm" It takes him approximately 20 minutes.
Once at the farm, he gives police chapter and verse of Sheila's mental state, embellishing and embroidering as he goes. She's only just come out of a psych hospital and is soon going back, She's gun competent. Has fired every gun in the house. She's attempted suicide. She's been diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic/depressive schizophrenic and had been treated with ECT. It's likely that not one of the operatives at that scene had ever previously dealt with a possible siege situation. They might have gone in earlier but for Jeremy's covert suggestions that they might possibly be facing a mad woman with a loaded gun who wouldn't think twice about using it. They weren't to know that everyone in that farmhouse was already dead.
So you see, for all the unfolding events which transpired we only have Jeremy's word. It was he who set the approximate timescale of events. Can he be believed? By some, certainly. Not by the jury.
Ham sandwich - standing up at the sink
-
Ham sandwich - standing up at the sink
Thank-you, Nicholas.
-
Ham sandwich - standing up at the sink
When asked by police what he did when he got home that night he said he phoned Julie and ‘I probably had a cup of coffee or a coke and possibly a sandwich.’ *&^^&
-
Thank-you, Nicholas.
8((()*/
-
I don't think ANYTHING of a sort until I see evidence to prove such a serious accusation.
If there were anything in this, the police would have to investigated fully.
Let's see the evidence first before jumping to any conclusions.
What are you expecting to see by way of evidence?
-
Aww! Are you really struggling *%87 Perhaps you should look at the whole story -the one which are behind the words written which are, after all, only facts.
From the very beginning of the events which we're told transpired, there is only Jeremy's word for any of it. It all comes down to "Jeremy claimed............" There was, we're told, a rather heated family discussion about the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements. We're told there was the suggestion of Sheila taking "a rest" in a Christian convalescent home on the South coast. We're told that Jeremy heard/saw rabbits, loaded/cocked(?) the rifle and went out intent on bunny bashing. To no avail, they'd scarpered. We're told he left the gun out. We're told that at some point he ate a sandwich standing up. We're told that when he left Sheila was sitting quietly. We know from Auntie Pam, that Sheila goes to bed at around 10.30. Jeremy goes home. We have it from Julie that he rang at around 10pm -he timed the call- and then, having slept like a log, is allegedly woken by his "panicked" father's telephone call -he eventually told police "he sounded terrified". Does he react immediately? No. He idles his way through the phone book -ignoring the advert bearing the legend that in an emergency call 999- instead, calling a couple of local police stations which aren't manned 24 hours. He then, before phoning a manned police station, phones Julie again to tell her "something is wrong at the farm" It takes him approximately 20 minutes.
Once at the farm, he gives police chapter and verse of Sheila's mental state, embellishing and embroidering as he goes. She's only just come out of a psych hospital and is soon going back, She's gun competent. Has fired every gun in the house. She's attempted suicide. She's been diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic/depressive schizophrenic and had been treated with ECT. It's likely that not one of the operatives at that scene had ever previously dealt with a possible siege situation. They might have gone in earlier but for Jeremy's covert suggestions that they might possibly be facing a mad woman with a loaded gun who wouldn't think twice about using it. They weren't to know that everyone in that farmhouse was already dead.
So you see, for all the unfolding events which transpired we only have Jeremy's word. It was he who set the approximate timescale of events. Can he be believed? By some, certainly. Not by the jury.
Was Colin not present when discussing "the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements"?
-
Ive already told you that we did not discuss people outside of his immediate family or those involved in giving evidence.
Don’t recall you saying this
-
Don’t recall you saying this
You are off-topic aren't you?
-
Was Colin not present when discussing "the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements"?
Colin took Sheila and the boys down to Essex on Sunday afternoon and left them there. He was to pick them up -certainly the boys- on Thursday because on Friday, they were all going to Norway to visit his sister. Colin certainly wouldn't have been sitting in on a conversation about alternative arrangements for the boys' care because he and Sheila had joint custody. There's no way he'd have allowed the Bambers any more access than they already had.
-
I have never said there must be a third party. All I'm doing is looking for is the possibility of a third party.
Like Jeremy was to inherit quite a sum of property from the tragic events, but had Jeremy also been killed who would have gained the fortune then? Is there always going to be a beneficiary at the end of the tragedy?
Talk about complicated https://youtu.be/7YppVCocVbI Jeremy Bamber - the money trail.
-
Why do you think Sarah didn’t go to the police
or did she ?
Seemingly Sarah did speak to the police but for some reason they did not follow it up.
Here we have a man. suspected of wiping out a whole family, an actor, a liar is how they described him, and yet, with all this information in front of them they chose not to follow it through.
The question should be, 'why did the police not follow up on the allegations made to them by Sarah?'
a) because she was lying
b) she had told them not to follow this through
c) she was intoxicated and really could not be sure what happened.
It does not state 'she woke up', or 'became alert' or 'came to'....to find Jeremy on top of her....
This story, or version laid out be CAL is all suggestive only and had no proof or sound dialog for the police to support it either.
Therefore, until we find some actual evidence, I'm inclined to believe that two intoxicated people crawled upstairs and had sex.So drunk, they possibly failed to notice somebody was next to them.
I have heard countless 'stories' of women being intoxicated and consenting to sex however so many have blacked out, which is common once the line of inebriation has been crossed.
Nothing untoward has happened its a very common occurrence amongst both men and women when utterly pi**ed.
-
Talk about complicated https://youtu.be/7YppVCocVbI Jeremy Bamber - the money trail.
I believe there was a third party involved and it answers alot more questions than does the idea of Sheila or Jeremy committing the killings.
-
Remember I proposed that the late call around 3:20 AM wasn't his father, but just someone Jeremy thought was his father. The caller never identified himself.
So you’re now suggesting Julie got a train from Lewisham to Essex, sprinted through the dark country unlit lanes, broke into WHF, shot everyone dead including beating Nevill to a pulp exposing his brain, then phoned Jeremy (who’d asked her to kill them), and said “Sheila’s gone berserk. She’s got the gun”. Left the receiver off the hook, showered, changed legged it to the train station and waited until the first train came along at about 6am, meanwhile the Jeremy phoned her from a call box at 5:30am and spoke to her flatmate thinking it was Julie, then the police rang at 7am and spoke to flatmate thinking it was Julie...she then arrived home in Lewisham at about 9am...found the police waiting for her...had no idea why they were outside...they told her they were taking her back to Essex, so she must have thought she was nicked, surely?
That load of nonsense I’ve posted makes as much sense as what you’re asking.
I’m not bothering anymore... I think you’re taking the pee.
-
Seemingly Sarah did speak to the police but for some reason they did not follow it up.
Here we have a man. suspected of wiping out a whole family, an actor, a liar is how they described him, and yet, with all this information in front of them they chose not to follow it through.
The question should be, 'why did the police not follow up on the allegations made to them by Sarah?'
a) because she was lying
b) she had told them not to follow this through
c) she was intoxicated and really could not be sure what happened.
It does not state 'she woke up', or 'became alert' or 'came to'....to find Jeremy on top of her....
This story, or version laid out be CAL is all suggestive only and had no proof or sound dialog for the police to support it either.
Therefore, until we find some actual evidence, I'm inclined to believe that two intoxicated people crawled upstairs and had sex.So drunk, they possibly failed to notice somebody was next to them.
I have heard countless 'stories' of women being intoxicated and consenting to sex however so many have blacked out, which is common once the line of inebriation has been crossed.
Nothing untoward has happened its a very common occurrence amongst both men and women when utterly pi**ed.
The police were different in the 1980s
Unlike now, when a woman went to the police to say she’d been raped, unless it was a violent rape from a total stranger who’d beaten them, left semen etc...the police would often say the case would be hard to prove if the woman knew the man; there was no violence; she hadn’t fought back etc...and as date-rape was unheard of then the police would usually tell the woman they had little grounds to arrest the man as it would be his word against hers.
A similar thing happened to a very close friend of mine, and she wasn’t even drugged; in fact, she was trapped, held against her will, threatened, raped twice, told she’d be punched if she didn’t stop crying as he raped her, and she thought he would murder her once it was over. She actually managed to escape when he went to the bathroom and immediately went to her friend’s house nearby. Naively, she had a bath as she felt so dirty and wanted to rid herself of it. Then her friend took her to the police who told her they could do nothing as she’d washed the evidence away. It was only weeks later someone asked her why the police hadn’t asked her for her underwear, which she’d thrown away in disgust. The police were USELESS.
And I’ve heard similar stories where the woman has had semen evidence, and STILL the police weren’t interested.
So I’m not at all surprised EP didn’t pursue Sarah’s complaint.
-
The police were different in the 1980s
Unlike now, when a woman went to the police to say she’d been raped, unless it was a violent rape from a total stranger who’d beaten them, left semen etc...the police would often say the case would be hard to prove if the woman knew the man; there was no violence; she hadn’t fought back etc...and as date-rape was unheard of then the police would usually tell the woman they had little grounds to arrest the man as it would be his word against hers.
A similar thing happened to a very close friend of mine, and she wasn’t even drugged; in fact, she was trapped, held against her will, threatened, raped twice, told she’d be punched if she didn’t stop crying as he raped her, and she thought he would murder her once it was over. She actually managed to escape when he went to the bathroom and immediately went to her friend’s house nearby. Naively, she had a bath as she felt so dirty and wanted to rid herself of it. Then her friend took her to the police who told her they could do nothing as she’d washed the evidence away. It was only weeks later someone asked her why the police hadn’t asked her for her underwear, which she’d thrown away in disgust. The police were USELESS.
And I’ve heard similar stories where the woman has had semen evidence, and STILL the police weren’t interested.
So I’m not at all surprised EP didn’t pursue Sarah’s complaint.
They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".
-
They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".
It wasn't just men who judged women, other women did too. Look at how June Bamber refused to buy her daughter a white wedding dress because she was pregnant. That was definitely a judgement about her daughter's behaviour.
-
If JB sexually assaulted Sarah I think it would have come out.
-
They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".
In a word — yes.
It was her fault for being stupid: now go away.
Disgraceful!
-
If JB sexually assaulted Sarah I think it would have come out.
It did
-
It did
In terms of the authorities getting involved.
EP were sniffing around JB's circle for dirt.
-
It wasn't just men who judged women, other women did too. Look at how June Bamber refused to buy her daughter a white wedding dress because she was pregnant. That was definitely a judgement about her daughter's behaviour.
June's was, though, purely religious bias. One might turn a blind eye to premarital sex providing the 'evidence' of it wasn't visible for all to see. For men, it was more about male dominance with a bit of misogyny thrown into the mix.
-
So you’re now suggesting Julie got a train from Lewisham to Essex, sprinted through the dark country unlit lanes, broke into WHF, shot everyone dead including beating Nevill to a pulp exposing his brain, then phoned Jeremy (who’d asked her to kill them), and said “Sheila’s gone berserk. She’s got the gun”. Left the receiver off the hook, showered, changed legged it to the train station and waited until the first train came along at about 6am, meanwhile the Jeremy phoned her from a call box at 5:30am and spoke to her flatmate thinking it was Julie, then the police rang at 7am and spoke to flatmate thinking it was Julie...she then arrived home in Lewisham at about 9am...found the police waiting for her...had no idea why they were outside...they told her they were taking her back to Essex, so she must have thought she was nicked, surely?
That load of nonsense I’ve posted makes as much sense as what you’re asking.
I’m not bothering anymore... I think you’re taking the pee.
Is there no other way?
-
If JB sexually assaulted Sarah I think it would have come out.
It did
It did indeed
We don’t know if the girl went to the police in 1984 (Or if she’s been to the police since) nor do we know what action the police may or may not have taken around the time they learned of her disclosure
It’s one of those ‘incidents’ we may not know more about unless the girl in question chooses to speak out
-
It did indeed
We don’t know if the girl went to the police in 1984 (Or if she’s been to the police since) nor do we know what action the police may or may not have taken around the time they learned of her disclosure
It’s one of those ‘incidents’ we may not know more about unless the girl in question chooses to speak out
In what way did it come out?
-
In terms of the authorities getting involved.
EP were sniffing around JB's circle for dirt.
What appears to have happened Holly is that Essex police interviewed Julie at length and through her numerous disclosures, especially regarding her relationship with Bamber - they were able to make further enquiries in order to check out the validity of each disclosure
-
What appears to have happened Holly is that Essex police interviewed Julie at length and through her numerous disclosures, especially regarding her relationship with Bamber - they were able to make further enquiries in order to check out the validity of each disclosure
I've read JM's version of events re Sarah but she makes no mention of JB sexually assaulting Sarah.
-
I've read JM's version of events re Sarah but she makes no mention of JB sexually assaulting Sarah.
We’ve already been over this Holly
-
I've read JM's version of events re Sarah but she makes no mention of JB sexually assaulting Sarah.
It’s not Julie the ‘drugging and sexual assault‘ story relates to - it’s Sarah *&^^&
-
It’s not Julie the ‘drugging and sexual assault‘ story relates to - it’s Sarah *&^^&
What is Sarah's surname please?
-
What is Sarah's surname please?
Suspect Bamber, his solicitor & campaign team would know the answer to your question (Would possibly be found on her witness statement)
I’ve no idea
-
Was Colin not present when discussing "the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements"?
That was what JB claimed was said around the kitchen table, but as he lies, and wanted to give a reason for why maybe Sheila had gone “berserk”, you need to discard that. Besides, Colin had custody of the children so it wasn’t up to June or Nevill to decide where the twins should go.
That’s just a lie of his.
-
In terms of the authorities getting involved.
EP were sniffing around JB's circle for dirt.
He was under suspicion, that’s why
And they got dirt on him, too
That’s how police and intelligence works
-
That was what JB claimed was said around the kitchen table, but as he lies, and wanted to give a reason for why maybe Sheila had gone “berserk”, you need to discard that. Besides, Colin had custody of the children so it wasn’t up to June or Nevill to decide where the twins should go.
That’s just a lie of his.
He may have been a liar, but we don't know whether or not he lied about this.
-
June's was, though, purely religious bias. One might turn a blind eye to premarital sex providing the 'evidence' of it wasn't visible for all to see. For men, it was more about male dominance with a bit of misogyny thrown into the mix.
Slightly off-topic, but if Julie was this horrid, money-orientated girl some people claim, why didn’t she accept June’s offer to buy her a flat rather than live with Jeremy at Goldhanger?
What was stopping her accepting it then staying at Jeremy’s without June’s knowledge? After all, Julie only went there at weekends and term holidays; it would’ve been easy to make out she was living in the flat June bought her...I bet when she told Jeremy what June had said he discouraged her from accepting it if she had been inclined, as he had no intention of being tied to her, and that money would have been a fair chunk of the inheritance he was planning on getting his paws on.
-
Is there no other way?
Rollerblades, perhaps...
-
Slightly off-topic, but if Julie was this horrid, money-orientated girl some people claim, why didn’t she accept June’s offer to buy her a flat rather than live with Jeremy at Goldhanger?
What was stopping her accepting it then staying at Jeremy’s without June’s knowledge? After all, Julie only went there at weekends and term holidays; it would’ve been easy to make out she was living in the flat June bought her...I bet when she told Jeremy what June had said he discouraged her from accepting it if she had been inclined, as he had no intention of being tied to her, and that money would have been a fair chunk of the inheritance he was planning on getting his paws on.
You raise excellent points.
-
He was under suspicion, that’s why
And they got dirt on him, too
That’s how police and intelligence works
The police and intelligence are not words I would use in the same sentence.
NB is on record referring to EP as 'Dad's Army'.
You mean like poor Chris Jefferies and countless other entirely law abiding people who suffer at the hands of the tabloids because they're too damn lazy to do any proper investigating of the facts.
-
It’s not Julie the ‘drugging and sexual assault‘ story relates to - it’s Sarah *&^^&
Where's Sarah's own account?
-
June's was, though, purely religious bias. One might turn a blind eye to premarital sex providing the 'evidence' of it wasn't visible for all to see. For men, it was more about male dominance with a bit of misogyny thrown into the mix.
I think June didn't want people gossiping about her and her family. Reputation is what mattered to her and going to Church was part of that.
-
I think June didn't want people gossiping about her and her family. Reputation is what mattered to her and going to Church was part of that.
I believe it went back to a childhood in which she learned that not only was God judging, everyone else was watching.
-
I think June didn't want people gossiping about her and her family. Reputation is what mattered to her and going to Church was part of that.
But Where's the evidence June actually offered to buy JM, a property in an attempt to prevent JM stsying overnight?
-
He may have been a liar, but we don't know whether or not he lied about this.
Logic should tell you, MrsWah, that June and Nevill would never have even mentioned having the twins adopted or fostered. Reasons why not:
Colin had custody
It wasn’t up to June or Nevill who had custody of the boys
June would have felt huge shame having her grandchildren fostered out/adopted
June and Nevill adored the grandchildren so why would they want them removed from the family?
Colin would never have agreed
Sheila would never have agreed
Sheila had joint custody
The twins would have been traumatised
June and Nevill had enough money to employ nannies, au pairs, housekeepers...so no need for fostering/adoption
The twins had a home in London with Sheila and with Colin
Had the worst happened and neither Sheila or Colin could care for the twins (which wasn’t the case — Colin was an excellent father who had the support of his parents’ too, who also adored the boys) June and Nevill would’ve loved to have had the twins living with them
The whole thing is utter nonsense
-
But Where's the evidence June actually offered to buy JM, a property in an attempt to prevent JM stsying overnight?
What would you describe as being evidence of it, Holly? It's unlikely she'd have written to her. It was too embryonic a suggestion for her to have consulted a solicitor. She MAY have written her thought in a diary. She may have spoken to Nevill, but we'll never know. More likely she'd have spoken to God.
-
The police and intelligence are not words I would use in the same sentence.
NB is on record referring to EP as 'Dad's Army'.
You mean like poor Chris Jefferies and countless other entirely law abiding people who suffer at the hands of the tabloids because they're too damn lazy to do any proper investigating of the facts.
Do we know from whom came the information that Nevill referred to EP as "Dads' Army"
-
The police and intelligence are not words I would use in the same sentence.
NB is on record referring to EP as 'Dad's Army'.
You mean like poor Chris Jefferies and countless other entirely law abiding people who suffer at the hands of the tabloids because they're too damn lazy to do any proper investigating of the facts.
I’ve never said that the police team working under Taff Jones were good, although DS Jones was definitely bright.
I know that many police back then were bent and dishonest, and although things have changed they haven’t changed for the better. There’s less corruption, but many of the police today as a whole are inept and dense.
-
Logic should tell you, MrsWah, that June and Nevill would never have even mentioned having the twins adopted or fostered. Reasons why not:
Colin had custody
It wasn’t up to June or Nevill who had custody of the boys
June would have felt huge shame having her grandchildren fostered out/adopted
June and Nevill adored the grandchildren so why would they want them removed from the family?
Colin would never have agreed
Sheila would never have agreed
Sheila had joint custody
The twins would have been traumatised
June and Nevill had enough money to employ nannies, au pairs, housekeepers...so no need for fostering/adoption
The twins had a home in London with Sheila and with Colin
Had the worst happened and neither Sheila or Colin could care for the twins (which wasn’t the case — Colin was an excellent father who had the support of his parents’ too, who also adored the boys) June and Nevill would’ve loved to have had the twins living with them
The whole thing is utter nonsense
I accept your reasoning, but we still don't know (and cannot know) whether the argument took place. The only witness still alive is Jeremy, and we don't know whether or not he told the truth.
-
Logic should tell you, MrsWah, that June and Nevill would never have even mentioned having the twins adopted or fostered. Reasons why not:
Colin had custody
It wasn’t up to June or Nevill who had custody of the boys
June would have felt huge shame having her grandchildren fostered out/adopted
June and Nevill adored the grandchildren so why would they want them removed from the family?
Colin would never have agreed
Sheila would never have agreed
Sheila had joint custody
The twins would have been traumatised
June and Nevill had enough money to employ nannies, au pairs, housekeepers...so no need for fostering/adoption
The twins had a home in London with Sheila and with Colin
Had the worst happened and neither Sheila or Colin could care for the twins (which wasn’t the case — Colin was an excellent father who had the support of his parents’ too, who also adored the boys) June and Nevill would’ve loved to have had the twins living with them
The whole thing is utter nonsense
If it is utter nonsense why did June mention to CC's mother her concerns that because of SC's illness the twins may have placed in foster care?
-
If it is utter nonsense why did June mention to CC's mother her concerns that because of SC's illness the twins may have placed in foster care?
Could it be that June may not have recognised boundaries, in that they were CC’s & SC’s children first and foremost
-
Could it be that June may not have recognised boundaries, in that they were CC’s & SC’s children first and foremost
I'm inclined to agree .
-
If it is utter nonsense why did June mention to CC's mother her concerns that because of SC's illness the twins may have placed in foster care?
As we're given to believe June's mental state was fragile, perhaps some of her fears became close to hysteria?
-
Could it be that June may not have recognised boundaries, in that they were CC’s & SC’s children first and foremost
That's entirely reasonable and acceptable.
-
As we're given to believe June's mental state was fragile, perhaps some of her fears became close to hysteria?
Or Hypervigilance
-
Or Hypervigilance
That, too!!
-
If it is utter nonsense why did June mention to CC's mother her concerns that because of SC's illness the twins may have placed in foster care?
All that reiterates is how fearful June was that she didn’t want the twins put into care
So that blows Jeremy’s lie out the water...
-
But Where's the evidence June actually offered to buy JM, a property in an attempt to prevent JM stsying overnight?
I think June didn't want people gossiping about her and her family. Reputation is what mattered to her and going to Church was part of that.
What would you describe as being evidence of it, Holly? It's unlikely she'd have written to her. It was too embryonic a suggestion for her to have consulted a solicitor. She MAY have written her thought in a diary. She may have spoken to Nevill, but we'll never know. More likely she'd have spoken to God.
re above...
-
re above...
Yes I'm aware of that but why would June offer to buy JM a London pad when she had a room in a shared house in London where JB spent some weekday nights?
-
Yes I'm aware of that but why would June offer to buy JM a London pad when she had a room in a shared house in London where JB spent some weekday nights?
For the same reason she refused to allow Sheila to marry locally. So his sexual activities wouldn't be talked about locally. She couldn't tell him he couldn't sleep with her, but she could try to organize it so it wasn't done under her nose.
-
For the same reason she refused to allow Sheila to marry locally. So his sexual activities wouldn't be talked about locally. She couldn't tell him he couldn't sleep with her, but she could try to organize it so it wasn't done under her nose.
But why offer to buy JM a London pad when they already had somewhere in the big smoke for sex.
-
Yes I'm aware of that but why would June offer to buy JM a London pad when she had a room in a shared house in London where JB spent some weekday nights?
Because it was a freebie incentive and investment too. Just think, no mortgage.
-
But why offer to buy JM a London pad when they already had somewhere in the big smoke for sex.
A little carrot? A tiny bit of guilty conscience, perhaps? MAYBE it was more about Jeremy, than Julie, who found herself in the middle of mother/son conflict?
-
Because it was a freebie incentive and investment too. Just think, no mortgage.
Maybe no mortgage for JM but June had already taken out a mortgage to purchase SC's pad and more recently to purchase the land at Little Renters.
-
A little carrot? A tiny bit of guilty conscience, perhaps? MAYBE it was more about Jeremy, than Julie, who found herself in the middle of mother/son conflict?
It doesn't add up that June was going to buy JB's girlfriend a pad in London with or without a mortgage. Especially when she might well have guessed the relationship would fizzle out. Why not buy a pad in London in her own name allowing JB to use?
-
For the same reason she refused to allow Sheila to marry locally. So his sexual activities wouldn't be talked about locally. She couldn't tell him he couldn't sleep with her, but she could try to organize it so it wasn't done under her nose.
To my mind it shows June was unsuitable to adopt if she had such an aversion to her adult adopted children having sexual relationships at an age appropriate time during the mid 80's.
-
It doesn't add up that June was going to buy JB's girlfriend a pad in London with or without a mortgage. Especially when she might well have guessed the relationship would fizzle out. Why not buy a pad in London in her own name allowing JB to use?
But she was desperate enough to get rid of her to make her a very generous offer? It's very much at odds with Jeremy breaking of, what must have been, the shortest engagement in history because June and Nevill approved.
-
It doesn't add up that June was going to buy JB's girlfriend a pad in London with or without a mortgage. Especially when she might well have guessed the relationship would fizzle out. Why not buy a pad in London in her own name allowing JB to use?
It doesn't add up for you but then you're talking about someone you don't know so it's impossible to second guess her.
-
To my mind it shows June was unsuitable to adopt if she had such an aversion to her adult adopted children having sexual relationships at an age appropriate time during the mid 80's.
What should she have done, arranged orgies - would that make her more acceptable?
-
To my mind it shows June was unsuitable to adopt if she had such an aversion to her adult adopted children having sexual relationships at an age appropriate time during the mid 80's.
I can give you many reasons why someone someone shouldn't be allowed to adopt, but I don't think an aversion to their adult children's sex lives would be one of them.
-
That was what JB claimed was said around the kitchen table, but as he lies, and wanted to give a reason for why maybe Sheila had gone “berserk”, you need to discard that. Besides, Colin had custody of the children so it wasn’t up to June or Nevill to decide where the twins should go.
That’s just a lie of his.
As you may know I'm in New Zealand, so I haven't been able to join the discussion for the last 8 hours.
The main document I've been working with is the "Judgment As Approved by the Court" I'm not sure what it is called but it is found at https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf
It outlines the first case against Jeremy and details why his appeal fails. In the document there are references to two phone calls made to WHF earlier the evening that make others aware that things are not going smoothly that evening.
So this is not just a lie created by Jeremy Bamber as you have opinioned.
-
Rollerblades, perhaps...
Or a car .....
-
Or a car .....
More likely a car, given the terrain.
-
Logic should tell you, MrsWah, that June and Nevill would never have even mentioned having the twins adopted or fostered. Reasons why not:
Colin had custody
It wasn’t up to June or Nevill who had custody of the boys
June would have felt huge shame having her grandchildren fostered out/adopted
June and Nevill adored the grandchildren so why would they want them removed from the family?
Colin would never have agreed
Sheila would never have agreed
Sheila had joint custody
The twins would have been traumatised
June and Nevill had enough money to employ nannies, au pairs, housekeepers...so no need for fostering/adoption
The twins had a home in London with Sheila and with Colin
Had the worst happened and neither Sheila or Colin could care for the twins (which wasn’t the case — Colin was an excellent father who had the support of his parents’ too, who also adored the boys) June and Nevill would’ve loved to have had the twins living with them
The whole thing is utter nonsense
It may be nonsense but we are getting the picture and it involves a mother who has been diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and who still has marijuana in her system, a drug known to intensify paranoia.
-
The police and intelligence are not words I would use in the same sentence.
NB is on record referring to EP as 'Dad's Army'.
You mean like poor Chris Jefferies and countless other entirely law abiding people who suffer at the hands of the tabloids because they're too damn lazy to do any proper investigating of the facts.
And yet you brought up the name of an innocent murder victim who suffered a similar fate - as did her family
-
All that reiterates is how fearful June was that she didn’t want the twins put into care
So that blows Jeremy’s lie out the water...
In your opinion may be.
-
As you may know I'm in New Zealand, so I haven't been able to join the discussion for the last 8 hours.
The main document I've been working with is the "Judgment As Approved by the Court" I'm not sure what it is called but it is found at https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf
It outlines the first case against Jeremy and details why his appeal fails. In the document there are references to two phone calls made to WHF earlier the evening that make others aware that things are not going smoothly that evening.
So this is not just a lie created by Jeremy Bamber as you have opinioned.
Is that the same HENRIQUES who prosecuted Shipman one wonders.
-
Is that the same HENRIQUES who prosecuted Shipman one wonders.
"LORD JUSTICE KAY
MR JUSTICE WRIGHT
and
MR JUSTICE HENRIQUES"
I don't know TBH. But most likely I would say.
-
Is that the same HENRIQUES who prosecuted Shipman one wonders.
Yes, they're pushing his new book which also contains a bit on Bamber...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8349495/How-sent-Dr-Death-Lawyer-Richard-Henriques-recalls-battle-court-Harold-Shipman.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8349495/How-sent-Dr-Death-Lawyer-Richard-Henriques-recalls-battle-court-Harold-Shipman.html)
-
It doesn't add up for you but then you're talking about someone you don't know so it's impossible to second guess her.
What evidence exists that June offered to buy JM. A pad?
-
As you may know I'm in New Zealand, so I haven't been able to join the discussion for the last 8 hours.
The main document I've been working with is the "Judgment As Approved by the Court" I'm not sure what it is called but it is found at https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf
It outlines the first case against Jeremy and details why his appeal fails. In the document there are references to two phone calls made to WHF earlier the evening that make others aware that things are not going smoothly that evening.
So this is not just a lie created by Jeremy Bamber as you have opinioned.
It is the 2002 appeal document - what phone calls?
-
What should she have done, arranged orgies - would that make her more acceptable?
I think it would have been more acceptable for her to accept the social mores of the day which involved those over the age of consent having sexual relationships outside of marriage.
If June had such an aversion to this its difficult to see how she was able to view her adopted children in a positive light who themselves were the product of sex outside marriage.
-
I think it would have been more acceptable for her to accept the social mores of the day which involved those over the age of consent having sexual relationships outside of marriage.
If June had such an aversion to this its difficult to see how she was able to view her adopted children in a positive light who themselves were the product of sex outside marriage.
Neither of them took much notice - she hardly tied them down.
-
It is the 2002 appeal document - what phone calls?
The two phone calls:
"23. Barbara Wilson, the farm secretary telephoned the farmhouse at 9.30 p.m. and spoke to
Nevill Bamber. He was not cheerful and Mrs Wilson thought she had interrupted an
argument. In evidence she described Nevill as abrupt, very impatient and very short. Pamela
Boutflour, June Bamber’s sister also telephoned the house that evening at about 10 p.m. She
spoke first with Sheila Caffell who was quiet and then to her sister. Mrs Boutflour noted
nothing unusual in her sister’s mood or in their conversation."
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 5.
-
Could it be that June may not have recognised boundaries, in that they were CC’s & SC’s children first and foremost
She ignored CC's wishes that she should stop making the boys pray all the time.
-
The two phone calls:
"23. Barbara Wilson, the farm secretary telephoned the farmhouse at 9.30 p.m. and spoke to
Nevill Bamber. He was not cheerful and Mrs Wilson thought she had interrupted an
argument. In evidence she described Nevill as abrupt, very impatient and very short. Pamela
Boutflour, June Bamber’s sister also telephoned the house that evening at about 10 p.m. She
spoke first with Sheila Caffell who was quiet and then to her sister. Mrs Boutflour noted
nothing unusual in her sister’s mood or in their conversation."
https://murderpedia.org/male.B/images/bamber_jeremy/20011745.pdf page 5.
Oh I already know about those calls but what's that got to do with Bamber?
-
Oh I already know about those calls but what's that got to do with Bamber?
Well work out if JB was there when these calls were made.
-
Well work out if JB was there when these calls were made.
I don't need to work it out - I already know 8((()*/
-
I don't need to work it out - I already know 8((()*/
Tell me the answer then Caro.
-
Tell me the answer then Caro.
Ite answer is out there just waiting to be discovered! 8(>((
-
Ite answer is out there just waiting to be discovered! 8(>((
I think all evidence of this has all been forgotten over the years.
-
I think all evidence of this has all been forgotten over the years.
No, it hasn't.
-
I think all evidence of this has all been forgotten over the years.
I do think you have a point here. We are debating something that happened 35 years ago. In addition, a lot of evidence was, apparently, destroyed in 1996. Some witnesses have died. The books on the case were written years afterwards. Most (not all) people who have a view about the guilt/innocence of JB know very little about him, never knew his family, and are relying on what they read.
Even most of the original witness statements were written a month after the event, so are possibly less reliable than if they had been written in the week after the murders.
I don't agree that "all evidence" has been forgotten, but I don't doubt that quite a lot has.
-
I do think you have a point here. We are debating something that happened 35 years ago. In addition, a lot of evidence was, apparently, destroyed in 1996. Some witnesses have died. The books on the case were written years afterwards. Most (not all) people who have a view about the guilt/innocence of JB know very little about him, never knew his family, and are relying on what they read.
Even most of the original witness statements were written a month after the event, so are possibly less reliable than if they had been written in the week after the murders.
I don't agree that "all evidence" has been forgotten, but I don't doubt that quite a lot has.
And that, Mrswah, is without the myths and legends which have grown up around the case. Whilst great lengths are gone to to ensure that ONLY those 'facts' accompanied by cites, are posted, it eliminates those personal experiences which aren't, and not ALL of these are opposers, ie my cousin's co in-law, a vicar, doesn't believe he's guilty. Although few and far between, I know others who have doubts about his guilt. It's also an absolute that MANY of those, are no longer with us, who knew the Bambers well. Time takes an inevitable toll.
From the off, a local crime means local information will be gleaned. What's given is likely to be coloured by personal experience, which is fair enough when one considers that an suspect's behaviour is likely to have differed from person to person, ergo, each of their character assessments will be different.
I'm inclined to agree that witness statements created a month after the event maybe less reliable than those written immediately, but within that month, the whole case was turned on it's head, and had to be reassessed from an entirely different perspective.
-
No, it hasn't.
I think you need to come forth with your knowledge. Are you implying there were others present early in the evening before Jeremy says he returned home?
I suppose there could well be some farmworkers who have some knowledge about what happened early evening.
-
I think you need to come forth with your knowledge. Are you implying there were others present early in the evening before Jeremy says he returned home?
I suppose there could well be some farmworkers who have some knowledge about what happened early evening.
Certainly there were some/was one who saw Jeremy prior to the door being closed on whatever family activity was going on, and the nearest neighbours, the Folkes, say they heard Jeremy drive off at whatever time it was that he left WHF. Until the story unfolded, it had been a day like any other day during harvest.
-
I think you need to come forth with your knowledge. Are you implying there were others present early in the evening before Jeremy says he returned home?
I suppose there could well be some farmworkers who have some knowledge about what happened early evening.
No I don't, I'm not doing your research for you.
-
I think you need to come forth with your knowledge. Are you implying there were others present early in the evening before Jeremy says he returned home?
I suppose there could well be some farmworkers who have some knowledge about what happened early evening.
Here is a clue for me to work on.
"On Tuesday, August 6, according to Jeremy and another relative, Nevill and June suggested to Sheila that the twins should be put into foster homes." from article "Is Bambi's killer innocent? by Bob Woffinden 19th May 2007" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1012.0
Does that mean both Jeremy and another relative were present when June made that suggestion?
-
Here is a clue for me to work on.
"On Tuesday, August 6, according to Jeremy and another relative, Nevill and June suggested to Sheila that the twins should be put into foster homes." from article "Is Bambi's killer innocent? by Bob Woffinden 19th May 2007" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1012.0
Does that mean both Jeremy and another relative were present when June made that suggestion?
There was no 'other relative' present.
-
There was no 'other relative' present.
Well that is how I read the article. How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?
-
Well that is how I read the article. How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?
Refer to what Colin says. He remarks that no one in the family seemed to be aware of Sheila's mental health problems. Why would they? She didn't live locally. June didn't share problems. So why on earth would they have been aware of a conversation which can't be validated?
-
Refer to what Colin says. He remarks that no one in the family seemed to be aware of Sheila's mental health problems. Why would they? She didn't live locally. June didn't share problems. So why on earth would they have been aware of a conversation which can't be validated?
Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys. I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.
-
Well that is how I read the article. How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?
Then read it again.
-
Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys. I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.
Who are you to think they weren't?
-
Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys. I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.
There are authors and authors. Some write facts. Others would be better if they stuck to writing novels. One author, writing years after the event, appears to be sitting round the kitchen table with them during the "last supper". She speaks as if she's a family friend. She'd never met them.
-
Who are you to think they weren't?
Only from the article.
-
Only from the article.
Read Jeremy's witness statement.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5632.msg200222#msg200222
-
Read Jeremy's witness statement.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5632.msg200222#msg200222
From Jeremy's statement he (and Nevill) are not there continuously so there is no reason to assume someone else didn't turn up while he wasn't present. Or that there was someone else present that he doesn't mention.
-
From Jeremy's statement he (and Nevill) are not there continuously so there is no reason to assume someone else didn't turn up while he wasn't present. Or that there was someone else present that he doesn't mention.
So he just allowed himself to be charged with murder when there was another person who could have spoken on his behalf? You'l have to come up with something more plausible than that.
-
So he just allowed himself to be charged with murder when there was another person who could have spoken on his behalf? You'l have to come up with something more plausible than that.
These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August. Weeks before he was being charged with murder. I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.
I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in. He is not there continuously.
-
These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August. Weeks before he was being charged with murder. I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.
I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in. He is not there continuously.
So had there been anyone else there, it would have been fresh in his mind. Presumably this 'person' would have required feeding. Jeremy says nothing of an extra place being set. Nor does he mention any sort of tension in the house -not even Sheila, who was useful to take the blame for his crimes- which would have been useful in his defence.
-
These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August. Weeks before he was being charged with murder. I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.
I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in. He is not there continuously.
There was no other person, because if there was, we would know who it was.
-
So had there been anyone else there, it would have been fresh in his mind. Presumably this 'person' would have required feeding. Jeremy says nothing of an extra place being set. Nor does he mention any sort of tension in the house -not even Sheila, who was useful to take the blame for his crimes- which would have been useful in his defence.
If he was unaware of someone else turning up while he is out driving tractors or whatever they do to get the harvest in, obviously he is taking any notice of finer details like an "extra place being set".
These statements (7th and 8th) aren't being made in his defence.
-
If he was unaware of someone else turning up while he is out driving tractors or whatever they do to get the harvest in, obviously he is taking any notice of finer details like an "extra place being set".
These statements (7th and 8th) aren't being made in his defence.
If someone else was present and the author of the article knew who they were and we would all know who it was. There was no one else.
I have no idea what your last sentence means.
-
If someone else was present and the author of the article knew who they were and we would all know who it was. There was no one else.
I have no idea what your last sentence means.
So are you claiming the author made a mistake?
"These statements (7th and 8th) aren't being made in his defense." Jeremy has not been charged with murder at that stage.
-
So are you claiming the author made a mistake?
"These statements (7th and 8th) aren't being made in his defense." Jeremy has not been charged with murder at that stage.
That's exactly what I am saying and so what about the statements?
-
That's exactly what I am saying and so what about the statements?
I can't fault those statements. He does say the gun didn't have a silencer on it at the time of "shooting the rabbits".
Do you accept that as truthful?
-
I think all evidence of this has all been forgotten over the years.
Is that why you don’t know what happened?
You’ve forgotten everything?
Or you never knew anything in the beginning?
-
Is that why you don’t know what happened?
You’ve forgotten everything?
Or you never anything in the beginning?
You know the answer to that.