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: John on July 09, 2013, 11:01:31 AM

Title: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: John on July 09, 2013, 11:01:31 AM
Killers' life terms 'breached their human rights'

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled the whole life tariffs given to murderer Jeremy Bamber and two other killers breached their human
rights.

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/68629000/jpg/_68629878_composite_crime464.jpg)

The appeal was brought by three killers - Jeremy Bamber (L),
Douglas Vinter (C) and Peter Moore.


The court ruled there had to be both a possibility of release and review to be compatible with their human rights.

However it said this did not mean there was "any prospect of imminent release".

Bamber, along with Peter Moore and Douglas Vinter, argued their sentences were "inhuman" and they should have the right to a review.

The three men had lost a previous legal battle at the European court and now its grand chamber has had a final say.

BBC legal affairs correspondent Clive Coleman said the grand chamber's decision was convincing, in that they ruled by 16-1.

He said the move was significant both legally and politically, and it would now have to be considered by the UK government.

BBC home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani said it would probably require Parliament to create a system to allow the Parole Board to review whole life orders.

Read more... (http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23230419)
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: tonyb on July 09, 2013, 12:54:19 PM
got to be good news for the "he's guilty" side. no hope of parole unless he confesses. he's in a catch 22.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: goatboy on July 09, 2013, 07:08:12 PM
A counter argument of course is that you forfeit your rights to be treated humanely when you choose to take another person's life. I don't think many people have a problem with life imprisonment meaning life.

Though it is interesting that the media seems to imply it is a victory for Bamber when as Tony says, in reality if the ECHR's decision is heeded by the UK government (and there is no guarantee it will be) you will need to prove you have been rehabilitated by showing remorse and that your character has changed. Bamber would have to admit his killings first. The fact is Bamber would much rather stay in prison than get out on a technicality or parole because he wants money and he would only have the chance to get this if his conviction is overturned.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Rachel Granada on July 09, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
At risk of being unpopular, I have to say that I agree with this decision.  In my opinion it is inhuman to deprive anyone of hope.
But it doesn't mean that Jeremy Bamber is likely to be released shortly.

And as far as The European Court is concerned, and their right to rule on British Law, I cannot in all conscience accept their right to grant me The Winter Fuel Allowance of which I have been deprived for thirteen years, and then question their right to rule on humanity.
The Winter Fuel Allowance is a measly £200 a year, but very important to me, as no doubt Hope is to Jeremy Bamber, and others.

Hi Eleanor, I agree with you that hope is very important.  However, I disagree that Bamber should ever have any hope of getting out. Not only did he cold-bloodedly execute his family, he also tried to blame it on poor Sheila, who had been very poorly with a psychiatric illness.  He tried to use Sheila's illness to sully her memory. He also tried to sell semi-nude pictures of Sheila after her death.

 I also believe that if he is ever released he could be a danger to remaining family members.

He is a dangerous monster in my opinion. 
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Eleanor on July 09, 2013, 07:21:46 PM
A counter argument of course is that you forfeit your rights to be treated humanely when you choose to take another person's life. I don't think many people have a problem with life imprisonment meaning life.

Though it is interesting that the media seems to imply it is a victory for Bamber when as Tony says, in reality if the ECHR's decision is heeded by the UK government (and there is no guarantee it will be) you will need to prove you have been rehabilitated by showing remorse and that your character has changed. Bamber would have to admit his killings first. The fact is Bamber would much rather stay in prison than get out on a technicality or parole because he wants money and he would only have the chance to get this if his conviction is overturned.

So you see, this ruling is not that dire.  He can go on hoping for the rest of his life as far as I am concerned.  It isn't just about him.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 07:22:26 PM
A counter argument of course is that you forfeit your rights to be treated humanely when you choose to take another person's life. I don't think many people have a problem with life imprisonment meaning life.

Though it is interesting that the media seems to imply it is a victory for Bamber when as Tony says, in reality if the ECHR's decision is heeded by the UK government (and there is no guarantee it will be) you will need to prove you have been rehabilitated by showing remorse and that your character has changed. Bamber would have to admit his killings first. The fact is Bamber would much rather stay in prison than get out on a technicality or parole because he wants money and he would only have the chance to get this if his conviction is overturned.
Agreed, I do not see the judgment as a victory for murderers or a defeat for the UK Government.  I see it as entirely an issue of an occasional review to see if prison "has worked" and the Prisoner, no matter what their crimes, has made some progress.  If not leave them there.  The European Court takes a wider perspective than just a few murderers in denial but also looks at the wider issue of people imprisoned for "political" crimes or "psychiatric" crimes.  A few years ago it was a crime to be "Gay" and certainly political prisoners were held in some countries for several decades without any form of appeal.  They are looking at the principle rather than any single case.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 07:28:50 PM
A counter argument of course is that you forfeit your rights to be treated humanely when you choose to take another person's life. I don't think many people have a problem with life imprisonment meaning life.

Though it is interesting that the media seems to imply it is a victory for Bamber when as Tony says, in reality if the ECHR's decision is heeded by the UK government (and there is no guarantee it will be) you will need to prove you have been rehabilitated by showing remorse and that your character has changed. Bamber would have to admit his killings first. The fact is Bamber would much rather stay in prison than get out on a technicality or parole because he wants money and he would only have the chance to get this if his conviction is overturned.
Except that he would never get compensation on a technicality.  To be compensated you have to demonstrate that you were "fitted up" like Stephan Kizko and several famous "Irish cases" rather than there was a typo on your charge sheet.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 07:43:07 PM
Hi Eleanor, I agree with you that hope is very important.  However, I disagree that Bamber should ever have any hope of getting out. Not only did he cold-bloodedly execute his family, he also tried to blame it on poor Sheila, who had been very poorly with a psychiatric illness.  He tried to use Sheila's illness to sully her memory. He also tried to sell semi-nude pictures of Sheila after her death.

 I also believe that if he is ever released he could be a danger to remaining family members.

He is a dangerous monster in my opinion.
I usually do not say this but I agree with every word you say Rachel.  Not only this but Bambers few supporters have continued to attack the remaining family and repeatedly published horrific pictures of Sheila and denigrate her in every way possible over the last 27 years.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: jackiepreece on July 09, 2013, 07:44:48 PM
It's good news for me as I have never been CONVINCED of Jeremy's guilt.  It there is a chance of him getting out of prison I don't believe he will ever give up fighting to prove his innocence.
We might all get closer to knowing what really happened that night.  Time will tell.  If I was convinced of Jeremy's guilt I still believe he should have a full life tarrif
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Rachel Granada on July 09, 2013, 08:03:03 PM
I usually do not say this but I agree with every word you say Rachel.  Not only this but Bambers few supporters have continued to attack the remaining family and repeatedly published horrific pictures of Sheila and denigrate her in every way possible over the last 27 years.

Thanks Outlook.  I honestly believe that Bamber, if released, would go after Julie Mugford and the Boutflours/Eatons.

The attempts to sully Sheila's memory are particularly disgusting.

Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 08:20:25 PM
Thanks Outlook.  I honestly believe that Bamber, if released, would go after Julie Mugford and the Boutflours/Eatons.

The attempts to sully Sheila's memory are particularly disgusting.
Well there is no chance of release because he denies his crimes and so does not qualify for the Parole process and even if he did get considered for release by some torturous process the family have a say in what happens and the Parole Board have to be satisfied that there is no risk of re-offending.  They do not have a good record on this in the past but in the case of Bamber there is ample evidence of his few deranged supporters threatening the family and denigrating the memory of his victims and on Youtube you can find videos of his most insane supporter driving up and down the lanes surrounding the farmhouse and boasting of peeping through their windows.

So no hope at all for Bamber.  The only way he will be coming out is in a box.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Myster on July 09, 2013, 08:28:57 PM
It's good news for me as I have never been CONVINCED of Jeremy's guilt.  It there is a chance of him getting out of prison I don't believe he will ever give up fighting to prove his innocence.
We might all get closer to knowing what really happened that night.  Time will tell.  If I was convinced of Jeremy's guilt I still believe he should have a full life tarrif

We don't need to get any closer to what happened that night, because most sane people here know that Bamber killed his family... period, full stop, end of story.

And going on present form it's unlikely he'll get out... Bamber will continue driving up the same old cul-de-sac, blaming his sister as he has done for nearly 30 years, especially as his "team" have "millions" of documents to wade through, which will take another 30, thank goodness !!!

Some murderers are so cruel, dangerous and self-seeking they don't deserve any hope of ever being free!

Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 08:36:38 PM
We don't need to get any closer to what happened that night, because most sane people here know that Bamber killed his family... period, full stop, end of story.

And going on present form it's unlikely he'll get out... Bamber will continue driving up the same old cul-de-sac, blaming his sister as he has done for nearly 30 years, especially as his "team" have "millions" of documents to wade through, which will take another 30, thank goodness !!!

Some murderers are so cruel, dangerous and self-seeking they don't deserve any hope of ever being free!
Agreed.  It must take a very special kind of courage to empty a magazine of bullets into the heads of sleeping children and to shoot your elderly mother in the head while she is helpless on the floor.  It must also take a very special kind of mental illness to support him also.

He will not be getting out ever.  His few supporters nailed his coffin shut years ago.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Redblossom on July 09, 2013, 09:27:11 PM
has any other person in history still denied  their guilt 28 yrs later? Have no idea if hes guilty or innocent, as i never followed the case, before my time, but had a look on a website of his which said there were 4 million pages and lots of evidence he was fitted up


Eta

As to the OP, i think the echr is right, unless you hang people or decide eye for an eye, and thats it,  then there has to be some hope for people banged up for life, ie the possibility of parole if they fulfill all the requirements, obviously it will depend on their crimes and the circumstances and their state of mind at all times......there are some crimes though  that are unforgiveable


the sensationalist papers reported it wrong, the courts can imprison people for life, just that they cant say there is never the possibility of asking for a parole review, and even if they get that, doesnt  mean they will be released
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 09:38:26 PM
has any other person in history still denied  their guilt 28 yrs later? Have no idea if hes guilty or innocent, as i never followed the case, before my time, but had a look on a website of his which said there were 4 million pages and lots of evidence he was fitted up
There are better people than me to advise but I see it is a fairly simple and obvious case and unfortunately the people who support him are not the nicest in the World.

He has had lots of appeals and a CRCC and every time they have found the appeals without foundation.  No new evidence has emerged over the years that supports him and the few people who have supported him have indulged in threats and trolling and personal attacks on peoples families even against their children.

Among the claims you will find is that he was fitted up by MI5, Special Branch, Essex Police and the media because he is of "Royal Birth" and of course they could not just get rid of him they had to slaughter an entire family and several policeman on the way.  It makes the Diana Conspiracy or 9/11 look sane.

If you want to follow it be prepared to lose your mind and if you come down on the "guilty side" make sure you have strong locks on your doors.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Redblossom on July 09, 2013, 09:45:03 PM
There are better people than me to advise but I see it is a fairly simple and obvious case and unfortunately the people who support him are not the nicest in the World.

He has had lots of appeals and a CRCC and every time they have found the appeals without foundation.  No new evidence has emerged over the years that supports him and the few people who have supported him have indulged in threats and trolling and personal attacks on peoples families even against their children.

Among the claims you will find is that he was fitted up by MI5, Special Branch, Essex Police and the media because he is of "Royal Birth" and of course they could not just get rid of him they had to slaughter an entire family and several policeman on the way.  It makes the Diana Conspiracy or 9/11 look sane.

If you want to follow it be prepared to lose your mind and if you come down on the "guilty side" make sure you have strong locks on your doors.

Ok thanks  LOL, think I will stay behind the couch then
 @)(++(*

i was googling the case today and came across a site that was talking of a fit up and a cover up atthe higest level, i must  admit i switched off, cleared all  my history and  cookies, cos im easily spooked
 @)(++(*

you never know though maybe someone got dando assassinated, oh hang on, wrong thread
 @)(++(*


got confused with the similarities,sorry
 >>>>>>>> gone









Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Outlook on July 09, 2013, 09:49:20 PM
Ok thanks  LOL, think I will stay behind the couch then
 @)(++(*

i was googling the case today and came across a site that was talking of a fit up and a cover up atthe higest level, i must  admit i switched off, cleared all  my history and  cookies, cos im easily spooked
 @)(++(*

you never know though maybe someone got dando assassinated, oh hang on, wrong thread
 @)(++(*
You are quite right.  We may sound paranoid but that does not mean that THEY are NOT to get YOU!

THEY are Everywhere!  Always Watching! Listening! Talking about us! Plotting!

Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Redblossom on July 09, 2013, 09:54:36 PM
You are quite right.  We may sound paranoid but that does not mean that THEY are NOT to get YOU!

THEY are Everywhere!  Always Watching! Listening! Talking about us!

 8)--)) @)(++(*

Ok
 8**8:/:

Wheels  of justice they say are slow

I mean for god sake why would they take 28 yrs?? If bamber was innocent?

BUT
Any other cases in history where someone was released over 20 yrs in jail unjustly?

I think there are a few

Are you saying its 100% totally impossible he was innocent?

See u later





Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: John on July 11, 2013, 02:40:36 AM
A counter argument of course is that you forfeit your rights to be treated humanely when you choose to take another person's life. I don't think many people have a problem with life imprisonment meaning life.

Though it is interesting that the media seems to imply it is a victory for Bamber when as Tony says, in reality if the ECHR's decision is heeded by the UK government (and there is no guarantee it will be) you will need to prove you have been rehabilitated by showing remorse and that your character has changed. Bamber would have to admit his killings first. The fact is Bamber would much rather stay in prison than get out on a technicality or parole because he wants money and he would only have the chance to get this if his conviction is overturned.

Spot on Goatboy   8@??)(

And especially when they take more than one life.  What about Nevill and June Bambers human rights or those of Sheila and the boys?  Jeremy Bamber didn't give a toss for their rights back in 1985 so why should we do so now?
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Myster on July 13, 2013, 07:07:22 PM

So sad that every time Bamber hits the news, a weary David Boutflour has to be wheeled out for the media once again to plead for it all to stop, yet not one of Bamber's supporters, and least of all the murderer himself will take a blind bit of notice... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23247525 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23247525)

Bamber thinks to himself - " Right, I've done more than my allotted 25 years... times up ! " much like he said at the funeral in '85. His sole concern if and when released is easy MONEY - loads of it, barrowfuls of it, oodles of it, and the more of it coming his way the better, even though he likes to pretend otherwise...

"If a little money comes my way, buying a small farm would perhaps be fulfilling a dream but who knows what opportunities will come my way, or if my inheritance will be returned."

Don't kid everybody, Jeremy -  you know how much land and property costs - the only thing that keeps you going is NOT thoughts of your family, but the prospect of riches shovelled into your bank account from publication/book deals, compensation claims, etc., etc., etc.

Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: John on February 19, 2014, 12:25:25 AM
Court of Appeal upholds principle of whole-life prison terms.

(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/73052000/jpg/_73052491_73052490.jpg)

Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas delivers his ruling at the Court of Appeal.


The Court of Appeal has upheld judges' right to jail the most serious offenders in England and Wales for the rest of their lives.

The court increased a 40-year tariff to a whole-life tariff for murderer Ian McLoughlin, whose trial judge had said he was unable to pass such a sentence.

It also dismissed an appeal by murderer Lee Newell that his whole-life order had been "manifestly excessive".

The European Court of Human Rights had ruled such terms breached human rights.

In July, the European court said that while it accepted whole life orders could be justified, there should nevertheless be some way of having imprisonment reviewed after 25 years.

Tuesday's Court of Appeal ruling was welcomed by the attorney general, the justice secretary and the shadow justice secretary.

Sentencing in a number of high-profile criminal cases - including the terms to be handed out to soldier Lee Rigby's murderers - had been put on hold pending the judgement.

In the latest Court of Appeal ruling, the panel of five judges found that the Strasbourg court had been wrong when it reached a conclusion that the law of England and Wales did not clearly provide the possibility that a whole-life prison term could ever be reduced.

Read more... (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26236225)
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 20, 2014, 12:01:23 PM
I am not sure I understand what all the fuss is about really.  Every prisoner still retains the right to have an application referred to the CCRC and then a potential referral to the CoA if new evidence comes to light showing he/she might have suffered a MoJ.

I guess the argument is whether prisoners should have the right to periodic reviews and the potential for parole if they show remorse and can prove they have been rehabilitated.  I find it difficult to accept the likes of Whiting and Huntley seeing the light of day again.  Interestingly I have just Googled prisoners serving whole life tariffs and Huntley and Whiting are serving minimum terms not whole life tariffs.  I cannot see that a guilty JB is worse than the likes of Huntley and Whiting?  Will have to read further to establish the thinking/differences.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prisoners_with_whole-life_tariffs

Some crimes are so heinous that imo life should mean life.  I guess there might be some argument for saying those who commit such crimes are either mentally unwell or psychopaths - psychopath being someone with zero or low levels of empathy.  If they suffer zero or low levels of empathy is it their fault?  I understand low levels of empathy are brought about by one or a combination of adverse early childhood experiences, amount of foetal exposure to testosterone and the MAO-A gene.  I guess at some point in time it will be possible to treat those at risk of carrying out harmful acts against others by medication and/or therapy before they offend  >@@(*&)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXcU8x_xK18

     
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Angelo222 on February 20, 2014, 01:29:15 PM
I cannot see that a guilty JB is worse than the likes of Huntley and Whiting? 

Are you for real Holly?

Whiting was convicted of killing little Sarah Payne while Huntley killed two other little girls.  Bamber was convicted of killing his 6 year old twin nephews, his sister and his parents and you wonder why that is worse.   He is technically a mass murderer, that's the difference.
Title: Re: Jeremy Bamber - Review of Whole Life Tarriff ECHR Appeal Decision
Post by: Holly Goodhead on February 20, 2014, 03:44:57 PM
Are you for real Holly?

Whiting was convicted of killing little Sarah Payne while Huntley killed two other little girls.  Bamber was convicted of killing his 6 year old twin nephews, his sister and his parents and you wonder why that is worse.   He is technically a mass murderer, that's the difference.

Try telling that to Anne Eaton.  She was/is happy to take up residence in WHF.  College Close was demolished as it was deemed too ghoulish to leave standing.

Perhaps I measure the seriousness of the crimes in terms of my perception of the impact on victims and their loved ones.  As far as I can see the victims of Huntley and Whiting suffered as much, if not more, than those at WHF.  Either way if JB is guilty then life should mean life imo.  I have made that clear in a previous post.  I am not the female equivalent of Lord Longford.  I was trying to establish a reason in sentencing and I still cannot see one.  For example Anthony Entwistle murdered one woman and had previous for sexual assault.  He is serving a whole life tarriff.  How are his crimes worse than those carried out by Whiting and Huntley who have minimum terms imposed?