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: Dillon on June 29, 2012, 08:07:00 AM
-
One has to be pretty lacking in the capacity for logical thought to even begin to think that Sheila could have been the killer.
So why the endless offensive and usually inaccurate trawling through her family, psychiatric history etc ? Given the phone call Bamber said he received from Nevill we all know it had to have been Sheila or Jeremy. Even if and IMO this is unlikely, someone else actually acted as the butcher, Jeremy has to be implicated. Hence he is guilty of murder. Sheila's memory should be respected . She was actually a kind, loving person but a bit mixed up.
Fundamentally, discussion of Sheila's psyche etc is irrelevant. I am like an old fashioned gramaphone record, but for some people it just will not sink in that this is a very simple case and all the discussion of telephone logs, polygraphs, and so forth and so forth is boring and pointless. It might be more interesting to gain some insight into how a normal nice little boy given every opportunity became such a warped and lethal personality. That is something that I do not understand. So many other people survive tough childhoods in difficult inner city estates etc and come out as balanced achieving members of society. Jeremy had opportunities which most people would have given their eye teeth for.
-
One has to be pretty lacking in the capacity for logical thought to even begin to think that Sheila could have been the killer.
So why the endless offensive and usually inaccurate trawling through her family, psychiatric history etc ? Given the phone call Bamber said he received from Nevill we all know it had to have been Sheila or Jeremy. Even if and IMO this is unlikely, someone else actually acted as the butcher, Jeremy has to be implicated. Hence he is guilty of murder. Sheila's memory should be respected . She was actually a kind, loving person but a bit mixed up.
Fundamentally, discussion of Sheila's psyche etc is irrelevant. I am like an old fashioned gramaphone record, but for some people it just will not sink in that this is a very simple case and all the discussion of telephone logs, polygraphs, and so forth and so forth is boring and pointless. It might be more interesting to gain some insight into how a normal nice little boy given every opportunity became such a warped and lethal personality. That is something that I do not understand. So many other people survive tough childhoods in difficult inner city estates etc and come out as balanced achieving members of society. Jeremy had opportunities which most people would have given their eye teeth for.
The quality of posts on this forum is exceptional at times. Word perfect Dillon!
-
Unforunately Dillon, I came on here thinking exactly the same, that Jeremy was innocent and Sheila was psychotic and possibly a nutter. I still think a lot of people think that because they have only seen the information that the programmes and media send out, one recently still claimed Jeremy was innocent.
When I found this site, everyting makes sense and how he had done it but when you're not in a criminal mindset, it's hard to think like a murerer covering his ass.
I was wrong of course and more so that I also though Sheila was a nutter, which she wasn't. There was no chat about fostering and Sheila was doing the best she could to cope with a mental illness which in the 80's wasn't well understood and we still had asylums etc and medication is notoriously hard to get correct in mental illness cases.
Sheila was probably the best mum a child could ever wish for and all power to her if she posed nude, if I had her body I'd do the same, it's easy money as apose to bricklaying.
Jeremy Bamber is another conman, the trouble is, he's good and plenty of people believe him.
-
Unforunately Dillon, I came on here thinking exactly the same, that Jeremy was innocent and Sheila was psychotic and possibly a nutter. I still think a lot of people think that because they have only seen the information that the programmes and media send out, one recently still claimed Jeremy was innocent.
When I found this site, everyting makes sense and how he had done it but when you're not in a criminal mindset, it's hard to think like a murerer covering his ass.
I was wrong of course and more so that I also though Sheila was a nutter, which she wasn't. There was no chat about fostering and Sheila was doing the best she could to cope with a mental illness which in the 80's wasn't well understood and we still had asylums etc and medication is notoriously hard to get correct in mental illness cases.
Sheila was probably the best mum a child could ever wish for and all power to her if she posed nude, if I had her body I'd do the same, it's easy money as apose to bricklaying.
Jeremy Bamber is another conman, the trouble is, he's good and plenty of people believe him.
They do say that if you say something often enough you will begin to believe it in the end. IMO that is what lies at the heart of Jeremy Bambers efforts to keep his case going. Starve him of publicity and he would disappear into obscurity for ever.
My honest belief is that convicted murderers should not be permitted to defame the memory of their victims.
-
One has to be pretty lacking in the capacity for logical thought to even begin to think that Sheila could have been the killer.
So why the endless offensive and usually inaccurate trawling through her family, psychiatric history etc ? Given the phone call Bamber said he received from Nevill we all know it had to have been Sheila or Jeremy. Even if and IMO this is unlikely, someone else actually acted as the butcher, Jeremy has to be implicated. Hence he is guilty of murder. Sheila's memory should be respected . She was actually a kind, loving person but a bit mixed up.
Fundamentally, discussion of Sheila's psyche etc is irrelevant. I am like an old fashioned gramaphone record, but for some people it just will not sink in that this is a very simple case and all the discussion of telephone logs, polygraphs, and so forth and so forth is boring and pointless. It might be more interesting to gain some insight into how a normal nice little boy given every opportunity became such a warped and lethal personality. That is something that I do not understand. So many other people survive tough childhoods in difficult inner city estates etc and come out as balanced achieving members of society. Jeremy had opportunities which most people would have given their eye teeth for.
Excellent points Dillon. You are absolutely right.
I believe that those monotonous points you have mentioned are continually brought up by his supporters. They are deperately looking for a hook, something, anything that will lead to doubt that their idol, Bamber is guilty. Some of the crackpot theories I have read from over there simply beggar belief and defy any logical analysis.
I have seen them blame 1. Sheila 2. June and Sheila 3. A stranger 4. A hitman 5. Drug dealers. When their thirst for stupidity wasn't quite slaked, they then blamed the police, the Tactical Firearms Team and still it went on.
They then turned the lazers on any witnesses that had the sheer temerity to speak about their idol in less than glowing terms. Julie Mugford is a lair, so is David Boutflour, so is ANY prosecution witness. They are all guilty of purgery. Even the police pathologist the respected Peter Venezis was not spared the wrath of Tesko. He claims that the report 'cannot be trusted' The reason? He states unequivocably that Sheila could not have 'moved after the first shot' This totally blows Tesko's drivelous nonsense that police being 'in conversation with someone inside the farmhouse or that she was still alive and moving around when police entered the building and ...erm......shot her 8-)(--)- clean out of the water.
Anyone BUT Bamber can be blamed, castigated, discredited, and ridiculed. The supporters just cannot see what is occurring here. A clearly guilty psychopath manipulating, squirming, deceiving others in order to avoid his just punishment. They do not realise that these people are merely tools to that end and no more.
-
One has to be pretty lacking in the capacity for logical thought to even begin to think that Sheila could have been the killer.
So why the endless offensive and usually inaccurate trawling through her family, psychiatric history etc ? Given the phone call Bamber said he received from Nevill we all know it had to have been Sheila or Jeremy. Even if and IMO this is unlikely, someone else actually acted as the butcher, Jeremy has to be implicated. Hence he is guilty of murder. Sheila's memory should be respected . She was actually a kind, loving person but a bit mixed up.
Fundamentally, discussion of Sheila's psyche etc is irrelevant. I am like an old fashioned gramaphone record, but for some people it just will not sink in that this is a very simple case and all the discussion of telephone logs, polygraphs, and so forth and so forth is boring and pointless. It might be more interesting to gain some insight into how a normal nice little boy given every opportunity became such a warped and lethal personality. That is something that I do not understand. So many other people survive tough childhoods in difficult inner city estates etc and come out as balanced achieving members of society. Jeremy had opportunities which most people would have given their eye teeth for.
Excellent points Dillon. You are absolutely right.
I believe that those monotonous points you have mentioned are continually brought up by his supporters. They are deperately looking for a hook, something, anything that will lead to doubt that their idol, Bamber is guilty. Some of the crackpot theories I have read from over there simply beggar belief and defy any logical analysis.
I have seen them blame 1. Sheila 2. June and Sheila 3. A stranger 4. A hitman 5. Drug dealers. When their thirst for stupidity wasn't quite slaked, they then blamed the police, the Tactical Firearms Team and still it went on.
They then turned the lazers on any witnesses that had the sheer temerity to speak about their idol in less than glowing terms. Julie Mugford is a lair, so is David Boutflour, so is ANY prosecution witness. They are all guilty of purgery. Even the police pathologist the respected Peter Venezis was not spared the wrath of Tesko. He claims that the report 'cannot be trusted' The reason? He states unequivocably that Sheila could not have 'moved after the first shot' This totally blows Tesko's drivelous nonsense that police being 'in conversation with someone inside the farmhouse or that she was still alive and moving around when police entered the building and ...erm......shot her 8-)(--)- clean out of the water.
Anyone BUT Bamber can be blamed, castigated, discredited, and ridiculed. The supporters just cannot see what is occurring here. A clearly guilty psychopath manipulating, squirming, deceiving others in order to avoid his just punishment. They do not realise that these people are merely tools to that end and no more.
You only need to look at what happened to Jackie. She was used by Bamber, she has said so herself not so long ago and now look at her. Ostracised from the very forum and campaign she helped to create. That's thanks and appreciation for you.
-
Unforunately Dillon, I came on here thinking exactly the same, that Jeremy was innocent and Sheila was psychotic and possibly a nutter. I still think a lot of people think that because they have only seen the information that the programmes and media send out, one recently still claimed Jeremy was innocent.
When I found this site, everyting makes sense and how he had done it but when you're not in a criminal mindset, it's hard to think like a murerer covering his ass.
I was wrong of course and more so that I also though Sheila was a nutter, which she wasn't. There was no chat about fostering and Sheila was doing the best she could to cope with a mental illness which in the 80's wasn't well understood and we still had asylums etc and medication is notoriously hard to get correct in mental illness cases.
Sheila was probably the best mum a child could ever wish for and all power to her if she posed nude, if I had her body I'd do the same, it's easy money as apose to bricklaying.
Jeremy Bamber is another conman, the trouble is, he's good and plenty of people believe him.
They do say that if you say something often enough you will begin to believe it in the end. IMO that is what lies at the heart of Jeremy Bambers efforts to keep his case going. Starve him of publicity and he would disappear into obscurity for ever.
My honest belief is that convicted murderers should not be permitted to defame the memory of their victims.
An excellent point David and worthy of attention. Starve this monster of the publicity he so craves. 8@??)(
-
Excellent posts! I think the CCRC have now starved Bamber of any meaningful publicity with their latest and effectively final rejection. The latest round of 'new evidence' proved to be so weak that layman on this forum could easily pull it apart and Bamber's new 'Dream Team' have been shown to have feet of clay and to clearly be promoting themselves more than Bamber's possible innocence.
-
There have NEVER to my knowledge been any TV programmes stating anything other than Jeremy Bamber as being innocent and being wrongly jailed. The programmes I have seen have never gone into detail either as to how Jeremy Bamber did this, they all seem to state-:
1) There was a conversation regarding Sheila's children,
2) There might have been a bit of a row about it,
3) Jeremy gets a phone call at 3amish from Neville to say Sheila has gone berserk with a gun,
4) Jeremy calls the police and goes to the farm,
5) Neville may have tried to dial 999,
6) The police came but had to wait a firearms team which took 4 hours to come,
7) There seemed to be movement in the house,
8) By the time the house was entered everyone was dead.
Then I've seen several other programmes claiming 'new evidence', usually lasting 30 minutes and going on about missing phone logs and the only other argument saying Jeremy did it was a chip in the paint of the arga (cooker, I don't know the spelling).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xbT9a2LHeQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo
There needs to be a programme to show how and why Jeremy Bamber remains in prison to counteract the 'positive/pro' Jeremy Bamber ones. People don't generally go out of their way to read books but they will watch a programme about it-I think. Or it might be my warped mind that likes crime programmes.
I agree, he should stop profiting from his continuing defaming of Sheila and the rest of the family. The picture of the twins as babies hits me everytime I look at it and Sheila, so full of promise.
-
Agree totally Joanne. 8((()*/
Its always the same old story with theses things, there is no money in what has been rather what could have been fantasies.
-
There have NEVER to my knowledge been any TV programmes stating anything other than Jeremy Bamber as being innocent and being wrongly jailed. The programmes I have seen have never gone into detail either as to how Jeremy Bamber did this, they all seem to state-:
1) There was a conversation regarding Sheila's children,
2) There might have been a bit of a row about it,
3) Jeremy gets a phone call at 3amish from Neville to say Sheila has gone berserk with a gun,
4) Jeremy calls the police and goes to the farm,
5) Neville may have tried to dial 999,
6) The police came but had to wait a firearms team which took 4 hours to come,
7) There seemed to be movement in the house,
8) By the time the house was entered everyone was dead.
Then I've seen several other programmes claiming 'new evidence', usually lasting 30 minutes and going on about missing phone logs and the only other argument saying Jeremy did it was a chip in the paint of the arga (cooker, I don't know the spelling).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xbT9a2LHeQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo
There needs to be a programme to show how and why Jeremy Bamber remains in prison to counteract the 'positive/pro' Jeremy Bamber ones. People don't generally go out of their way to read books but they will watch a programme about it-I think. Or it might be my warped mind that likes crime programmes.
I agree, he should stop profiting from his continuing defaming of Sheila and the rest of the family. The picture of the twins as babies hits me everytime I look at it and Sheila, so full of promise.
An excellent set of points Joanne. You really have highlighted the selective and often absurd standpoint that TV and filmakers tend to be attracted to. I think that they are attracted to controversy Joanne - it sells. The same as sex and violence is a sure-fire way of selling newspapers. It does seem highly unfair and unbalanced but 'money talks' as the old saying goes.
I think it is time for a documentary that does show the plain truth of this whole affair - the fact that Bamber is guilty and has manipulated so many well-meaning, but hopelessly naive people into believing that he is innocent.
There was a documentary series that took the viewpoint he was guilty called 'Killing Mum and Dad' Shown some time ago on Sky One. It did have all the ingredients of a well-balanced documentary but didn't ask enough questions for me and there was an awful lot of presumption occurring that failed to make it anything other than a normal hum-drum crime series. However it did have it's good points, such as the discussion surrounding Bamber's suspected psychopathy and input from David Boutflour.
I have it on good authority that Bamber did make several complaints about this programme and question, in particular, the accuracy and validity of the consultant psychologist (A lady whose name escapes me) statements.
Other programmes about Bamber - particularly showing him in the light of innocence - received no such complaints as to it's content despite there being some identical issues as the one that was previously complained about.
It may be the time when we start to do so and redress the balance.
Thank you Joanne for highlighting these excellent points 8@??)( 8((()*/
-
I wouldn't worry. I don't think that there are many people left who think that Bamber is innocent. He has been indulged beyond belief, with appeals, case reviews, tv documentaries, books etc etc and it all goes to illustrate just how overwhelmingly guilty he is.
I would like to see a Tv program which reconstructs the prosecutions version of events, Bamber's version of events and just for comedic reasons, Tesko's. This would then clearly demonstrate, how the suggestion that Shelia or Essex Police killed the family, is quite ridiculous.
Whatever the murder case, unless there is absolute forensic proof which links the suspect to the crime, some people will always question the conviction. The fact that there might be a ton of circumstantial evidence, is conveniently disregarded. Bamber and his team have done remarkably well to keep this case in the news for all these years, considering how strong the case against him is. Even if you doubt the evidence against Bamber, the fact that it's quite clear that Shelia couldn't have done it, means that only one person could. He will rot in hell
-
There have NEVER to my knowledge been any TV programmes stating anything other than Jeremy Bamber as being innocent and being wrongly jailed. The programmes I have seen have never gone into detail either as to how Jeremy Bamber did this, they all seem to state-:
1) There was a conversation regarding Sheila's children,
2) There might have been a bit of a row about it,
3) Jeremy gets a phone call at 3amish from Neville to say Sheila has gone berserk with a gun,
4) Jeremy calls the police and goes to the farm,
5) Neville may have tried to dial 999,
6) The police came but had to wait a firearms team which took 4 hours to come,
7) There seemed to be movement in the house,
8) By the time the house was entered everyone was dead.
Then I've seen several other programmes claiming 'new evidence', usually lasting 30 minutes and going on about missing phone logs and the only other argument saying Jeremy did it was a chip in the paint of the arga (cooker, I don't know the spelling).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xbT9a2LHeQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo
There needs to be a programme to show how and why Jeremy Bamber remains in prison to counteract the 'positive/pro' Jeremy Bamber ones. People don't generally go out of their way to read books but they will watch a programme about it-I think. Or it might be my warped mind that likes crime programmes.
I agree, he should stop profiting from his continuing defaming of Sheila and the rest of the family. The picture of the twins as babies hits me everytime I look at it and Sheila, so full of promise.
Have you seen these Joanne?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhoEuhL_Ojs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bocwzw3ZYf8
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=228.0
-
No, I will have a look.
-
Unforunately Dillon, I came on here thinking exactly the same, that Jeremy was innocent and Sheila was psychotic and possibly a nutter. I still think a lot of people think that because they have only seen the information that the programmes and media send out, one recently still claimed Jeremy was innocent.
When I found this site, everyting makes sense and how he had done it but when you're not in a criminal mindset, it's hard to think like a murerer covering his ass.
I was wrong of course and more so that I also though Sheila was a nutter, which she wasn't. There was no chat about fostering and Sheila was doing the best she could to cope with a mental illness which in the 80's wasn't well understood and we still had asylums etc and medication is notoriously hard to get correct in mental illness cases.
Sheila was probably the best mum a child could ever wish for and all power to her if she posed nude, if I had her body I'd do the same, it's easy money as apose to bricklaying.
Jeremy Bamber is another conman, the trouble is, he's good and plenty of people believe him.
There was no chat about fostering? Im afraid that you are grossly mistaken about that Joanne.Ask Jean Boutell the housekeeper.Also,you say that Sheila was the best mum a child could ever wish for?I dont dispute that she did indeed love her children,but the truth was that she could not cope with them due to her illness hence the involvement of social services and the fact that her ex-husband had residency of the boys.
-
I don't believe the conversation took place, I believe it was an alibi to provide a backstory for the police.
I have previously asked about how big the family were and if Colin Cafell was in the picture. There were enough family members available for social services to be involved and Sheila was actively trying to come to terms with her mental state.
Jeremy tried to cover all his bases with his backstory, the build up, the reasons, Neville calling the police during the attack (like if Sheila was going beserk, he'd have time to make two phone calls, let alone one, surely you'd call 999 and just leave the phone running so the police could hear the commotion) and Jeremy accounting for all his movements.
Even Stefan Kizhco got out in the end because it was proven he didn't do it. If Jeremy didn't do it, he wouldn't still be trying to persue it after all this time, he'd have prooved his innocence by now and I'm sure with the developments of DNA and other techniques, something would be able to prove him as innocent.
-
I don't believe the conversation took place, I believe it was an alibi to provide a backstory for the police.
I have previously asked about how big the family were and if Colin Cafell was in the picture. There were enough family members available for social services to be involved and Sheila was actively trying to come to terms with her mental state.
I agree. It's a fake story. Discredited by Colin.
-
It should say the family were big enough for social services NOT to be involved. They wanted to and were helping Sheila.
-
When Sheila was first diagnosed with mental illness, she'll have been asked questions regarding her personal life and 'stress' risks. Sheila had gone through a seperation which won't have helped her mental state, themental health hospital may have been obliged to refer to social services who in turn will have come out and interviewed Sheila. So, they may well have been in the picture but social services look to immediate family to help in these situations, I've just had something similar happen to a friend, they (social services) try NOT to split families up where possible, June and Neville were upstanding people as was Colin Cafell, so it's unlikely they'd have taken the children into care.
-
When Sheila was first diagnosed with mental illness, she'll have been asked questions regarding her personal life and 'stress' risks. Sheila had gone through a seperation which won't have helped her mental state, themental health hospital may have been obliged to refer to social services who in turn will have come out and interviewed Sheila. So, they may well have been in the picture but social services look to immediate family to help in these situations, I've just had something similar happen to a friend, they (social services) try NOT to split families up where possible, June and Neville were upstanding people as was Colin Cafell, so it's unlikely they'd have taken the children into care.
I agree.Neither Colin nor the Bambers would have allowed the children to go into care.
It is a FACT that Sheila approached the social services herself.
They had provided daycare fostering in the past for the twins and this is what the Bambers were hoping to make use of again whilst Sheila worked at the caravan park.
I think this speaks against Jeremy. If Sheila had contacted the social services herself - why would she freak out when Ralph and June mentioned it to her, why would that make her kill everyone if it is something she herself had looked at.
-
I now understand why people on this forum believe Jeremy to be guilty.The fact is that Jean Bouttell confirmed that fostering was indeed being discussed,although I agree that we now only have Jeremys word for it that it was indeed being discussed on the evening prior to the murders.
The Bambers wanted Sheila and the boys back in Essex where they could help them.They wanted to give Sheila a job at the caravan park to keep her occupied.I doubt that Colin would have agreed to this but that would not have stopped the Bambers trying.They were used to being in control remember?
And it is a FACT that social services were involved at various stages with Sheila and the boys.There is paperwork and statements to support this.Sheila herself approached them,admitting to them that she couldnt cope due to her illness.
Just what I have been saying for ages. 8((()*/
-
When Sheila was first diagnosed with mental illness, she'll have been asked questions regarding her personal life and 'stress' risks. Sheila had gone through a seperation which won't have helped her mental state, themental health hospital may have been obliged to refer to social services who in turn will have come out and interviewed Sheila. So, they may well have been in the picture but social services look to immediate family to help in these situations, I've just had something similar happen to a friend, they (social services) try NOT to split families up where possible, June and Neville were upstanding people as was Colin Cafell, so it's unlikely they'd have taken the children into care.
I agree.Neither Colin nor the Bambers would have allowed the children to go into care.
It is a FACT that Sheila approached the social services herself.
They had provided daycare fostering in the past for the twins and this is what the Bambers were hoping to make use of again whilst Sheila worked at the caravan park.
I have no doubt that Nevill and June would have died of shame if their grandsons had to be adopted. They were very proud people and would have done anything they could to try to keep the twins with Sheila and/or Colin if possible.
I agree that interim care had been necessary when Sheila was ill and Colin unable to cope because of his work but long term placement was never a serious option. Sheila and the twins return to the farm for a few days was to have been the beginning of a new start for them all but Jeremy Bamber rightly saw this as a threat to his future prosperity.
It was now or never he told Julie Mugford.
Ps..Lois, can you introduce yourself in the new members section please?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=3.0
-
Interim foster care may well have been discussed at some point. However, I don't think this would have been a motivation for Sheila to go on a killing spree (especially given that Colin had custody of the children most of the time anyway).
-
I think we are reading too much into this issue. Personally I believe that this is a non-event - it didn't happen. This is another smokescreen by Bamber in order to point the finger of suspicion at his dead sister and 'prove' her culpability.
I look at it in this way. Since I believe that Jeremy Bamber is a congenital and pathological liar, it follows that anything he has to say is a lie. This conversation did not take place on the night in question, then or at any other time would Nevil and June have contemplated such a drastic move. They knew Sheila loved those boys, they were her whole life and they were all she had. Why on earth would they want to take them away from her?? It is complete nonsense that seems to have worked it's way in the case and indeed it's folklore when it reality it has no business being there, the same as the distressed phone call from Nevil and 'I left a fully loaded rifle out in full view' nonsense.
This is a small selection of the downright lies that Bamber has perpetuated and woven into the narrative to boost his claims of innocence - nothing more.