Who killed Bambi ?

[Holly Goodhead]

I don't say that !... far too risky, especially as he'd never shot any human being before.  I just think things went banana-shaped because he disturbed his parents first and so they became moving targets before he had a chance to eliminate them with headshots, and maybe he also overestimated the rifle's power which required more bullets than the ten or eleven he thought were needed.

I also believe David Bain was guilty, because there was so much evidence stacked up against him, i.e. his misleading emergency call and subsequent faulty memory when interviewed of whose bodies he'd actually seen; the fact that he wouldn't let police in when they arrived; the trigger lock key whose location only he knew about; his little brother's bloodstain on the crotch of his shorts; the lens found in Stephen's bedroom and the distorted spectacle frame belonging to his mother (which he wore because his own were broken) with one lens missing found on a chair in his own bedroom; his machine-washing of bloodstained clothing, jersey, etc. in an attempt to destroy evidence; the date of when he had his arm tattoo which he lied about. There may be more which I can't remember offhand.

The following shows the Home Office has calculated the lowest level of muzzle energy capable of inflicting a penetrating wound is one foot pound (1.35 joules).

http://www.mileoakshootingclub.co.uk/8.html

The calculation is based on speed (ft/s) x speed (ft/s) x weight (grain) divide by 450240. Here's how the calculation works:

https://www.pyramydair.com/article/What ... ust_2003/5

So the cartridges used at WHF:

1080 x 1080 x 40/450240 = 103.62 ft/llbs or 140.50 joules. So based on the Home Office saying 1 foot pound is needed to penetrate skin we can see how lethal the rifle and ammo used at WHF are at close rang providing 103.62 llbs ie >100% than the required force to penetrate skin alone.  The fact so many bullets were required is evidence of an inexperienced shooter not a marksman underestimating the power of the rifle.

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm just trying to picture myself in that master bedroom in the dead of night ready to shoot my sleeping parents (God forbid), armed with a rifle loaded with only ten or eleven bullets and being extremely careful not to waste any.  My first priority would have been to try to ensure that I didn't wake them beforehand, for example by not alarming Crispy, so that their execution would be as swift as possible.  But even the most well thought out plans go awry, and if I disturbed them so that they began to move, I'd probably fire off as many bullets as I could without too much thought about placement to prevent them getting out of bed and resisting, especially so in the case of Nevill.  I'd be nervous, sweaty probably, with adrenaline pumping and time passing by in split seconds, but the least thing I'd be thinking about would be where Sheila might have directed the bullets.

I'm not sure whether the twins were killed first or last.  If first, Bamber might have thought it was so easy, just like dispatching two small animals, that the same repeated on his dozing parents would be a cinch.  If last, then he probably went for overkill to ensure the mistakes made with his parents weren't repeated.

There's no expert evidence re the sequence of shootings, if there was it would no doubt show NB sustained his upstairs gsw's on the landing and main stairs and not in the main bedroom.

The physical evidence by way of blood stains, casings, distance of shots, trajectories and wound tracks all support the above. 

[Holly Goodhead]

I'll ask again - how were they coerced? What could they have on LR or MW? And what was to stop them mentioning they had been coerced when giving evidence? It seems a bit of a cop out to dismiss the testimony of anyone who accused Bamber of murder as being coerced. I can see an argument for Julie - but not the others.

We've covered this previously...recreational drugs. 

If they were successfully coerced by a police officer(s) pre-trial why would they suddenly fess up at trial?  Especially if DS Jones told them SC sustained 2 gsw's and was unable to inflict the second.

[Caroline]

We've covered this previously...recreational drugs. 

If they were successfully coerced by a police officer(s) pre-trial why would they suddenly fess up at trial?  Especially if DS Jones told them SC sustained 2 gsw's and was unable to inflict the second.

So because they smoked some weed, they were easily coerced  into sending an innocent man to prison? Seriously? That's not in the slightest bit plausible - they most likely got their drugs from Bamber anyway which makes it even less likely.

[Holly Goodhead]

So because they smoked some weed, they were easily coerced  into sending an innocent man to prison? Seriously? That's not in the slightest bit plausible - they most likely got their drugs from Bamber anyway which makes it even less likely.

But it wasn't a case of just smoking some 'weed'.  JB was growing cannabis at Bourtree cottage (production) and selling it to others with JM a distributor (dealing). 

The drugs in this case present too many anomalies for it not to be mean something......

- MM spent the night of the murders with his part-time lover Mavis Southgate and yet there's no evidence she was interviewed under caution and/or had her home searched. 

- On the other hand Christine Bacon, another of MM's part-time lovers also mother of his young son, was interviewed under caution, kept in custody overnight and had her home searched.  Why, given she did not spend the night of the tragedy with MM and was only acquainted with JB through SF did EP adopt this heavy handed approach with this witness?  I would suggest it was connected with DI Miller interviewing MM under caution where he was asked whether or not CB used cannabis to which he replied occasionally.  He was then asked when she last used. 

- MM was told his homegrown cannabis plants had been removed for analysis and that he could face charges over this and the fact he admitted to purchasing cannabis from some work colleagues.

- In JM's WS's reference is made to JB's neighbours alerting the drugs squad to JB's cannabis plants in his garden and their destruction.  The WS makes ref to JM assisting JB produce and distribute around uni campus.  It also makes ref to MM and JB producing and distributing cannabis. 

- SB's WS also makes ref to JB/JM drugs referring again to drugs squad.  The WS claims SB didn't like JM/JB bringing drugs into their shared house on the basis a couple of the lads who were sharing were part-timers in the army/TA.  One of the lads, James Richard, was a prosecution witness telling the court/trial JB told him he hated his fcukin parents.  As you know I am sceptical about the authors of these WS's.  I think it likely these statements had a lot of input from EP and witnesses were cooerced using the drugs angle.

- JB was charged over OCP break-in.  Why would EP press charges over this but not the drugs especially given the way MM/CB were handled over their involvement with drugs?

- JB was not even questioned about drugs during his police interviews.

- The CoA doc refers to OCP and JM's cheque fraud but not the drugs, why not?

- JM infers others in the JB/JM circle used drugs eg LR and Charles Marsden.  As you know LR was at one time girlfriend to MW owner of Sloppy Joes and Frog N Bean.  If these people were not only users but also distributors on  licenced premises EP could quite easily close the business down if drugs were found.

- IF DS Jones sold it hard to witnesses SC had 2 gsw's and both were fatal ie she could not have inflicted second gsw, 33 plus years ago people were far more deferential than they are today especially to the police and the like.  Unlikely they would say I want to see the PM and they certainly couldn't Google 'Multiple gunshots suicide'.  They start to think maybe JB was responsible and coupled with the fact if they cooperate they avoid any potential charges re drugs putting an end to businesses and careers.

IMO DS Jones was a Harrold Shipman type character who got off on control ie with Shipman he decided who should live and die perhaps believing he was acting humanely if his patients were seriously ill.  With DS Jones he had a hunch about JB but no evidence.  As he said in the 'Killing Mum and Dad' docu/drama he had to hope and pray something would turn up and of course it did turn up by way of the silencer and JM's testimony both of which he had a helping hand in producing!  DS Jones undoubtedly thought JB guilty and made sure he got the result he wanted.  In both cases, Shipman and DS Jones, the systems and controls were weak with equally weak supervision and management hence the pair were able to act with impunity. 

[Myster]

Well, that takes the biscuit, and something I never expected I would ever hear !!!  Comparing a good old-fashioned cop like Stan Jones who nailed a murderer, to serial killer who dispatched 200+ elderly women, divesting some victims of their jewellery and forging the will of his last one to obtain £386,000 by deception. There were even suggestions that he got a sexual thrill from doing so.

[Caroline]

But it wasn't a case of just smoking some 'weed'.  JB was growing cannabis at Bourtree cottage (production) and selling it to others with JM a distributor (dealing). 

The drugs in this case present too many anomalies for it not to be mean something......

- MM spent the night of the murders with his part-time lover Mavis Southgate and yet there's no evidence she was interviewed under caution and/or had her home searched. 

- On the other hand Christine Bacon, another of MM's part-time lovers also mother of his young son, was interviewed under caution, kept in custody overnight and had her home searched.  Why, given she did not spend the night of the tragedy with MM and was only acquainted with JB through SF did EP adopt this heavy handed approach with this witness?  I would suggest it was connected with DI Miller interviewing MM under caution where he was asked whether or not CB used cannabis to which he replied occasionally.  He was then asked when she last used. 

- MM was told his homegrown cannabis plants had been removed for analysis and that he could face charges over this and the fact he admitted to purchasing cannabis from some work colleagues.

- In JM's WS's reference is made to JB's neighbours alerting the drugs squad to JB's cannabis plants in his garden and their destruction.  The WS makes ref to JM assisting JB produce and distribute around uni campus.  It also makes ref to MM and JB producing and distributing cannabis. 

- SB's WS also makes ref to JB/JM drugs referring again to drugs squad.  The WS claims SB didn't like JM/JB bringing drugs into their shared house on the basis a couple of the lads who were sharing were part-timers in the army/TA.  One of the lads, James Richard, was a prosecution witness telling the court/trial JB told him he hated his fcukin parents.  As you know I am sceptical about the authors of these WS's.  I think it likely these statements had a lot of input from EP and witnesses were cooerced using the drugs angle.

- JB was charged over OCP break-in.  Why would EP press charges over this but not the drugs especially given the way MM/CB were handled over their involvement with drugs?

- JB was not even questioned about drugs during his police interviews.

- The CoA doc refers to OCP and JM's cheque fraud but not the drugs, why not?

- JM infers others in the JB/JM circle used drugs eg LR and Charles Marsden.  As you know LR was at one time girlfriend to MW owner of Sloppy Joes and Frog N Bean.  If these people were not only users but also distributors on  licenced premises EP could quite easily close the business down if drugs were found.

- IF DS Jones sold it hard to witnesses SC had 2 gsw's and both were fatal ie she could not have inflicted second gsw, 33 plus years ago people were far more deferential than they are today especially to the police and the like.  Unlikely they would say I want to see the PM and they certainly couldn't Google 'Multiple gunshots suicide'.  They start to think maybe JB was responsible and coupled with the fact if they cooperate they avoid any potential charges re drugs putting an end to businesses and careers.

IMO DS Jones was a Harrold Shipman type character who got off on control ie with Shipman he decided who should live and die perhaps believing he was acting humanely if his patients were seriously ill.  With DS Jones he had a hunch about JB but no evidence.  As he said in the 'Killing Mum and Dad' docu/drama he had to hope and pray something would turn up and of course it did turn up by way of the silencer and JM's testimony both of which he had a helping hand in producing!  DS Jones undoubtedly thought JB guilty and made sure he got the result he wanted.  In both cases, Shipman and DS Jones, the systems and controls were weak with equally weak supervision and management hence the pair were able to act with impunity.

So how can the other be coerced when they were users or BAMBERS drugs? Again, Bamber himself is the instigator. This is no way a good enough bargaining tool - they would have gotten a fine at the most and would have a pretty good story to tell about how the cops tried to frame an innocent man.

Don't really think Shipman can be likened to Stan Jones. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Well, that takes the biscuit, and something I never expected I would ever hear !!!  Comparing a good old-fashioned cop like Stan Jones who nailed a murderer, to serial killer who dispatched 200+ elderly women, divesting some victims of their jewellery and forging the will of his last one to obtain £386,000 by deception. There were even suggestions that he got a sexual thrill from doing so.

If DS Jones had a helping hand in fabricating the silencer evidence and coercing witnesses including JM this would take perverting the course of justice to a whole new level and imo amount to a heinous crime against potentially an innocent man.  WHF was an exceptionally complex soc for the time and the fact it happened in this country where gun crime is relatively low.  The fact DS Jones, a relatively low ranking officer, believed JB guilty based on a lot of subjective stuff eg JB's behaviour is neither here nor there. 

We don't know whether or not DS Jones was a good old-fahsioned cop who always acted professionally.  We know little about him apart from when he joined and retired from the police.  We don't know anything about his disciplinary record, any complaints made against him and whether or not these were upheld, other cases he worked on, etc, etc. 

Accountability and transparency were not what they are today hence the likes of clergy and Jimmy Savile were able to slip under the radar and sexually abuse children over decades. 

[Holly Goodhead]

So how can the other be coerced when they were users or BAMBERS drugs? Again, Bamber himself is the instigator. This is no way a good enough bargaining tool - they would have gotten a fine at the most and would have a pretty good story to tell about how the cops tried to frame an innocent man.

Don't really think Shipman can be likened to Stan Jones. 

There's no evidence the cannabis CB used around the beginning of 1985 (according to MM's interview) was sourced from JB.  MM also produced his own and purchased from others.

JB may have been producing, using and dealing cannabis but others were also using and dealing eg JM.  The fact JB produced/supplied is neither here nor there.  The others were all adults and responsible for their own actions.  Afaik JB was not threatening JM in any way to deal on campus or to use personally?  If I'm in a pub and intend to drive home the fact someone might offer me a drink would not be grounds to absolve myself of the drink/driving laws.  You seem to be saying because the drugs were supplied by JB this would absolve others who used drugs from this source? 

Cannabis is currently a class B drug.  Possession carries a max 5 year prison sentence and/or an unlimited fine.  Supply and production carries a max 14 year prison sentence and/or an unlimited fine.

https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing

The police may have used all of this against those they wanted to use as prosecution witnesses.  What on earth was the point in sending PC's Collins and Delgado to CB's house to carry out a search, interviewing her under caution and remanding her in custody overnight?  Bearing in mind this woman sent JB a condolence card but ended up a prosecution witness in terms of blackening his character by claiming he supplied her with 2 ducks at Christmas which she says had been shot inhumanely! 

[Myster]

There's no expert evidence re the sequence of shootings, if there was it would no doubt show NB sustained his upstairs gsw's on the landing and main stairs and not in the main bedroom.

The physical evidence by way of blood stains, casings, distance of shots, trajectories and wound tracks all support the above.

Have you been tucking into your Christmas pud laced with a whole bottle of brandy, already!

[Myster]

If DS Jones had a helping hand in fabricating the silencer evidence and coercing witnesses including JM this would take perverting the course of justice to a whole new level and imo amount to a heinous crime against potentially an innocent man.  WHF was an exceptionally complex soc for the time and the fact it happened in this country where gun crime is relatively low.  The fact DS Jones, a relatively low ranking officer, believed JB guilty based on a lot of subjective stuff eg JB's behaviour is neither here nor there. 

We don't know whether or not DS Jones was a good old-fahsioned cop who always acted professionally.  We know little about him apart from when he joined and retired from the police.  We don't know anything about his disciplinary record, any complaints made against him and whether or not these were upheld, other cases he worked on, etc, etc. 

Accountability and transparency were not what they are today hence the likes of clergy and Jimmy Savile were able to slip under the radar and sexually abuse children over decades.

Detectives go on hunches initially, as did Miss Marple at Bourtree.  If they didn't no criminal would ever be prosecuted.

What's this fabricating of evidence re the moderator then... don't say we're back to that bloody water in the buckets again !

And why should we want to know anything more about Stan the Man, he wasn't on trial... nosey parker !  Just think, if he' d been sacked for insubordination, Jeremy Bamber would have got off scot-free.

[adam]

Why an earth would the police have a hunch that Nevill had not rang Jeremy at 3am & said 'please come over, Sheila's gone crazy & she's got the gun' ?

Surprised Nevill said 'the gun'.

What gun ? There were several at WHF. Including shot guns. Massive difference between a shot gun & a rifle for shooting rabbits.

It was a rifle Sheila used, not a gun . It was also the rifle Jeremy had used earlier that evening.

It would not have taken any longer for Nevill to say 'she's picked up the rifle you left out'.

As it happened Jeremy was very perceptive & instantly assummed the 'gun' Nevill was referring to was actually a rifle for shooting rabbits he had left out.

[Myster]

Why an earth would the police have a hunch that Nevill had not rang Jeremy at 3am & said 'please come over, Sheila's gone crazy & she's got the gun' ?

Surprised Nevill said 'the gun'.

What gun ? There were several at WHF. Including shot guns. Massive difference between a shot gun & a rifle for shooting rabbits.

It was a rifle Sheila used, not a gun . It was also the rifle Jeremy had used earlier that evening.

It would not have taken any longer for Nevill to say 'she's picked up the rifle you left out'.

As it happened Jeremy was very perceptive & instantly assummed the 'gun' Nevill was referring to was actually a rifle for shooting rabbits he had left out.

That's a good point, Adam.   Why specifically "the gun" when there were accessible shotguns in various locations at WHF.  Nevill must have known exactly which weapon she'd got hold of, so why didn't he say - "She / Sheila's got your rifle... " or "She / Sheila's got your Anschutz..."?

https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/jeremy-bamber-fathers-alleged-phone-call

[APRIL]

That's a good point, Adam.   Why specifically "the gun" when there were accessible shotguns in various locations at WHF.  Nevill must have known exactly which weapon she'd got hold of, so why didn't he say - "She / Sheila's got your rifle... " or "She / Sheila's got your Anschutz..."?

https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/jeremy-bamber-fathers-alleged-phone-call

I think it was a Freudian slip.  It's highly likely the "THE" gun referenced the one which was on his mind, ie the gun he said he claimed to have taken on a futile bunny bashing foray and claimed he'd left in a prominent enough position for Sheila to see. In a house which was home to a multitude of different fire-arms, why would one be specific enough to be "THE" gun.

[Holly Goodhead]

Detectives go on hunches initially, as did Miss Marple at Bourtree.  If they didn't no criminal would ever be prosecuted.

What's this fabricating of evidence re the moderator then... don't say we're back to that bloody water in the buckets again !

And why should we want to know anything more about Stan the Man, he wasn't on trial... nosey parker !  Just think, if he' d been sacked for insubordination, Jeremy Bamber would have got off scot-free.

I prefer the idea of forensic science used to catch criminals not a prosecution built on hunches with fabricated evidence and unreliable testimony.