Author Topic: The Weapons kept at White House Farm  (Read 6295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline adam

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #180 on: March 28, 2020, 09:41:16 AM »
A poster said recently there is no 'smoking gun' so could not vote guilty. 

Assume this means no witnesses, CCTV, accused blood at the scene, victims blood at his home etc. Or not being caught red handed, 'it's a fair cop guv'.

If a smoking gun was always needed, no one would be in prison.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #181 on: March 28, 2020, 09:57:50 AM »

How can you ignore all the overwhelming evidence which proved beyond doubt that he murdered all his family?

He had a trial; was found guilty; has lost all his appeals — so what don’t you understand about the fact he’s guilty?

As an aside, I hope you’re never called for jury service, because if you’d find someone guilty simply because you didn’t like them you shouldn’t be allowed to sit on a jury. You can’t find someone guilty just because you don’t like them! In the same way you can’t find someone not guilty just because you take a shine to them. You have to be impartial.


Who said that, if I were on a jury, I would find someone guilty because I didn't like them? That isn't what I said at all. I'm considering the case years after the event, and I know very well that any dislike I feel about Jeremy is only from what I've read.  I'm also fully aware that what one reads isn't always the truth.

I like to think that, were I to sit on a jury, I would consider all the evidence very carefully (and I hope you would too).

We have been over the fact that Jeremy was found guilty and lost his appeals, several times now. Yes, he is a convicted murderer, yes, he is legally guilty.

But, is he factually guilty?

Is the evidence against him really overwhelming? 

Why did two jurors NOT think him guilty?  Please don't say it's because they were women and they "fancied" him!!





Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #182 on: March 28, 2020, 10:00:45 AM »
A poster said recently there is no 'smoking gun' so could not vote guilty. 

Assume this means no witnesses, CCTV, accused blood at the scene, victims blood at his home etc. Or not being caught red handed, 'it's a fair cop guv'.

If a smoking gun was always needed, no one would be in prison.

Oh, of course they would!!

Offline adam

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #183 on: March 28, 2020, 10:14:56 AM »

Who said that, if I were on a jury, I would find someone guilty because I didn't like them? That isn't what I said at all. I'm considering the case years after the event, and I know very well that any dislike I feel about Jeremy is only from what I've read.  I'm also fully aware that what one reads isn't always the truth.

I like to think that, were I to sit on a jury, I would consider all the evidence very carefully (and I hope you would too).

We have been over the fact that Jeremy was found guilty and lost his appeals, several times now. Yes, he is a convicted murderer, yes, he is legally guilty.

But, is he factually guilty?

Is the evidence against him really overwhelming? 

Why did two jurors NOT think him guilty?  Please don't say it's because they were women and they "fancied" him!!

Well there is one alive suspect, with several motives, an opportunity and no alibi. And one witness - Julie Mugford.

There is over 60 pieces of forensic evidence which shows it was not Sheila. From the Court of Appeal.

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #184 on: March 28, 2020, 11:43:33 AM »

Who said that, if I were on a jury, I would find someone guilty because I didn't like them? That isn't what I said at all. I'm considering the case years after the event, and I know very well that any dislike I feel about Jeremy is only from what I've read.  I'm also fully aware that what one reads isn't always the truth.

I like to think that, were I to sit on a jury, I would consider all the evidence very carefully (and I hope you would too).

We have been over the fact that Jeremy was found guilty and lost his appeals, several times now. Yes, he is a convicted murderer, yes, he is legally guilty.

But, is he factually guilty?

Is the evidence against him really overwhelming? 

Why did two jurors NOT think him guilty?  Please don't say it's because they were women and they "fancied" him!!


You said, MrsWah, and I quote:  “ I'm concerned that I'm veering towards his guilt merely because I don't like him.”

That suggests you’re allowing your personal feelings about him to sway you...

You’re correct that you shouldn’t believe everything you read — just look at the lies, exaggerations and rubbish that Jeremy Bamber and his “team” put out.

However, not EVERYONE can be wrong and untruthful, nor are official reports fabrications and lies. Almost every person who’s had contact with JB, knew him well etc all say the same: he’s a cold-blooded liar and he’s guilty. They can’t ALL be wrong.

You’re also forgetting a little stumbling block: EVIDENCE.

And evidence proves he was guilty.

As for just the two jurors out of 12 who weren’t sure he was guilty, that happens in many cases, hence why we have 12 jurors. By the law of averages you’ll always get a couple of jurors who aren’t particularly bright, so the law accounts for that by allowing a majority decision. Ten men and women were convinced beyond doubt that he is guilty, and as he’s lost appeals since then it simply proves their decision was the right one. Furthermore, IF he ever got to appeal again (which won’t happen), but if he did, he’d lose again. Not just because he’s guilty, but SINCE his conviction even MORE damning evidence has surfaced against him , so he doesn’t have a hope in hell of worming his way out.
Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.

Offline Brietta

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #185 on: March 28, 2020, 02:49:18 PM »
I think that the evidence is overwhelming that Sheila had neither interest nor expertise in any of the firearms kept at the farm; and unless she was an accomplished actress when 'feigning' the effect of the prescribed drugs found in her system would not have been in the physical condition necessary to enable the coordination evident in the slaughter of herself and her family.

I am at a bit of a loss why we are even bothering to give thought to consideration of Jeremy Bamber's conviction for one of the most heinous crimes of the past fifty years.
In my opinion the fact that there was sufficient evidence to convict him despite the marvellous job the police initially carried out of getting rid of evidence which must have convinced him he'd walked into his fortune having got off with the massacre of his family scot-free and it shows that if the crime scene had not been destroyed there would be absolutely no room for anyone to doubt his guilt.

I watched the part of the docudrama where the police put mattresses etc into a fire pit open mouthed (until then I had no idea it was possible for anything like that to happen almost before the bodies of the victims were cold).

If I was in the habit of shouting at the television the neighbours would have heard me when I realised from the docudrama that the bodies had been released for cremation!
Until then the dominant image I had from the time was Mugford supporting Bamber in the funeral procession.  It never occurred to me that there was a cremation not a burial.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2020, 02:52:24 PM by Brietta »
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #186 on: March 28, 2020, 04:21:45 PM »

You said, MrsWah, and I quote:  “ I'm concerned that I'm veering towards his guilt merely because I don't like him.”

That suggests you’re allowing your personal feelings about him to sway you...

You’re correct that you shouldn’t believe everything you read — just look at the lies, exaggerations and rubbish that Jeremy Bamber and his “team” put out.

However, not EVERYONE can be wrong and untruthful, nor are official reports fabrications and lies. Almost every person who’s had contact with JB, knew him well etc all say the same: he’s a cold-blooded liar and he’s guilty. They can’t ALL be wrong.

You’re also forgetting a little stumbling block: EVIDENCE.

And evidence proves he was guilty.

As for just the two jurors out of 12 who weren’t sure he was guilty, that happens in many cases, hence why we have 12 jurors. By the law of averages you’ll always get a couple of jurors who aren’t particularly bright, so the law accounts for that by allowing a majority decision. Ten men and women were convinced beyond doubt that he is guilty, and as he’s lost appeals since then it simply proves their decision was the right one. Furthermore, IF he ever got to appeal again (which won’t happen), but if he did, he’d lose again. Not just because he’s guilty, but SINCE his conviction even MORE damning evidence has surfaced against him , so he doesn’t have a hope in hell of worming his way out.


Of course I'm letting my personal feelings sway me.  It is 35 years later. I don't know Jeremy, nor did I ever know anyone involved in the case, and I wasn't in court. All my information comes from books, articles, and people on forums, and I have never spoken to Jeremy, nor have I written to him.

This is NOT the same as actually being on the jury, and being part of the body of people deciding a person's fate.Of course I would take that seriously! 

I don't agree that the jurors who didn't think Jeremy was guilty, were necessarily "not particularly bright", however, I do believe that some people on juries are exactly that-----not particularly bright. Also, not particularly interested, and also, easily swayed. I am also concerned that some people on juries may be bullied into taking a certain stance, although that's a topic for another day, and I'm not saying it happened in Bamber's case.

You mentioned on another post that Jeremy is "thick"( in your opinion). I have heard that said before. What I wonder is, if he is "thick" , how did he manage to plan and execute those murders as efficiently as he did ?  I would have thought that, yes, of course he could well have done it, but he would have actually had to be rather clever to have done so.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #187 on: March 28, 2020, 04:25:08 PM »
Well there is one alive suspect, with several motives, an opportunity and no alibi. And one witness - Julie Mugford.

There is over 60 pieces of forensic evidence which shows it was not Sheila. From the Court of Appeal.


I have the link---I will read it. Have read some of it before, but not all of it.  However, these days, I have more time on my hands!!

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #188 on: March 28, 2020, 08:25:27 PM »

Of course I'm letting my personal feelings sway me.  It is 35 years later. I don't know Jeremy, nor did I ever know anyone involved in the case, and I wasn't in court. All my information comes from books, articles, and people on forums, and I have never spoken to Jeremy, nor have I written to him.

This is NOT the same as actually being on the jury, and being part of the body of people deciding a person's fate.Of course I would take that seriously! 

I don't agree that the jurors who didn't think Jeremy was guilty, were necessarily "not particularly bright", however, I do believe that some people on juries are exactly that-----not particularly bright. Also, not particularly interested, and also, easily swayed. I am also concerned that some people on juries may be bullied into taking a certain stance, although that's a topic for another day, and I'm not saying it happened in Bamber's case.

You mentioned on another post that Jeremy is "thick"( in your opinion). I have heard that said before. What I wonder is, if he is "thick" , how did he manage to plan and execute those murders as efficiently as he did ?  I would have thought that, yes, of course he could well have done it, but he would have actually had to be rather clever to have done so.


Mrs Wah, you’re “assuming” those two jurors didn’t think Jeremy was guilty: they may not have, but equally they may have been unsure of his guilt. And considering 10 of the jurors were indeed convinced of his guilt, that sugggests those two had difficulty forming opinions, or were biased in some way.

You also need reminding that Jeremy had one of the top QC’s in the country at that time: so if he wasn’t able to persuade the jury that Jeremy was innocent, that doesn’t bode well for him, does it?

As for your preposterous belief that Jeremy “executed those murders efficiently “ and was “rather clever” in carrying them out, besides seeming to admire him for doing such a heinous deed, he was anything BUT clever, hence why he was arrested relatively soon after. Just some of his mistakes were:

~ He told Julie of his plan
~ He was too arrogant to believe she’d give him away
~ He didn’t think through about Sheila being unable to shoot herself with the silencer attached
~ Rather than leaving the silencer by Sheila’s side he hid it in a cupboard
~ It didn’t occur to him that Sheila’s blood could be deep inside the silencer
~ He hadn’t banked on Nevill putting up a violent struggle
~ He beat Nevill to a pulp — something Sheila couldn’t possibly have done
~ He didn’t force Sheila to walk in the kitchen so she’d get glass, sugar and blood on her feet
~ He didn’t push Sheila against Nevill’s dead body so she’d have his blood on her
~ He didn’t break any of her long fingernails
~ He didn’t shoot Sheila in the twins bedroom
~ He didn’t smear blood on the telephone in the kitchen
~ He didn’t leave the receiver dangling down — he simply placed it by its cradle
~ He didn’t realise it would have been impossible for Nevill to speak having had his mouth shot to pieces
~ He didn’t place Sheila’s fingertips all over the gun
~ He didn’t dial 999
~ He phoned Julie before calling the local police
~ He lied to officers about the timing of his phone calls
~ He drove unusually slow to WHF
~ He behaved unnaturally calm at the scene and even spoke about buying a Porsche
~ He told numerous lies and contradicted himself in his two statements
~ He claimed he’d tried to shoot rabbits with the gun he said had no silencer or scope on
~ He gave different accounts of where he’d supposedly left the gun
~ He lied about why he had June’s new bicycle at his house
~ He told police it was impossible to break-in to WHF as it was all locked from inside, but didn’t mention the faulty latch
~ He later pretended he’d broken into the window to get car documents after police found his blade
~ He didn’t have the nous to realise he was under surveillance & police knew he hadn’t gone there
~ His left his wetsuit at WHF without his snorkel & flippers which were at Goldhanger: Julie said it was always at GH
~ He started “celebrating” the very next day; Chamoagne/expensive meals/ two holidays/spending sprees
~ He sold family heirlooms within days
~ He insisted the family be cremated
~ He went to The Sun trying to sell nude photos of Sheila

And that’s just some of his huge slip-ups...

And you say he planned and executed the murders efficiently?
Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #189 on: March 28, 2020, 09:38:26 PM »

Mrs Wah, you’re “assuming” those two jurors didn’t think Jeremy was guilty: they may not have, but equally they may have been unsure of his guilt. And considering 10 of the jurors were indeed convinced of his guilt, that sugggests those two had difficulty forming opinions, or were biased in some way.

You also need reminding that Jeremy had one of the top QC’s in the country at that time: so if he wasn’t able to persuade the jury that Jeremy was innocent, that doesn’t bode well for him, does it?

As for your preposterous belief that Jeremy “executed those murders efficiently “ and was “rather clever” in carrying them out, besides seeming to admire him for doing such a heinous deed, he was anything BUT clever, hence why he was arrested relatively soon after. Just some of his mistakes were:

~ He told Julie of his plan
~ He was too arrogant to believe she’d give him away
~ He didn’t think through about Sheila being unable to shoot herself with the silencer attached
~ Rather than leaving the silencer by Sheila’s side he hid it in a cupboard
~ It didn’t occur to him that Sheila’s blood could be deep inside the silencer
~ He hadn’t banked on Nevill putting up a violent struggle
~ He beat Nevill to a pulp — something Sheila couldn’t possibly have done
~ He didn’t force Sheila to walk in the kitchen so she’d get glass, sugar and blood on her feet
~ He didn’t push Sheila against Nevill’s dead body so she’d have his blood on her
~ He didn’t break any of her long fingernails
~ He didn’t shoot Sheila in the twins bedroom
~ He didn’t smear blood on the telephone in the kitchen
~ He didn’t leave the receiver dangling down — he simply placed it by its cradle
~ He didn’t realise it would have been impossible for Nevill to speak having had his mouth shot to pieces
~ He didn’t place Sheila’s fingertips all over the gun
~ He didn’t dial 999
~ He phoned Julie before calling the local police
~ He lied to officers about the timing of his phone calls
~ He drove unusually slow to WHF
~ He behaved unnaturally calm at the scene and even spoke about buying a Porsche
~ He told numerous lies and contradicted himself in his two statements
~ He claimed he’d tried to shoot rabbits with the gun he said had no silencer or scope on
~ He gave different accounts of where he’d supposedly left the gun
~ He lied about why he had June’s new bicycle at his house
~ He told police it was impossible to break-in to WHF as it was all locked from inside, but didn’t mention the faulty latch
~ He later pretended he’d broken into the window to get car documents after police found his blade
~ He didn’t have the nous to realise he was under surveillance & police knew he hadn’t gone there
~ His left his wetsuit at WHF without his snorkel & flippers which were at Goldhanger: Julie said it was always at GH
~ He started “celebrating” the very next day; Chamoagne/expensive meals/ two holidays/spending sprees
~ He sold family heirlooms within days
~ He insisted the family be cremated
~ He went to The Sun trying to sell nude photos of Sheila

And that’s just some of his huge slip-ups...

And you say he planned and executed the murders efficiently?


No, I don't "seem to admire him".  It does seem, however, that you still find it difficult to reply to posts without slipping in personal remarks about other posters!

As for all the points you make, you may be correct that they all happened as you say, but many of them have been debated over and over, and not everyone agrees. For instance, if you read Scott Lomax's book, he says that Sheila did not have immaculate nails. Now, I don't know whether you are right or he is, but I'm saying it's been debated. Some people even disagree that the blood in the silencer was Sheila's.  Again, I don't know who is right, but I am saying that not everybody agrees with you. And, not everybody believes Julie's story,or that there was only one phone call.



If it was all so obvious, as you say, I would have expected the police to have "cottoned on" to the true situation long before they did. Police officers make mistakes, but in general, my common sense tells me that they know what they are doing.

It all happened so long ago now, and it's all been argued/debated for so many years, that I doubt it's even possible to know for sure what is true and what isn't.  For what it's worth, though, I don't believe JB is going to be winning any appeals .

Offline Caroline

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #190 on: March 28, 2020, 09:50:05 PM »

No, I don't "seem to admire him".  It does seem, however, that you still find it difficult to reply to posts without slipping in personal remarks about other posters!

As for all the points you make, you may be correct that they all happened as you say, but many of them have been debated over and over, and not everyone agrees. For instance, if you read Scott Lomax's book, he says that Sheila did not have immaculate nails. Now, I don't know whether you are right or he is, but I'm saying it's been debated. Some people even disagree that the blood in the silencer was Sheila's.  Again, I don't know who is right, but I am saying that not everybody agrees with you. And, not everybody believes Julie's story,or that there was only one phone call.



If it was all so obvious, as you say, I would have expected the police to have "cottoned on" to the true situation long before they did. Police officers make mistakes, but in general, my common sense tells me that they know what they are doing.

It all happened so long ago now, and it's all been argued/debated for so many years, that I doubt it's even possible to know for sure what is true and what isn't.  For what it's worth, though, I don't believe JB is going to be winning any appeals .

Sorry Mrswah, but you can see she has immaculate nails.

Offline APRIL

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #191 on: March 28, 2020, 10:06:56 PM »

No, I don't "seem to admire him".  It does seem, however, that you still find it difficult to reply to posts without slipping in personal remarks about other posters!

As for all the points you make, you may be correct that they all happened as you say, but many of them have been debated over and over, and not everyone agrees. For instance, if you read Scott Lomax's book, he says that Sheila did not have immaculate nails. Now, I don't know whether you are right or he is, but I'm saying it's been debated. Some people even disagree that the blood in the silencer was Sheila's.  Again, I don't know who is right, but I am saying that not everybody agrees with you. And, not everybody believes Julie's story,or that there was only one phone call.



If it was all so obvious, as you say, I would have expected the police to have "cottoned on" to the true situation long before they did. Police officers make mistakes, but in general, my common sense tells me that they know what they are doing.

It all happened so long ago now, and it's all been argued/debated for so many years, that I doubt it's even possible to know for sure what is true and what isn't.  For what it's worth, though, I don't believe JB is going to be winning any appeals .


Look, I know the police didn't do their finest work, for which I blame Jeremy, but I get really pxxxxd off when I hear them being lumped together. My friend's late husband was one of the attending officers. He interviewed Jeremy and he never had any doubts about his guilt, NOR did others. Unfortunately, they can't follow their own instincts. Their orders come from higher up the chain. Their own thoughts are irrelevant.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1729
  • Total likes: 659
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #192 on: March 28, 2020, 10:47:17 PM »
Sorry Mrswah, but you can see she has immaculate nails.


I can see she had one immaculate nail!!!

Offline Caroline

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #193 on: March 28, 2020, 11:00:01 PM »

I can see she had one immaculate nail!!!

Can you see any non-immaculate nails?

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

Re: The Weapons kept at White House Farm
« Reply #194 on: March 29, 2020, 06:14:05 AM »

No, I don't "seem to admire him".  It does seem, however, that you still find it difficult to reply to posts without slipping in personal remarks about other posters!

As for all the points you make, you may be correct that they all happened as you say, but many of them have been debated over and over, and not everyone agrees. For instance, if you read Scott Lomax's book, he says that Sheila did not have immaculate nails. Now, I don't know whether you are right or he is, but I'm saying it's been debated. Some people even disagree that the blood in the silencer was Sheila's.  Again, I don't know who is right, but I am saying that not everybody agrees with you. And, not everybody believes Julie's story,or that there was only one phone call.



If it was all so obvious, as you say, I would have expected the police to have "cottoned on" to the true situation long before they did. Police officers make mistakes, but in general, my common sense tells me that they know what they are doing.

It all happened so long ago now, and it's all been argued/debated for so many years, that I doubt it's even possible to know for sure what is true and what isn't.  For what it's worth, though, I don't believe JB is going to be winning any appeals .


I’m sure that you don’t admire him, MrsWah — it would be most odd to admire a convicted mass murderer who killed both his parents’, sister, and two little six-year-old nephews.  But to call that killer “clever”  and that he carried out the murders “perfectly” could be construed as you admiring him for that, despite him not actually being clever at all: if he was he’d never had been a suspect, let alone charged and convicted.

Scott Lomax’ book is poorly written, completely biased, and full of discrepancies and falsehoods. For example, it’s well-recorded by both police, photographers and pathologist that all Sheila’s fingernails were long, perfectly manicured, polished, had no breaks in any of them, nor even chipped polish. Lomax got a major fact wrong, which negates everything else he claimed. I’ve actually seen photos of Sheila’s hands and fingernails, and they are indeed perfect. I have the photos somewhere and will post them up to show you.

I don’t care who agrees with me or not: I’m of no consequence in this case. The people who were of consequence were the jurors and the judges in both the first hearing and the subsequent appeal hearings. They concluded that on the evidence they were given, Jeremy was — and is — guilty. A few people can say they don’t believe Sheila’s blood was in the silencer, but the fact is, at the appeal hearing when an updated DNA sample was taken of the blood in the silencer it was proved that the chances of it not being Sheila’s was a TRILLION to one. I’d say that’s proof it was Sheila’s blood, but if people want to refuse to believe it, let them. They don’t matter...

Likewise, it’s been proved by the police that only ONE phone call was made from JB, and there wasn’t one call from Nevill. The police have PROVEN that; but still some people refuse to accept it. To argue against a proven fact makes that person look unhinged, and even WITHOUT the proof the police gave that it was the SAME phone call being paraphrased, what are the odds that both Nevill and Jeremy would phone Chelmsford Police 20 miles away rather than 999? Are you saying these people think both J and N chose to look up the telephone number, wasting precious time in a dire emergency, rather than calling 999? And we haven’t even TOUCHED on the fact Nevill was unable to speak whilst in the kitchen...

If you’ve researched properly you’ll find that most of the police officers did indeed feel something was wrong about Sheila being the murderer, but DCI Jones who was leading the case, refused to listen to their concerns. He, and just he, was to blame for allowing the crime scene to be contaminated; for allowing crucial items to be burned; for not showing the pathologist crime scene photos during the post mortem. Dr Vanezis was extremely angry with him soon after,  once he saw the photos of Sheila in situ, and realised he’d been encouraged into saying she’d committed suicide when he was already uneasy about it. As soon as he saw the photos AND learned about the silencer he absolutely knew Sheila could not have killed herself. For one thing, the first shot would have incapacitated her: the photos prove that by her blood trails on her face.

When you put all the pieces together you can see that this dreadfully inept investigation was caused by none other than DCI Jones.

Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.