How Did JB Commit The Killings

[The General]

People have been known to tell people they’d like to “bump their partners off” , kill them, words to that effect...and people have dismissed it.

Some people have tried to hire hitmen to kill their spouse, and have often been given away by the hitman when he’s considered it too evil...that’s why NO hitman would have killed The Bamber family. Even hitmen have morals...

The only reasonable explanation for a hitman to use someone else's weapon would be to fit up a third party. But, in this case, it would take a particularly foolhardy hitman to agree to using such an inappropriate weapon to kill everyone inside the house.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The only reasonable explanation for a hitman to use someone else's weapon would be to fit up a third party. But, in this case, it would take a particularly foolhardy hitman to agree to using such an inappropriate weapon to kill everyone inside the house.

It would be the only way to do it to fit up Sheila though.

[The General]

It would be the only way to do it to fit up Sheila though.

Yes, I conceded that point. But surely you consider hiring a hitman for a clinical job? I doubt even JB would suggest asking this hitman for a rubbish job and make it look like Sheila did it, when he could do that with a much more plausible result himself - given that the forum majority believe him to be a psychopath.

[Caroline]

Yes, I conceded that point. But surely you consider hiring a hitman for a clinical job? I doubt even JB would suggest asking this hitman for a rubbish job and make it look like Sheila did it, when he could do that with a much more plausible result himself - given that the forum majority believe him to be a psychopath.

He hardly moved in hitman circles and would risk telling a third person of his intentions.

[The General]

He hardly moved in hitman circles and would risk telling a third person of his intentions.

Indeed.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Thank you!!

I types far too quickly...so embarrassing!

I should edit before posting 🤦‍♀️

[ISpyWithMyEye]

The only reasonable explanation for a hitman to use someone else's weapon would be to fit up a third party. But, in this case, it would take a particularly foolhardy hitman to agree to using such an inappropriate weapon to kill everyone inside the house.

Great point, General.

Besides that, professional hitmen are professional — they wouldn’t assassinate a family of five by breaking into their home where there’s dogs; not knowing the layout; not knowing what he’d be up against; risking leaving evidence/being seen nearby; using a weapon they weren’t sure was effective/working properly/loaded etc; and not even Mafia kill children at any price.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Cite please.  Is this police officer who you are besmirching still alive?  Furthermore why has the witness who was coerced and intimidated into coming up with the exact same information as JM not come forward in the last 35 years to say how he was coerced and intimidated into lying in his police statement?

So Holly has declined to answer any of my last few posts on this thread.  That’s fine, I understand why.  I’d just like to address the suggestion of police collusion, cover up and conspiracy to get Jeremy banged up for a crime he didn’t commit.  After the court case and verdict Essex police came in for massive criticism and ridicule for their handling of the case, which they would not have done nearly as much if a verdict of not guilty had been reached, indeed they would have avoided any criticism at all if they had steadfastly stuck to their guns from the get go and done their best to cover up any suggestion of Jeremy’s involvement.  So quite what was the motivation for them pursuing JB so hard when it only served to shine a light on what a cock-up the initial investigation had been?  Rhetorical question and obviously not expecting Holly or any other supporter to respond.

[Caroline]

So Holly has declined to answer any of my last few posts on this thread.  That’s fine, I understand why.  I’d just like to address the suggestion of police collusion, cover up and conspiracy to get Jeremy banged up for a crime he didn’t commit.  After the court case and verdict Essex police came in for massive criticism and ridicule for their handling of the case, which they would not have done nearly as much if a verdict of not guilty had been reached, indeed they would have avoided any criticism at all if they had steadfastly stuck to their guns from the get go and done their best to cover up any suggestion of Jeremy’s involvement.  So quite what was the motivation for them pursuing JB so hard when it only served to shine a light on what a cock-up the initial investigation had been?  Rhetorical question and obviously not expecting Holly or any other supporter to respond.

I have made this point before, changing their mind, made them look stupid - so no motivation at all.

[Holly Goodhead]

So Holly has declined to answer any of my last few posts on this thread.  That’s fine, I understand why.  I’d just like to address the suggestion of police collusion, cover up and conspiracy to get Jeremy banged up for a crime he didn’t commit.  After the court case and verdict Essex police came in for massive criticism and ridicule for their handling of the case, which they would not have done nearly as much if a verdict of not guilty had been reached, indeed they would have avoided any criticism at all if they had steadfastly stuck to their guns from the get go and done their best to cover up any suggestion of Jeremy’s involvement.  So quite what was the motivation for them pursuing JB so hard when it only served to shine a light on what a cock-up the initial investigation had been?  Rhetorical question and obviously not expecting Holly or any other supporter to respond.

If you are expecting or wanting me to respond to a post(s) can you not just bump it up when I'm on the forum or send me the links via pm?

I had other things on yesterday and spent very liitle time here.  When I arrived yesterday evening I spent most of that time editing and removing posts which contained comments of a personal nature one of which was yours.

Are the posts pending replies on this thread and from yesterday?

Off for the daily run followed by floor and weight exercises.  I'll be back later! 

[ISpyWithMyEye]

So Holly has declined to answer any of my last few posts on this thread.  That’s fine, I understand why.  I’d just like to address the suggestion of police collusion, cover up and conspiracy to get Jeremy banged up for a crime he didn’t commit.  After the court case and verdict Essex police came in for massive criticism and ridicule for their handling of the case, which they would not have done nearly as much if a verdict of not guilty had been reached, indeed they would have avoided any criticism at all if they had steadfastly stuck to their guns from the get go and done their best to cover up any suggestion of Jeremy’s involvement.  So quite what was the motivation for them pursuing JB so hard when it only served to shine a light on what a cock-up the initial investigation had been?  Rhetorical question and obviously not expecting Holly or any other supporter to respond.

Oh, I thought Holly would have responded by now...

Another thought; if the police wanted to stitch him up why didn’t they on day one?  Why leave it so long?

I believe DCI Taff Jones was the major obstacle in preventing the police pursuing Jeremy sooner. He was a hysterical bully and threatened ANY officer with the sack if they didn’t agree with him. But nearly ALL those police were suspicious of JB from the very start, even outside WHF on the night, and when DS Jones asked Taff not to destroy evidence and to preserve the crime scene he went nuts! He clearly had an emotional disturbance, and as his behaviour was so erratic rumours started that they thought he may have a brain tumour — so he was the one who cocked up, not the police.

He seemed so determined to frame Sheila anyone would think he and Jeremy were in cahoots! I know that’s virtually impossible, but why WAS he so determined to blame Sheila? Maybe he wanted an open and shut case to make himself look efficient and further his own career...

Whatever, the police were suspicious BEFORE Julie confessed, so how anyone can say they set out to stitch Jeremy up is utter nonsense. Especially as you say, VS, by admitting their initial mistake (caused by Taff) they faced humiliation, demotions, and ridicule...so if they didn’t know for certain JB was the killer they’d NEVER have charged him because had he got off they’d have looked even worse & probably would’ve lost their jobs.

[Holly Goodhead]

So what are you going to do, actually fire bullets into someone’s face to prove a point?  They didn’t need to recreate the shooting of JFK to prove definitively that that killing bullet that took the top off the president’s head came from the Book Depository building.

They proved the perp's location by laser trajectory analysis which can be used in this case too.

What was known about the JFK or Fred Barras shooting that isn't known about the shooting of NB?

[Nicholas]

Oh, I thought Holly would have responded by now...

Another thought; if the police wanted to stitch him up why didn’t they on day one?  Why leave it so long?

I believe DCI Taff Jones was the major obstacle in preventing the police pursuing Jeremy sooner. He was a hysterical bully and threatened ANY officer with the sack if they didn’t agree with him. But nearly ALL those police were suspicious of JB from the very start, even outside WHF on the night, and when DS Jones asked Taff not to destroy evidence and to preserve the crime scene he went nuts! He clearly had an emotional disturbance, and as his behaviour was so erratic rumours started that they thought he may have a brain tumour — so he was the one who cocked up, not the police.

He seemed so determined to frame Sheila anyone would think he and Jeremy were in cahoots! I know that’s virtually impossible, but why WAS he so determined to blame Sheila? Maybe he wanted an open and shut case to make himself look efficient and further his own career...

Whatever, the police were suspicious BEFORE Julie confessed, so how anyone can say they set out to stitch Jeremy up is utter nonsense. Especially as you say, VS, by admitting their initial mistake (caused by Taff) they faced humiliation, demotions, and ridicule...so if they didn’t know for certain JB was the killer they’d NEVER have charged him because had he got off they’d have looked even worse & probably would’ve lost their jobs.

Of course it is - there’s no evidence of a ‘stitch up’ nor that he’s a ‘political prisoner’ its propaganda & nothing more

Bamber jumped on the innocence fraud train and it was full steam ahead for a short time

His abuse of others is clear from the start - the police recognised it then as they do now

“In the last few decades, researchers have been measuring a cluster of traits ready-made to predict abuse — the Dark Tetrad (formerly Triad), a frankly exploitative, aggressive type marked by four traits: narcissism, best thought of, again, as the drive to feel special; psychopathy, a pattern of remorseless lies and manipulation; Machiavellianism, a cold, chess-playing approach to life and love; and finally, sadism, a troubling tendency to delight in the suffering of others. A quick glance at this cluster is enough to give anyone chills. But some of these traits are patently more dangerous than others.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/romance-redux/201802/is-what-everyone-should-know-about-covert-abusers

Bamber’s fraudulent ‘innocence campaign’ has exposed all of the above and his true psychopathic character is there for all to see

[Holly Goodhead]

Please explain why it is simply impossible for Jeremy to have shot NB upstairs?

As I said previously, the prosecution case at trial was that JB entered his parents bedroom and opened fire and that NB's 4 upstairs gsw's were inflicted in the bedroom.  The junior defence QC asked Malcolm Fletcher (ballistics from a HO run lab) whether any of the adults sustained any gsw's upstairs outside the bedroom and he replied 'No'.  The pathological evidence showed after NB sustained the 2 facial gsw's, inflicted upstairs, he was incapable of purposeful speech thereafter.  Therefore how could NB have made the call to JB when he arrived in the kitchen if he was incapable of purposeful speech and why was the hanset/mouthpiece free of blood when the facial wounds produced heavy blood loss internally and externally.

In this case MF was not asked and did not volunteer how he arrived at the above conclusion. 

You can see from the JFK shooting it involves a multi-disciplinary team going to soc to reconstruct.  In this case with the exception of Dr Vanezis and the prosecutor no one even visited WHF let alone carried out a reconstruction.

IMO all the physical evidence supports NB sustaining his facial gsw's on the landing stairs with the perp firing out of the bedroom onto the landing.  NB then turned and when on the main staircase facing down towards the front door he sustained the two gsw's to his rear whilst the perp was behind ie higher up the staircase.

I don't expect most others here to share my views on this as most are wedded to JB guilty as charged, but what I struggle to understand is the denial that it is possible to carry out a professional reconstruction today.

[Holly Goodhead]

You need witnesses for any reconstruction, otherwise it’s just assumption.

It’s a pointless exercise, and won’t determine anything

It would be laughed away...

Where does it mention witnesses in the following?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780123822413/shooting-incident-reconstruction