Why would Julie do this? Say this?

[Nicholas]

I don't think ANYTHING of a sort until I see evidence to prove such a serious accusation.

If there were anything in this, the police would have to investigated fully.

Let's see the evidence first before jumping to any conclusions.

What are you expecting to see by way of evidence?

[Robittybob1]

Aww! Are you really struggling Perhaps you should look at the whole story -the one which are behind the words written which are, after all, only facts.

From the very beginning of the events which we're told transpired, there is only Jeremy's word for any of it. It all comes down to "Jeremy claimed............" There was, we're told, a rather heated family discussion about the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements. We're told there was the suggestion of Sheila taking "a rest" in a Christian convalescent home on the South coast. We're told that Jeremy heard/saw rabbits, loaded/cocked(?) the rifle and went out intent on bunny bashing. To no avail, they'd scarpered. We're told he left the gun out. We're told that at some point he ate a sandwich standing up. We're told that when he left Sheila was sitting quietly. We know from Auntie Pam, that Sheila goes to bed at around 10.30. Jeremy goes home. We have it from Julie that he rang at around 10pm -he timed the call- and then, having slept like a log, is allegedly woken by his "panicked" father's telephone call -he eventually told police "he sounded terrified". Does he react immediately? No. He idles his way through the phone book -ignoring the advert bearing the legend that in an emergency call 999- instead, calling a couple of local police stations which aren't manned 24 hours. He then, before phoning a manned police station, phones Julie again to tell her "something is wrong at the farm" It takes him approximately 20 minutes.

Once at the farm, he gives police chapter and verse of Sheila's mental state, embellishing and embroidering as he goes. She's only just come out of a psych hospital and is soon going back, She's gun competent. Has fired every gun in the house. She's attempted suicide. She's been diagnosed a paranoid schizophrenic/depressive schizophrenic and had been treated with ECT. It's likely that not one of the operatives at that scene had ever previously dealt with a possible siege situation. They might have gone in earlier but for Jeremy's covert suggestions that they might possibly be facing a mad woman with a loaded gun who wouldn't think twice about using it. They weren't to know that everyone in that farmhouse was already dead.

So you see, for all the unfolding events which transpired we only have Jeremy's word. It was he who set the approximate timescale of events. Can he be believed? By some, certainly. Not by the jury.

Was Colin not present when discussing "the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements"?

[Nicholas]

Ive already told you that we did not discuss people outside of his immediate family or those involved in giving evidence.

Don’t recall you saying this

[Robittybob1]

Don’t recall you saying this

You are off-topic aren't you?

[APRIL]

Was Colin not present when discussing "the future care of Sheila's sons, resulting in suggestions of them being cared for in ways other than the present arrangements"?

Colin took Sheila and the boys down to Essex on Sunday afternoon and left them there. He was to pick them up -certainly the boys- on Thursday because on Friday, they were all going to Norway to visit his sister. Colin certainly wouldn't have been sitting in on a conversation about alternative arrangements for the boys' care because he and Sheila had joint custody. There's no way he'd have allowed the Bambers any more access than they already had.

[Robittybob1]

I have never said there must be a third party.  All I'm doing is looking for is the possibility of a third party.

Like Jeremy was to inherit quite a sum of property from the tragic events, but had Jeremy also been killed who would have gained the fortune then?  Is there always going to be a beneficiary at the end of the tragedy?

Talk about complicated https://youtu.be/7YppVCocVbI   Jeremy Bamber - the money trail.

[Aunt Agatha]

Why do you think Sarah didn’t go to the police

or did she ?

Seemingly Sarah did speak to the police but for some reason they did not follow it up.

Here we have a man. suspected of wiping out a whole family, an actor, a liar is how they described him, and yet, with all this information in front of them they chose not to follow it through.

The question should be, 'why did the police not follow up on the allegations made to them by Sarah?'

a) because she was lying
b) she had told them not to follow this through
c) she was intoxicated and really could not be sure what happened.

It does not state 'she woke up', or 'became alert' or 'came to'....to find Jeremy on top of her....

This story, or version laid out be CAL is all suggestive only and had no proof or sound dialog for the police to support it either.

Therefore, until we find some actual evidence, I'm inclined to believe that two intoxicated people crawled upstairs and had sex.So drunk, they possibly failed to notice somebody was next to them.

I have heard countless 'stories' of women being intoxicated and consenting to sex however so many have blacked out, which is common once the line of inebriation has been crossed. 

Nothing untoward has happened its a very common occurrence amongst both men and women when utterly pi**ed.

[Aunt Agatha]

Talk about complicated https://youtu.be/7YppVCocVbI   Jeremy Bamber - the money trail.

I believe there was a third party involved and it answers alot more questions than does the idea of Sheila or Jeremy committing the killings.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Remember I proposed that the late call around 3:20 AM wasn't his father, but just someone Jeremy thought was his father.  The caller never identified himself.

So you’re now suggesting Julie got a train from Lewisham to Essex, sprinted through the dark country unlit lanes, broke into WHF, shot everyone dead including beating Nevill to a pulp exposing his brain, then phoned Jeremy (who’d asked her to kill them), and said “Sheila’s gone berserk. She’s got the gun”. Left the receiver off the hook, showered, changed legged it to the train station and waited until the first train came along at about 6am, meanwhile the Jeremy phoned her from a call box at 5:30am and spoke to her flatmate thinking it was Julie, then the police rang at 7am and spoke to flatmate thinking it was Julie...she then arrived home in Lewisham at about 9am...found the police waiting for her...had no idea why they were outside...they told her they were taking her back to Essex, so she must have thought she was nicked, surely?

That load of nonsense I’ve posted makes as much sense as what you’re asking.

I’m not bothering anymore... I think you’re taking the pee.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Seemingly Sarah did speak to the police but for some reason they did not follow it up.

Here we have a man. suspected of wiping out a whole family, an actor, a liar is how they described him, and yet, with all this information in front of them they chose not to follow it through.

The question should be, 'why did the police not follow up on the allegations made to them by Sarah?'

a) because she was lying
b) she had told them not to follow this through
c) she was intoxicated and really could not be sure what happened.

It does not state 'she woke up', or 'became alert' or 'came to'....to find Jeremy on top of her....

This story, or version laid out be CAL is all suggestive only and had no proof or sound dialog for the police to support it either.

Therefore, until we find some actual evidence, I'm inclined to believe that two intoxicated people crawled upstairs and had sex.So drunk, they possibly failed to notice somebody was next to them.

I have heard countless 'stories' of women being intoxicated and consenting to sex however so many have blacked out, which is common once the line of inebriation has been crossed. 

Nothing untoward has happened its a very common occurrence amongst both men and women when utterly pi**ed.

The police were different in the 1980s

Unlike now, when a woman went to the police to say she’d been raped, unless it was a violent rape from a total stranger who’d beaten them, left semen etc...the police would often say the case would be hard to prove if the woman knew the man; there was no violence; she hadn’t fought back etc...and as date-rape was unheard of then the police would usually tell the woman they had little grounds to arrest the man as it would be his word against hers.

A similar thing happened to a very close friend of mine, and she wasn’t even drugged; in fact, she was trapped, held against her will, threatened, raped twice, told she’d be punched if she didn’t stop crying as he raped her, and she thought he would murder her once it was over. She actually managed to escape when he went to the bathroom and immediately went to her friend’s house nearby. Naively, she had a bath as she felt so dirty and wanted to rid herself of it. Then her friend took her to the police who told her they could do nothing as she’d washed the evidence away. It was only weeks later someone asked her why the police hadn’t asked her for her underwear, which she’d thrown away in disgust. The police were USELESS.

And I’ve heard similar stories where the woman has had semen evidence, and STILL the police weren’t interested.

So I’m not at all surprised EP didn’t pursue Sarah’s complaint.

[APRIL]

The police were different in the 1980s

Unlike now, when a woman went to the police to say she’d been raped, unless it was a violent rape from a total stranger who’d beaten them, left semen etc...the police would often say the case would be hard to prove if the woman knew the man; there was no violence; she hadn’t fought back etc...and as date-rape was unheard of then the police would usually tell the woman they had little grounds to arrest the man as it would be his word against hers.

A similar thing happened to a very close friend of mine, and she wasn’t even drugged; in fact, she was trapped, held against her will, threatened, raped twice, told she’d be punched if she didn’t stop crying as he raped her, and she thought he would murder her once it was over. She actually managed to escape when he went to the bathroom and immediately went to her friend’s house nearby. Naively, she had a bath as she felt so dirty and wanted to rid herself of it. Then her friend took her to the police who told her they could do nothing as she’d washed the evidence away. It was only weeks later someone asked her why the police hadn’t asked her for her underwear, which she’d thrown away in disgust. The police were USELESS.

And I’ve heard similar stories where the woman has had semen evidence, and STILL the police weren’t interested.

So I’m not at all surprised EP didn’t pursue Sarah’s complaint.

They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".

[G-Unit]

They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".

It wasn't just men who judged women, other women did too. Look at how June Bamber refused to buy her daughter a white wedding dress because she was pregnant. That was definitely a judgement about her daughter's behaviour.   

[Holly Goodhead]

If JB sexually assaulted Sarah I think it would have come out. 

[ISpyWithMyEye]

They were probably following the general, and prevalent male consensus of the times, that "she'd asked for it".

In a word — yes.

It was her fault for being stupid: now go away.

Disgraceful!

[ISpyWithMyEye]

If JB sexually assaulted Sarah I think it would have come out.

It did