New Program featuring an interview with Barbara Wilson, former WHF secretary.

[John]

I believe Robert Boutflour passed away quite a while ago.

Just goes to show how long it has been.  I meant David of course...sorry!

[Holly Goodhead]

I managed to make contact with the psychologist Dr David Holmes earlier today for a chat:

http://www.rihsc.mmu.ac.uk/staff/profile.php?surname=Holmes&name=David

He advised me that the programme was made several years ago or rather his input was supplied several years ago.  I said I disagreed with his findings and asked why he had not considered other relevant aspects (eg those in above post).  He said his research was all up-to-date at the time he provided his input and his area of specialism is biological psychology.  I said I didn't think he was qualified to comment on the case and that I would report him to The British Psychological Society. At this point he flew into Mr Rage  mode and said I had no right to go behind his back.  I said I have every right and I will be making a formal complaint.  I said goodbye and put the phone down.

[Holly Goodhead]

This is the kind of stuff they come out with on "Blue."   Deals made by Nevile when he was still alive 27 years ago and the terms of those deals are not our concern anymore than if we lend a family member money to buy a car.  Nevile was equally as generous, if not more so, to Jeremy and Sheila.

They are typical of deals between family members and probably even more so years ago in farming communities.

Whoa what have I said to deserve such harsh criticism Outlook?  I may not share your views on JB but please don't tar me with the same brush as many of those numpties on 'Blue'. 

Yes I agree I think all of the land purchase deal and the gifting and loaning to Jackie and Anthony was par for the course.  What I object to is the idea that Jeremy should be treated differently. For example the witness statements of the relatives and Robert Boutflour's diaries paint a picture of Jeremy in some way being undeserving of any financial support provided by his parents eg the trip to the Antipodes.  This appears to extend to Sheila too where Anne Eaton makes reference to the fact that Nevill and June financed things eg Sheila's modelling course, wedding etc.  In any event this was and is typical of middle class families.  In fact nowadays we even have 'the bank of mum and dad'.

[Outlook]

Yes, the programme was littered with errors, but it was interesting as people have said to have it confirmed that the Bambers knew Jeremy robbed the caravan park. I don't know if all Channel 5 documentaries have the same format (a recap after every ad break, because let's face it we all have the memory span of a goldfish don't we?). And when the narration said "Sheila brushed her teeth" was it really necessary to have a dramatisation of Sheila brushing her teeth? With a caption in the top corner saying "reconstruction"? You know, in case someone thought that this was actual footage of the event?

What I found particularly interesting was the psychologist, along with Barbara Wilson's interview definitely the best thing in a rather shoddy programme if I'm honest. He picked apart every aspect of Jeremy's behaviour before and after the murders and how this fits in with mindset of a psycopath which really does need to be pointed out. One thing I did find a bit odd was the Bob Miller interview and the one with PC Bews in which they both seemed to suggest that the rest of the force were fooled by Bamber but they weren't? Surely it's OK for them to admit they were fooled after all this time? The only officer not to be fooled was Stan Jones. And on a related note didn't DI Miller get a bit of a rebuke from the judge for his less than thorough forensic work on the day?

I also thought they made a mistake in the programme by suggesting that Neville was shot when he got downstairs, yes the casings on the landing and stairs suggest it was he was likely to have been shot upstairs. And if June was shot as she slept why was her body not found on the bed (they revealed later that her body was found on the floor)?

I must admit I find it odd that Julie had to identify the bodies, but to suggest Bamber didn't do it because he was grief stricken is pushing it a bit. It is a fact that he had gone to solicitors and accountants to discuss the inheritance instead. Thank goodness he wasn't too grief stricken to make sure he was getting his money eh? 

I quite enjoyed the Bamber programme as it was fairly biased against him and showed him with mad eyes.  Mind you I would not have liked to meet Sheila on a dark night either.  The makeup for both was totally insane.

The problem to me was that it was pro-police.  "Bamber was devilish cunning but clever plod got the measure of him."  Well "clever plod" did not have the measure of him.  He was running rings around them in spite of being the dumbest and most obvious killer in a generation.  The police were far too sympathetic to him and helped him dispose of evidence, fell for the "sexy mad junkie model with the machine gun" story that the media was pushing and if you read the Anne Eaton Statements the police were far too free with Nevile's Whisky.  It was really down to Anne Eaton and Robert Boutflour and eventually Julie Mugford grassing him up supported by no more than two suspicious coppers that brought him to justice.
 
He very nearly got away with it and if Anne Eaton had been more intimidated by the police he would have done.

A lot of silly errors but I assume that is par for the course for today's documentaries.  Everyone has the attention span of dead cat these days and assumes that if it isn't on Youtube then it did not happen.

[Outlook]

Whoa what have I said to deserve such harsh criticism Outlook?  I may not share your views on JB but please don't tar me with the same brush as many of those numpties on 'Blue'. 

Yes I agree I think all of the land purchase deal and the gifting and loaning to Jackie and Anthony was par for the course.  What I object to is the idea that Jeremy should be treated differently. For example the witness statements of the relatives and Robert Boutflour's diaries paint a picture of Jeremy in some way being undeserving of any financial support provided by his parents eg the trip to the Antipodes.  This appears to extend to Sheila too where Anne Eaton makes reference to the fact that Nevill and June financed things eg Sheila's modelling course, wedding etc.  In any event this was and is typical of middle class families.  In fact nowadays we even have 'the bank of mum and dad'.

I am not being harsh, merely pointing out that this is a common theme on "Blue".  That dear little Jeremy was "discriminated against" at the expense of Sheila and other family.

We have no business to judge whether Nevile was fair or less fair to JB than to anyone else, especially Sheila.  Daughters are frequently treated more generously than sons especially by their father.  There is nothing sinister in that, it is just the way things often work.  Fathers usually spend more time with their sons and teach them different things.  With mothers it is often the other way around.  We do not have the right to judge or draw conclusions on this.

[goatboy]

I managed to make contact with the psychologist Dr David Holmes earlier today for a chat:

http://www.rihsc.mmu.ac.uk/staff/profile.php?surname=Holmes&name=David

He advised me that the programme was made several years ago or rather his input was supplied several years ago.  I said I disagreed with his findings and asked why he had not considered other relevant aspects (eg those in above post).  He said his research was all up-to-date at the time he provided his input and his area of specialism is biological psychology.  I said I didn't think he was qualified to comment on the case and that I would report him to The British Psychological Society. At this point he flew into Mr Rage  mode and said I had no right to go behind his back.  I said I have every right and I will be making a formal complaint.  I said goodbye and put the phone down.

I fail to see what he did wrong in the programme-he was obviously asked for his views on the case as an expert in criminal psychology. His points were all pertinent and made a lot of sense. They were one sided but then again so was the programme. No room for any of the B.S that Mark Williams-Thomas's programme in March last year was full of. Clearly everyone who goes to boarding school doesn't end up murdering their family so he wasn't making that point, though a lot of people sent to boarding school as children do end up resentful even years later. Why does Dr Holmes need to be reported to the British Psychological Society? Saying something that YOU don't agree with doesn't mean he needs to be reprimanded. I'm just curious.

[Holly Goodhead]

Ooops! It's an "E". Ethel.

 

[Outlook]

I fail to see what he did wrong in the programme-he was obviously asked for his views on the case as an expert in criminal psychology. His points were all pertinent and made a lot of sense. They were one sided but then again so was the programme. No room for any of the B.S that Mark Williams-Thomas's programme in March last year was full of. Clearly everyone who goes to boarding school doesn't end up murdering their family so he wasn't making that point, though a lot of people sent to boarding school as children do end up resentful even years later. Why does Dr Holmes need to be reported to the British Psychological Society? Saying something that YOU don't agree with doesn't mean he needs to be reprimanded. I'm just curious.

I didn't see anything particularly wrong with his comments but there really is a lot of this Psychobollocks around these days.  Abused children do not all grow up to be abusers, adoptees do not all grow up to be mass murderers, Immigrants are not all benefit scroungers, and not all gypsies are thieves.  Any sensible Psychologist these days will readily admit it is not a science in the normal sense of the word and any conclusions are usually generalist.  At least he was not as bad as some of the other programmes we have been subject to as well as the sneering remarks of the JB Campaign Website which to this day still indulges in a widespread character assassination of Robert Boutflour whilst refusing to admit any defect in the reputation of their blood-drenched hero.

[Holly Goodhead]

I fail to see what he did wrong in the programme-he was obviously asked for his views on the case as an expert in criminal psychology. His points were all pertinent and made a lot of sense. They were one sided but then again so was the programme. No room for any of the B.S that Mark Williams-Thomas's programme in March last year was full of. Clearly everyone who goes to boarding school doesn't end up murdering their family so he wasn't making that point, though a lot of people sent to boarding school as children do end up resentful even years later. Why does Dr Holmes need to be reported to the British Psychological Society? Saying something that YOU don't agree with doesn't mean he needs to be reprimanded. I'm just curious.

Arrgh lost my reply...for a repeat...

Has he ever met with JB to undertake an assessment in a formal setting to offer professional opinion?  Did he have permission from JB/relevant authorities?  (Not sure he needs permission actually as JB has been found guilty) 

His areas of specialism do not appear to pertain to the murders at WHF.

Imo the Mark Williams-Thomas programme made a fatal mistake in not including some professional opinion re the family dynamics particularly June's mental illness circa 1959 and the issues raised in my post above which seem to get overlooked and yet I am convinced herein lies the answer.

I guess it depends on who you choose to believe the likes of Kerry Danes and David Holmes neither of which I believe have met with JB, or the likes of Vincent Egan who have the relevant authority to meet and assess JB in a formal setting:

http://jeremybamber.org/psychological-reports/

It will not be down to me whether or not David Holmes is reprimanded his professional body will see to that.

[Holly Goodhead]

I am not being harsh, merely pointing out that this is a common theme on "Blue".  That dear little Jeremy was "discriminated against" at the expense of Sheila and other family.

We have no business to judge whether Nevile was fair or less fair to JB than to anyone else, especially Sheila.  Daughters are frequently treated more generously than sons especially by their father.  There is nothing sinister in that, it is just the way things often work.  Fathers usually spend more time with their sons and teach them different things.  With mothers it is often the other way around.  We do not have the right to judge or draw conclusions on this.

I think Nevill was generous to a fault to all concerned whether it be Sheila, Jeremy or his nieces and nephews.  I think it is unfair of others to describe Jeremy as "greedy" when there's no evidence of this or that he received any more or less than others. I think this is an important point after all the motivations for the murders was supposedly greed. 

Yes it is often common for mothers to spend more time with their daughters and teach them different things but according to Anne Eaton's wit stat June asked Anne to find Sheila chores and teach her to cook.  I find this rather strange given that Sheila spent most of her time away at boarding school.  Jeremy claims that June taught him to cook.  Perhaps mother and daughter just didn't get on  >@@(*&)

[John]

I have only viewed the programme once but will do so again tomorrow but wasn't it claimed that Nevill owned something like 300 acres when the truth is that he was merely a tenant farmer of that particular land and only rented White House Farmhouse itself?  I don't think Channel 5 explained that terribly well.

I still think it odd that David Boutflour never put in his tuppence worth on that particular docudrama. He is usually quite outspoken when it comes to cousin Jeremy.

Bob Miller was so full of himself when we all know that it was Sgt Stan Jones who blew the lid on Bamber.  Miller was taken in just like the rest of them.


Did you know that the Bow Tie Society was founded by Bob Miller and Howard Bills to "celebrate" the distinctive item of neckwear?



Bob Miller says bow ties were quintessentially 'British'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21923222

[Joanne]

I don't see what the program did wrong either, it stuck to it's name 'Countdown to murder' which implied to me that they were only going to be looking at the events from one side-the murderers and how it was done and it did that, it was trying to be impartial or fair just look at 'the murders'. I quite enjoyed it, it did what it said on the tin.

[Andrea]

Ive only just watched it, the make up wearing and riding circles around june and taunting her isnt new, that was known about years ago. The rest of it we already knew anyway.

I thought the documentary was ok, only 1 hour long so didnt expect anything fantastic.
But it stated the basics.

"I never had any doubt, and Jeremy knows that ".

[Myster]

I have only viewed the programme once but will do so again tomorrow but wasn't it claimed that Nevile owned something like 300 acres when the truth is that he was merely a tenant farmer of that particular land and only rented White House Farmhouse itself?  I don't think Channel 5 explained that terribly well.

I still think it odd that David Boutflour never put in his tuppence worth on that particular docudrama. He is usually quite outspoken when it comes to cousin Jeremy.

Bob Miller was so full of himself when we all know that it was Sgt Stan Jones who blew the lid on Bamber.  Miller was taken in just like the rest of them.


Did you know that the Bow Tie Society was founded by Bob Miller and Howard Bills to "celebrate" the distinctive item of neckwear?



Bob Miller says bow ties were quintessentially 'British'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21923222

David is probably sick to the back teeth of it, John. He's been wheeled out on numerous occasions before, so maybe he thought Barbara Wilson's excellent contribution would suffice... and he does tend to get a bit nervy and emotional.

Normally you see [Name removed]s on old archaeologists, University bods, Prof. Ian Fells impersonators, etc. so I thought it was bit unusual for a member of the Old Bill to wear a bow-tie. I half-expected the glorious one Bob wore to come to life with flashing lights, then whizz round windmill-fashion, especially when he became more animated putting the boot in to dear old Jez.

[Myster]

Ive only just watched it, the make up wearing and riding circles around june and taunting her isnt new, that was known about years ago. The rest of it we already knew anyway.

I thought the documentary was ok, only 1 hour long so didnt expect anything fantastic.
But it stated the basics.

"I never had any doubt, and Jeremy knows that ".

Mistakes, continued...

666). Eyebrows of actor who played Jeremy Bamber didn't meet in the middle.

You missed that one, Andrea !

But at last we've discovered Mason Doyle is named after his former well-loved dog, a combo of Perry Mason and Arthur Conan Doyle perhaps. As a recently signed-up member, if MD is lurking around the forum he might give us his impression of the prog.!