Author Topic: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?  (Read 6001 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline scipio_usmc

The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« on: February 22, 2014, 09:23:20 PM »
What happened is easy to piece together based on the evidence.  Precisely why it happened cannot be said for sure, there are several variables.

What happened:

Nevill grabbed the rifle, tried to take it away from the killer and they wrestled over it. The weapon swayed all around as they each tried to wrest it from the other.  It crashed into things and knocked them over, probably knocking little knickknacks around in the process.  The silencer scraped against the bottom of the mantelshelf in a random pattern indicating each was fighting for control and it just randomly was swaying.   Their bodies knocked into things like the table and chairs. Eventually the killer punched Neville in the face repeatedly breaking his nose and giving him black eyes.  This enabled the killer to seize sole control of the rifle.  The killer then began striking Nevill with the butt of the rifle.  Defensive wounds indicate Neville tried to block the blows with his arms but eventually the killer was able to hit Nevill in the head repeatedly. The blows were so hard that the stock broke and Nevill was knocked unconscious.  The killer then shot Nevill 3-4 more times in his head and he died. (3 times if the killer had shot him from the stairs, 4 times if the shot from the stairs never occurred and the bullet casing was transported to the stairs by someone accidentally)           

Why did this struggle happen?  Why was Nevill able to grab the rifle?  Why didn’t his killer shoot him before he could grab it?  The main variables are whether the gun was loaded or not at the time the Killer entered the kitchen and whether Neville was chasing his killer or his killer was chasing Nevill.

Everyone has always assumed Nevill was being chased by his killer.  I even assumed such because the bullet casing on the stairs suggests his killer was chasing him and still firing.  But if the theory of the medical examiner is correct and all 4 final shots were fired in the kitchen and a shell casing stuck to a shoe and deposited on the stairs this adds a different possibility.

Variables:

1) Gun was empty when the killer exited the bedroom   
a)Nevill took advantage of this and ran down stairs either to use the phone or to try to get a weapon of his own and killer gave chase.
i)Killer caught up with Nevill then tried to bludgeon him and Nevill grabbed the gun and the scuffle ensued, or
ii)Nevill jumped his killer as his killer entered the kitchen and grabbed the gun and the scuffle ensued, or
iii) Nevill's killer caught up with Nevill in the kitchen, pulled the trigger, both realized the gun was empty and Nevill moved to disarm his killer and the struggle ensued

b) Killer was running downstairs to get more ammunition and Nevill gave chase, caught up with his killer in the kitchen and tried to disarm the killer.  No one considered this possibility before.

2) Gun was empty after killer fired from the stairs. Nevill managed to run out of the room and ran down stairs either to use the phone or to try to get a weapon of his own. Killer gave chase and fired 1 shot from the stairs hitting him in the head but it was not severe enough to disable him.  killer followed Nevill into the kitchen either to get more ammo or to try to stop Nevill from reaching the phone or a weapon
a)Killer caught up with Nevill then tried to bludgeon him and Nevill grabbed the gun and the scuffle ensued, or

b)Nevill jumped his killer as his killer entered the kitchen and grabbed the gun and the scuffle ensued, or

c) Nevill's killer caught up with Nevill in the kitchen, Nevill's killer pulled the trigger, both realized the gun was empty and Nevill moved to disarm his killer and the struggle ensued

3) Gun was loaded when killer exited the bedroom and entered the kitchen. Nevill managed to run out of the room and ran down stairs either to use the phone or to try to get a weapon of his own. Killer gave chase.
a) killer fired 1 shot from the stairs hitting Nevill in the head but it was not severe enough to disable him. Killer didn’t have any other clear shots before Neville entered the kitchen so killer didn’t fire again until after Nevill was unconscious
b) killer could not get any clear shots so decided not to fire at Nevill as he was on the run.

In either event Nevill would have jumped his killer as his killer entered the kitchen and grabbed the gun and the scuffle ensued.  If Nevill didn’t jump his killer then his killer would simply have shot him and the scuffle would not have occurred. So if the gun was loaded his killer was ambushed. 

It is highly unlikely that Sheila could have won such a scuffle let alone inflict all the damage that was inflicted on Nevill without Sheila receiving a single scratch.  So it is rather academic which scenario actually occurred.  These are all the possibilities though of why the scuffle took place.  I accounted for every possibility.  I find it interesting that Nevill could have been the one pursuing his killer, that places things in a someone different light.

I wondered why he would not simply run out the front door.  Chasing his killer because he wanted to disarm him before he could reload and because he was angry and wanted revenge would account for why he didn't flee the premises. If someone has a loaded gun and is shooting at you the more space you have to run around the harder a target you will be.  So leaving the premises makes the most sense.  If a killer is close behind, running to a phone is a waste of time. You will leave yourself exposed for a clean shot as you try to dial.  That is why I assumed his goal was to get a weapon of his own.  But that too would be futile if his killer were close behind with a loaded gun.  Moreover I wondered why Nevill would have the guts to charge his attacker and try to grab the gun in the kitchen yet was not desperate/gutsy enough to do so upstairs and wondered how he got by his attacker out the bedroom door.

All these questions are answered if the killer ran out of bullets hen ran downstairs to get more ammo and Nevill gave chase.  It actually makes perfect sense that in this case Nevill would not leave the house but instead attempt to disarm the killer.         
« Last Edit: February 23, 2014, 05:26:19 AM by scipio_usmc »
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Lindyhop

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2014, 09:15:03 AM »
Very well thought out Scipio. Something else which I haven't come across in any discussions is JB's disguise. I imagine he had a balaclava on and may have come across as a masked intruder upstairs in the dark. Did he then reveal himself to them before he shot them? During the battle with Neville downstairs Neville would have been aware that his killer was his son, which could explain his actions - he may have acted differently if he thought it was an unknown armed burglar. He probably also recognised his gun.

(I also wonder if June and Sheila were aware their killer was Jeremy at the time they died. I think it's been accepted that the twins died in their sleep, so they were thankfully oblivious to the goings on)

Offline goatboy

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2014, 09:55:03 AM »
For me I think Nevill was trying to get to the phone in the kitchen because the one in the bedroom had either been moved, or simply disabled by taking the kitchen phone receiver off the hook. I genuinely don't see why Sheila would have been so keen to prevent him from reaching the phone, and I think the struggle in the kitchen was evidence that someone didn't want the police to know the truth about who was attacking Nevill. Put simply the struggle to stop him getting to the phone makes more sense if the killer was Jeremy than if it was Sheila. What swings it for me is that assuming the call from Nevill to Jeremy did happen then why, if Jeremy thought his family's lives were in danger would he call Julie first, waste time looking for the local police station number rather than dial 999, and finally drive to the farm at a snail's pace? All of this behaviour clearly indicates he was in no hurry to get there because he knew what was there-because there was no call from Nevill.

Offline Joanne

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2014, 11:25:18 AM »
In that 'Great crimes and trials' programme, they did say that even though it took some time to muster the police team, they still got there before Jeremy and the police thought after that it was odd that he didn't follow 'natural' instinct and go to the farm straight away to see what was going on.

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2014, 03:50:10 PM »
Very well thought out Scipio. Something else which I haven't come across in any discussions is JB's disguise. I imagine he had a balaclava on and may have come across as a masked intruder upstairs in the dark. Did he then reveal himself to them before he shot them? During the battle with Neville downstairs Neville would have been aware that his killer was his son, which could explain his actions - he may have acted differently if he thought it was an unknown armed burglar. He probably also recognised his gun.

(I also wonder if June and Sheila were aware their killer was Jeremy at the time they died. I think it's been accepted that the twins died in their sleep, so they were thankfully oblivious to the goings on)

Since he planned to kill everyone straight away I doubt he bothered to wear a disguise. Wearing clothes he didn't mind disposing of and gloves so that he left would not leave and bloody fingerprints or have gun shot residue on hands was a good idea but I doubt he wore anything over his face.  I would not bother doing so it would obstruct vision unnecessarily.
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Amanda3266

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2014, 06:03:39 PM »
I think there is speculation somewhere that Jeremy wore a wet-suit and balaclava and simply showered afterwards. I am not certain I buy that necessarily...it seems an awful lot of trouble to go to if you know you are going to kill everybody who could identify you.

I think the scuffle happened because Neville had just about enough strength left to fight his attacker...there was no way this was Sheila... I have checked the postmortem report....her fingernails were long and painted with nail varnish...so not false ones and no way could she have carried out all these murders and not damaged a single nail.

I agree that Neville was persued downstairs but managed to ambush his attacker.....maybe while he was trying to reload the rifle.

I am also of the opinion that Jeremy took the phone straight off the hook in the kitchen when he arrived to disable all other phones in the house.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2014, 08:47:41 PM »
I think there is speculation somewhere that Jeremy wore a wet-suit and balaclava and simply showered afterwards. I am not certain I buy that necessarily...it seems an awful lot of trouble to go to if you know you are going to kill everybody who could identify you.

I think the scuffle happened because Neville had just about enough strength left to fight his attacker...there was no way this was Sheila... I have checked the postmortem report....her fingernails were long and painted with nail varnish...so not false ones and no way could she have carried out all these murders and not damaged a single nail.

I agree that Neville was persued downstairs but managed to ambush his attacker.....maybe while he was trying to reload the rifle.

I am also of the opinion that Jeremy took the phone straight off the hook in the kitchen when he arrived to disable all other phones in the house.

The pathologist was asked about Sheila's nails and he said he wasn't competent to comment it would fall to ballistics.  Do we have the report from ballistics?  If the pathologist is unable to confirm what makes posters here think they are competent to offer up opinion.  Lol  @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2014, 08:56:55 PM »
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2014, 09:20:41 PM »
The pathologist was asked about Sheila's nails and he said he wasn't competent to comment it would fall to ballistics.  Do we have the report from ballistics?  If the pathologist is unable to confirm what makes posters here think they are competent to offer up opinion.  Lol  @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

The firearms expert was the one tasked with asessing whether she likely loaded and fired a weapon because the pathologist is not an expert on gun shot residue or any other firearms related issues. 

In court each expert stays within their own field.  We have the advantage of knowing the full story and not being limited by the formalities of court.  Thanks to the work of others we KNOW she had no evidence on her hands or clothes of handling bullets let alone firing a weapon.  We also know she had not a scratch on her body and would have if she had been the one engaged in the struggle.  As I pointed out to you I have considerable firearms experience and have been in plenty of fights.  Thus I have actual experience not just experience from study like many lawyers and experts for that matter.  I personally witnessed a female break a nail loading a 9mm magazine so your claim that it doesn't happen is refuted from a personal experience.  More important than the nails not breaking from loading the magazine is not a chip or mark on her hands or any other part of her body if she had punched Nevill hard enough to breka his nose, give him 2 black eyes and to also break the stock over his head.  When you punch someone very hard you get abrasions to your hands, especially knuckles.   He was trying to fight back mind you.  After the stock broke the rifle was still used and that also would have done damage to bare hands. Only someone living in fantasy land would claim that she would not be likely to get a scratch and have no evidence of even handling a weapon let alone being  in a struggle during the course of events.

You can live in denial all you like but it doesn't help prove your claims at all in fact it harms your credibility to do so.   
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Amanda3266

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2014, 10:01:02 PM »
That's interesting...then again the Pathologist being a bloke wouldn't necessarily have the same experience of nails that us women do!

I would be very surprised if Sheila had been able to do all the things that Jeremy attributes to her without damaging her nail polish at the very least.


Offline Outlook

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2014, 10:33:17 PM »
Oh that is easy in Bamber Disneyland.  The Bamber Groupies would have us believe that after the massacre Sheila had a shower (ritual washing as they call it), put on a clean nightie, sat around doing up her nails, waited half-an-hour for the damn things to dry, played peek-a-bo through the window with her brother and the cops.  Shot herself once in the neck, was not sick or suffered any disability, tried a different position and found the rifle was too long, floated downstairs without touching the messy floor, (a girl has to look after her feet), put the silencer in the cupboard, which involved climbing past the body of her father and going through a locked door.  Back again up stairs and shooting herself a second time.  Wrote "Special Branch" on the floor in her own blood and then covered it up with her mother's bible.

Oh and sometime during the night she attended to her "feminine needs" and cut up a tampon in the living room for some strange reason.

Then the police burst in firing at random, changed the barrel on the rifle, the family followed planting evidence in all directions, bounced Sheila on and off the bed several times and at one point the family dog got the blame for firing the final shot, which is why Jeremy executed the dog several days later in his uncontrollable grief at losing his family.

All this is due to the fact they were adopted and Jeremy was in fact the true born king of all Britain and fathered by Prince P*****.

Bamber Groupies are mad beyond belief.

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #11 on: February 23, 2014, 11:00:51 PM »
Here's the pathologist's report re the nails:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=206.0;attach=742

As I expected all it did was note that the pathologist has no firearms experience and has no idea whether or not there would likely be damage from such.  Nothing else was considered about the severity of the fight and whether that would likely result in damage was considered either in this report. What maters is the trial testimony not the report because everything in total would be discussed at trial and it would all be tied together not viewed in isolation.     
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2014, 11:15:02 PM »
That's interesting...then again the Pathologist being a bloke wouldn't necessarily have the same experience of nails that us women do!

I would be very surprised if Sheila had been able to do all the things that Jeremy attributes to her without damaging her nail polish at the very least.

Saying he doesn't know what effort goes into loading and operating the weapon so doesn't have  a basis to know what impact loading and operating it would have on her nails and that those with firearms expertise should assess it is a punt basically. instea dof consulting them to find out he will let them evaluate it.

Holly keeps ignoring that the nail issues extend well beyond pulling a trigger and loading a magazine.  The pathologist had no idea what kind of struggle took place because he left the events to be pieced together by others at the time this report was written.

By the trial they had a complete picture of what transpired. Nevill and his killer wrestled over the gun and they did so ferociously.  They made the gun crash into things including the underside of the mantle shelf.  They also knocked over chairs and the like.  The killer punched Nevill in the face repeatedly so he would let go of the rifle.  The killer punched him hard enough to break his nose and give him 2 black eyes.  The killer gripped the rifle extremely tighly as the killer bludgeoned nevill with it striking his arms and then his head.  Hold something in your hands and then bash it against something hard.  What happens to your hands?  What is likely to happen to long nails?  If a woman punches a face hard enough to break a nose and leave black eyes what happened to knuckles and nails? What happens to hands holding a splintered rifle stock that has a sharp edges? It is about more than just the nails and the nail issue is hardly only about the magazine being loaded. I doubt Nevill did not try to strike his killer back either.

       
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Outlook

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2014, 11:55:22 PM »
That is why the Bamber Groupies like to argue only on a point by point basis.

Each single point taken in isolation can be used to prove or disprove another point or merely dismissed as a lie or part of the cover-up by the "corrupt police."

Professor Peter Vanezis is alternatively worshipped as a genius on "Blue" or derided as an incompetent and "part of the cover-up" depending on the item of evidence under discussion.  It all depends on whether they agree with his evidence or not.  This point of view changes regularly as the significance of the silencer and blood changes within the forum largely dependent on what Mike Tesco tells the morons to think next.

Professor Vanezis' website can be viewed here:  http://www.petervanezis.com/index.html

Significantly on "Blue" Bamber's police interview notes are not published and nobody questions this.  Other significant statements and interview notes are not present either.

Offline scipio_usmc

Re: The scuffle in the kitchen- why did it happen?
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2014, 01:15:29 AM »
For me I think Nevill was trying to get to the phone in the kitchen because the one in the bedroom had either been moved, or simply disabled by taking the kitchen phone receiver off the hook. I genuinely don't see why Sheila would have been so keen to prevent him from reaching the phone, and I think the struggle in the kitchen was evidence that someone didn't want the police to know the truth about who was attacking Nevill. Put simply the struggle to stop him getting to the phone makes more sense if the killer was Jeremy than if it was Sheila.

I. The killer did indeed take precautions in advance to make sure a phone call could not be made from the bedroom.  I do not believe the phone was simply left off the hook downstairs for a long enough period of time to prevent a call from dialing out. That would take a while for the phone to become inactive to the point that no one could dial out and at any rate had Nevill picked up the phone he would have gotten blood on it whether he picked it up in the bedroom or the kitchen.  I doubt the killer would wash blood off the phone, indeed if jeremy were the killer the blood would help his story so he had reason to leave it on the phone had he relocated it to the kitchen.  In fact there is no reason to relocate it to the kitchen. He could have claimed Nevill made the call to him from the bedroom.  Much more likely is that the killer hid the kitchen phone saying it was broken (though it was tested and worked perfectly) and either brought the master bedroom phone there personally earlier in the day or made sure someone else did it.  It was testified to that when the kitchen phone had problems the bedroom phone was substituted.  They considered it more important to have phones in the office and kitchen than the bedroom so the bedroom phone was the one that was usually moved.  The killer either moved it personally or hid the kitchen phone saying it was broken and suggested someone else move the bedroom phone.
           
This indicates 2 things.  1) that the killings were premeditated not a spur of the moment thing and 2) the killer did not want the victims to call someone and reveal his/her identity to anyone because it would result in the killer being caught. The killer hoped police would not find out his/her identity and planned to escape the scene and hoped to escape responsibility.
 
None of this is consistent with what Sheila allegedly was doing.  It is not claimed that Sheila planned the murders in advance and came up with a scheme to blame someone else, escape responsibility and start a new life without her parents and children.  This is not claimed because it makes no sense and no one can come up with any reason that she would do such or how she could expect to escape liability.  The allegation is that she had a crazy episode and where she decided to kill everyone including herself.  If she were in a crazy frenzy and this had not been preplanned then she certainly would not take precautions to remove the phone.  Even if she planned to kill herself then commit suicide in advance there still would be no reason to move the phone. Even if her parents managed to make a call identifying her as shooting them so what?  By the time anyone could arrive everyone would be dead including her.  There is no way anyone could respond fast enough to prevent her from killing everyone.  So the phone doesn't matter at all.  The phone only matters if a killer intends to flee the scene and escape responsibility. This does indeed suggest that Jeremy was the killer not Sheila. His frame would not work if Nevill or June called to say he was shooting them.  If they called to announce Sheila was shooting them though it would not accomplish anything.  Indeed Nevill allegedly called and identified their killer yet everyone in the house died anyway. 

II. It makes little sense to rush to the phone if someone is actively shooting you unless you can lock a door and have some time to safely dial. To stop, pick up the phone and dial you open yourself up to a clear shot. Stationary targets are much easier to hit.  Unless his killer was out of bullets so paused shooting or was a good distance behind Nevill it makes little sense to use the phone.  The lack of blood on the phone means Nevill was stopped before he reached it.   

Someone posted that the doors usually were locked from the inside with the key left in.  This suggests it was the old style lever locks (what we is the US typically call skeleton key locks).  This could explain why Nevill did not run out the door.  If indeed the doors usually had the keys inside the lock then the killer would have taken the keys and hid them so that no one could escape easily.  Many families keep keys in the kitchen maybe he found the front door locked with no key in the lock so could not unlock it and that is why he ran to the kitchen.  His killer cannot have been too far behind that Nevill was unable to reach the phone if he was trying to reach it.  Unless Nevill knew the gun was empty I think he had a different motive than the reach the phone. 

III. The lack of blood on the phone makes it unlikely the phone had been in the bedroom for Nevill to try to use.  If he did run down to try to use it probably it was because the bedroom phone was missing.  That still required running past his killer which would be safer to accomplish if you wrestle the gun away as opposed to just running by.  That is why I  think that the gun might have been empty and he might have been chasing his killer.

What swings it for me is that assuming the call from Nevill to Jeremy did happen then why, if Jeremy thought his family's lives were in danger would he call Julie first, waste time looking for the local police station number rather than dial 999, and finally drive to the farm at a snail's pace? All of this behaviour clearly indicates he was in no hurry to get there because he knew what was there-because there was no call from Nevill.

I still wonder if Nevill were actually trying to reach the phone when he ran into the kitchen, I am not completely convinced he was.  BUT the account from Jeremy is that he not only was running to the phone but he reached it, dialed Jeremy and told him that Sheila grabbed a gun, was running around with it in a crazy fit and he was scared she was going to use it so come over right away to help disarm her.

I have a host of problems with the account and Jeremy’s supposed reactions.

The killer started shooting upstairs.  June was shot enough times to disable her and Nevill had already been shot at least 4 times by the time he could have reached the phone.  One of these bullets had shot off his lip and another shattered his teeth, jaw and damaged his voicebox to the point he would be unable to speak in any fashion that could be understood.

Why was there no blood on the phone if Nevill had actually picked it up and dialed it? 

Even if he got through to Jeremy how could he communicate with Jeremy given the damage to his mouth and voicebox?     

Even if by some miracle he were able to talk, why would he phone Jeremy and ask Jeremy to come over?  He and his wife had been shot, they needed medical attention what could Jeremy do for them?  Even if he felt to weak to disarm Sheila himself so decided to ask Jeremy to come help why wouldn’t he tell Jeremy that they had been shot and to call an ambulance then come over.?  It makes no sense to fail to indicate they had been shot and in need of medical attention.  At best Nevill would have calle dhis son because his son were closer than police so would arrive sooner but he still at minimum would have wanted an ambulance even if not police to come.

The fact Jeremy called Julie is suspicious period.  Calling her before police is even more suspicious but just the fact he called her at all makes no sense.  This was the middle of the night why would he feel the need to wake her and her roommates up just to tell her that his parents called to say Sheila was in a crazy frenzy running around with a gun but they the phonecall was cut off so he was not sure what happened?  What could she do?  Absolutely nothing.  He could not have been calling to be consoled because he wasn’t sure what if anything had happened.  For all he knew nothing happened. He could have gone over and found out nothing was wrong.  Wouldn’t a rational person find out what happened and if bad news and needing a shoulder to cry on to call at that point?  If it were the middle of the day not the middle of the night ok maybe then it might make sense for him to gossip and say he is heading to his parents with police to check things out because there might be trouble.  To say such at night and worry her for potentially nothing makes no sense.  Some emotional basket case might fear the worst and call his girlfriend to cry but he was far from a basket case and showed little sign of concern.           

He did not run over right away to see what was up.  He was only 3 minutes away but he decided not to go check it out.  Not even to go recon the outside of the house and try to spy or listen.  He decided he would make police go with him but he did not call police right away.  He didn’t even dial 999 he displayed no sense of urgency whatsoever.  Nor did he show any sense of urgency when he finally got to the scene.  He didn’t get close to the house to look in the windows.  He left it up to police.  When police said they were not going in did he press them to go in?  Did he say if they don’t go in then he will?  Nope for more than 3.5 hours he hung out with cops chatting calmly about cars and guy stuff and in fact he even lied to police to make them scared to go in.  He told them Sheila had fired and was proficient with all the guns in the house.  Given this complete lack of urgency on his part why would he feel any need to wake his girlfriend to tell her something might have happened?  There is only one explanation about why he called.  He knew they were dead when he made the call and was excited in a good way, not upset.  He was so excited he could not contain himself and needed to tell somebody.  That is the only rational explanation for his call and that is the purpose for the call according to Julie.  Her account is much more credible than his.       

The fact he wanted police to pick him up and then when they refused to wait for them to go there first then go also makes no sense.  Why was he so desperate for police to see that he arrived after them?  The only explanation was tha tit was an act to try to get cops to think he had nothing to do with it because he wasn’t even on the scene till after they arrived.  It was rather worthless but shows how his mind was working. 

Someone in his place either would have:
 
1) taken the 3 minute drive to check things out and then called police if necessary.  At bare minimum to spy outside if not actually enter,  or

2) called police then taken the 3 minute drive and at minimum tried to listen and look in the windows while waiting for police, some even would have entered the house

3) After police arrived and said they were waiting not going in, who would wait?  You would either go in without police or press the police to go inside to make sure no one is hurt and in need of medical attention.

Jeremy's actions make no sense.  When you factor in everything else it is easy to see he committed the murders.
“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli