How the psychopath can fool you...James Hanratty.

[Intrigued]

I am with you on that one! it sometimes turns out to be more of a curse than a blessing and is open to abuse as seen yesterday

[Admin]

Another excellent point by starryian which we feel should be copied to this thread.

For all you amateur sleuths out there, just take a while to read this statement put on the Jeremy Bamber Website in regards to Bambers psychopathy. You may have noticed as I did with some alarm, that a person needs to be tested 27 times by 27 psychologists to 'prove' that he was, in fact, not a psychopath.
However, no-one to my knowledge has ever seen these reports nor verified their accuracy or validity. So we only have Bamber's word for this. Further, it seem to run in direct disagreement to the report of a senior, eminent psychologist called actually in by the defense, in an attempt to show that Bamber was, in fact a man with a perfectly normal personality, with no significant  psychopathic traits, at Bamber's original trial in 1986. However, it backfired spectacularly when on lengthy examination the psychologist announced to a stunned defense team that Bamber WAS in fact a psychopath. He went further by stating.........'if ever there was a psychopath, Jeremy Bamber is it'. Please read the statement and draw your own conclusions.

Jeremy says:
 
“As a high profile case, a category ‘A’ prisoner, and a whole life tariff prisoner I have undergone a number of psychological assessments by twenty seven different psychologists. Each carried out numerous tests on me and some interviewed me for twenty hours or more over many weeks.

The most recent assessment of me was carried out last in 2009 by Professor Vincent Egan a Chartered Clinical psychologist and senior lecturer in forensic psychology at Leicester University. He was provided with my complete psychological file and all my medical records. He also interviewed me, and I completed various psychological tests before he wrote his report on me.

His conclusion is that I am not a psychopath. During the last quarter of a century and twenty seven different psychologists, not a single one of these experts has concluded that I show any traits consistent with psychopathy.
 
On the ‘Hare’ psychopathy test it was concluded that 95% of the population show more psychopathic traits than I do. I have also had 3 P.C.L.R tests that are designed specifically to reveal psychopathy and all 3 concluded the same, I am not a psychopath. Nor do I have any personality disorder.

If you, like I did almost fall off the chair laughing at Bamber's stunning accusation that ‘Hare’ psychopathy test it was concluded that 95% of the population show more psychopathic traits than I do.   

We are all doomed.................doomed I tell you!

Ian, your original point about the 27 tests has never been made before so this is novel to the case as far as we can see.  If it is true and we only have Bamber's word for it, why indeed had it become necessary to conduct 27 tests?  Would two or three not have sufficed.  This in itself (if true) would be an indication that there is certainly a question over his mental reasoning.

It should also be pointed out that a test carried out in 2009 will never and could never have provided a definitve answer as to Jeremy Bamber's state of mind in 1985.  To state otherwise is folly.

Bamber's own father (Major Leslie Marsham) referred to him as a psychopath shortly after the murders, there is evidence that his own defence team were concerned.

Another quote by David Shaw in his manuscript goes as follows...

The defence lawyers remained bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private they were mostly gloomy. A week before the trial opened the defence team held a case conference at Rivlin’s chambers and the meeting ended with Edmund Lawson hurrying away in search of some gin and three glasses. An eminent psychiatrist had just expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of a murdering psychopath.

DAVID SHAW'S "AN INNOCENT MAN"



An eminent psychiatrist indeed, no wonder Bambers own lawyers doubted him...says it all really??

[starryian]

Very good points Admin,
Thank you for highlighting that the point has not been made before. It seems to be the main thread on Bamber's website labelled appropriately 'Psychopathy' They were used in order to explain away the notion that Bamber is, in any way, a psychopath.
Indeed you make a good point that his state of mind may have been different in 1985 - or at least insofar as deadly intent goes. In my view Bamber is without doubt, a classic, narcissistic psychopath. A police officer who interviewed Bamber  just after the murders described him as having 'something missing'  He states 'After speaking with this young man I was immediately struck by his complete lack of care. He just didnt care for anything. It just wasn't right'
I also was struck when reading about Bamber's first arrest at just how unconcerned he was. Roger Wilkes in his excellent appraisal of the case writes "Bamber was lead to the cells he was given food, and went to sleep in just a few moments'...........backtrack right there....'went to sleep in a few moments!!' He was so unconcerned he feel into a deep sleep in the police cells. To his supporters this could mean that he was unconcerned because he was innocent. I beg to differ, even innocent people will worry. This man was being questioned in connection with the murders of FIVE people, two of them children. Normal people dont just fall asleep. Normal people dont display the ostentatious, over-the-top displays of grief that Bamber did at the funerals, normal innocent people are not evasive, and need time to think of an answer during police questioning. This all leads to the same personality trait- psychopathy.
Bamber certainly displayed most, if not all of the main characteristics associated with this deadly personality type. Glibness, superficial charm, compulsive lying, manipulative, grandiose sense of entitlement, inflated sense of self-worth and complete lack of guilt, remorse, empathy or sympathy for others, and tellingly a complete inability to take responsibility for their own actions. In short this is picture-perfect description of very own Bamber's personality traits.

[Andrea]

Supporters argue that he was in shock and grieving and thats why he behaved the way he did. I lost my dad suddenly, he was also young (47) i acted normally, you wouldnt have thought i had lost my dad to look at me. But then again he wasnt murdered along with 4 other members of my family.

So the shock and grief thing doesnt wash with me. Had my family been brutally killed like that, i would have been distraught, beside myself with grief. I wouldnt have been partying , laughing and going on hollidays and smuggling drugs back.

[John]

I find the points being made here very interesting.  Something else, why was he going to see a lawyer in any event immediately after the murders. This was the job of Nevill's Executor and Trustees.  He was just too quick to show his true hand and then fell back into the bereaved son mode just in time for the funerals.

All in all I feel the whole thing was indeed an act, just as Julie Mugford has already indicated.

[Andrea]

And wasnt he also watching colin closely to see how he was acting? then copying him?

Sorry, but grief doesnt need to be copied it should be felt.

[puglove]

And wasnt he also watching colin closely to see how he was acting? then copying him?

Sorry, but grief doesnt need to be copied it should be felt.

Colin realised that JB was watching him so that he could register grief. And yet JB was laughing and joking in the funeral car, and telling JM what he was "going to do to her" after the funeral. However many excuses are made for JB, he did not act like a man who had lost his parents, a man whose two small nephews had been shot as they slept. He acted like all his birthdays had come at once.

[Milly]

And wasnt he also watching colin closely to see how he was acting? then copying him?

Sorry, but grief doesnt need to be copied it should be felt.

Colin realised that JB was watching him so that he could register grief. And yet JB was laughing and joking in the funeral car, and telling JM what he was "going to do to her" after the funeral. However many excuses are made for JB, he did not act like a man who had lost his parents, a man whose two small nephews had been shot as they slept. He acted like all his birthdays had come at once.

Evening peeps.  Maybe that is because they had Shona.  Congratulations to you and the others on being made a mod.  You are a great poster and a lovely person to boot!!!

[puglove]

The bottom line is, JB was obsessed with money. When he trashed the caravan park and stole the money, knowing the distress and anguish that would cause, he kept and spent the money. If he was concerned about security, that was a bloody clumsy way of proving it. And no one can deny that he acted with indecent haste in sorting out anything valuable at WHF, and doing the same at Sheila's flat. And I will always question why he made a point of finding out where Sheila and the boys would be. He had NEVER done that before.

[Andrea]

All boiled down to greed, he robbed and trashed the office to highlight weaknesses in the security, but he didnt give the money back, what a joker. He was too greedy to wait for what would have been his had his parents died naturally.

[John]

The bottom line is, JB was obsessed with money. When he trashed the caravan park and stole the money, knowing the distress and anguish that would cause, he kept and spent the money. If he was concerned about security, that was a bloody clumsy way of proving it. And no one can deny that he acted with indecent haste in sorting out anything valuable at WHF, and doing the same at Sheila's flat. And I will always question why he made a point of finding out where Sheila and the boys would be. He had NEVER done that before.

That was his downfall Shona.  If it was a genuine attempt to show that security was lacking at the caravan office then he would have given the money back the next day.  As for wasting police time?  I don't think the police would have appreciated it.

Bottom line is that he broke in and trashed the place to point the finger of suspicion elsewhere.  Now where have we seen that particular ploy or Modus Operandi again???    8-)(--)

[John]

Gee whizz Andy...you read my mind again!!!!   

[Andrea]

Hoho John!

Dont worry im not having an Ali Bongo moment 

[puglove]

All boiled down to greed, he robbed and trashed the office to highlight weaknesses in the security, but he didnt give the money back, what a joker. He was too greedy to wait for what would have been his had his parents died naturally.

He didn't want to share it, Andy. Oh, sorry, IMO!! Why risk any pennies going to Sheila and the boys, and any extended family, when he could have the lot? Remember how he described Sheila and the twins?

What a decent man.

[starryian]

I find the points being made here very interesting.  Something else, why was he going to see a lawyer in any event immediately after the murders. This was the job of Nevill's Executor and Trustees.  He was just too quick to show his true hand and then fell back into the bereaved son mode just in time for the funerals.

All in all I feel the whole thing was indeed an act, just as Julie Mugford has already indicated.

Hello again Andrea and thank you for your excellent, incisive points. I agree. The ostentatious display of grief at the funerals was such a giveaway. A psychopath cannot feel these emotions. In order to make them look genuine they often have to mimic them - hence Bamber's over-the-top theatrics. Bamber dyed his hair, whitened his face to make it look more pale and haggard in contrast to his hair. It was all a completely deceptive act in order to divert the finger of suspicion being pointed at him. There are videos of the funeral and it is highly apparent that when Bamber's appears from the church and he is aware that there are many people outside including a large contingent from the press he switches instantly to 'grief mode' - hands rubbing the eyes, but with no tears, the impression of grief, the staggering walk, the bowed head - all meant to impress those present and those that matter. What he didn't realise was that his display of grief was noticeable because of it sheer exuberance. Bamber had to fake the emotion and had to put it on with in spade-loads, but the problem was his only role-model was Colin Cafell, a man who had lost his ex-wife and mother of his children and both his beloved sons. Colin was grim and clearly in a great deal of emotional pain, but Colin was a rock, supportive of the Eaton's, Boutflour's and indeed Jeremy. With no clear person to copy Bamber reacted the way that he thought people should grieve. The psychopath took centre stage. Colin later remembered noticing Bamber whilst inside the church, glance at his watch and inappropriately state that ' time's up we should be getting out of here' Colin was rightly disgusted.
Other present also overheard him refer to his relatives as he walked into the church 'They are like a bloody pack of vultures. If they think they are going to get a penny, they are sadly mistaken'
Over=arching all this, and this is what I find deeply disturbing. A man can attend the funerals of the very people he had viciously murdered only a short time before, watch the coffins of those he killed pass him by, watch as so many people were suffering around him because of their tragic loss, all the while smiling inside and believing he had gotten clean away with it.
Can there be a better example a a more dispicable, inhuman, monstrous wastrel than this utter waste of oxygen?
I very much doubt it.