This is not a rhetorical question.
When peopele believe something such belief will either be based on rational evidence or something other than rational evidence.
On both the blue and red forums I tried to get people to provide the basis for their assertions to try to understand their positions. Many have been non-committal and said they didn't know whether to believe Jeremy is guilty or not. Many of those who assert he is innocent have to date failed to provide any basis for their position at all let alone a rational basis. Those who have provided a basis have largely provided lies or at best bogus claims they believe but are false for example the assertion Nevill phoned police himself.
Jeremy supporters like Holly have at best managed to say they wonder whether the evidence to prove Jeremy's guilt was fabricated but have failed to provide any evidence at all to establish such occurred. But Holly et al go well beyond this and assert it did happen. Wondering whether it occured and asserted it did are two very different things. You have no need for evidence to simply wonder. You do have a need for evidence in order to reasonably assert something happened.
Can anyone who thinks Jeremy is innocent provide a detailed basis for why they believe such and explain whether it is based on evidence or just hunches?
I can and have provided the basis why I believe Jeremy is guilty.
I. Zero evidence that Sheila did anything
A) What evidence is there that Sheila killed anyone? None!
B) Any evidence she loaded a gun? No, she had no elevated lead levels.
C) Any evidence she fired a gun? No, she had no GSR or high velocity back spatter from the victims
D) Any evidence she beat Nevill? No, even though she would have: damaged her nails, damaged her hand when the stock broke, been hit with medium velocity blood spatter from the victim and would have gotten her prints on the blood that was on the rifle none of this occurred.
E) Any evidence that she killed herself? No she can't have killed herself because after she was shot while seated with her body propped against something the killer: 1) removed the moderator and put it in the closet, 2) moved her blody flat while she was still bleeding so she then bled down the side of her neck forming a blood pool, 3) placed the bible in such pool of blood then opened and closed it repeatedly before the blood dried. Someone else had to do all these things and they were done very soon after she had been killed.
F) No indication she would do something like this and no motive. There is no reason for her medication to stop working suddenly at 2AM while sleeping and to get dilusions. Even before her latest medicaiton she was not having delusions about her fmaily. There is nothing that should have agitated her while everyone was sleeping. There is nothing to indicate she would have been likely to harm anyone else or her self.
G) No evidence she would have been able to carry out such a murder because: 1) she had no experience using such a weapon so would not have even known how to chamber a round let alone known she needed to. Nor would she know how to load 11 rounds (the maximum capacity of the weapon) and 11 rounds were fired in the master bedroom at the parents before Nevill escaped to the kitchen. 2) schizophrenia prevents people from being organized killers 3) her medication would have harmed her already poor hand eye coordination which was so bad she could not even be taught to drive. Her medication causes involuntary movements like Parkison's.
H) What evidence is there that Nevill actually phoned Jeremy? None
I) Jeremy's story kept shifting and many details was contradicted by others suggesting he was trying to frame Sheila. For instance, he initially told police she had taken her shooting and she had fired all guns in the house including the gun he left on the kitchen table with a loaded magazine but he later acknowledged she had never fired it or any other weapons to his knowledge. The claim he got the gun out to shoot rabbits is not credible because he was not known to ever do such. His ex-girlfriend and extended family said he did not like the shooting of rabbits. Worse, his story of the gun being found without the scope and moderator attached is not credible. His claim that Nevill sometimes removed the scope was disputed by others and he was unable to present any valid reason for why the scope would be removed. He clearly staged the bullets in the kitchen, they can't have been the sloe source of ammunition used in the murders. There were 48-50 rounds allegedly when he supposedly left them in the kitchen prior to the murders and there were 30 after the murders. 25 were used in the murders. For his story to be true that means the killer used 18-20 rounds from this pile of ammo but instead of using all 25 from it went to the closet to get another 5-7 rounds. Why would anyone do that let alone Sheila while she is supposedly enraged? So all the available evidence in this regard suggests that Jeremy lied about getting the gun out, loading it and leaving it and additional ammunition in the kitchen for Sheila to grab. This tale appears to be complete fiction meant to frame Sheila because there is no way she would have fetched the gun herself while arguing with anyone and if she had then as she tried to load it she coudl have been disarmed. So this tale was crafted of the gun being left in front of her for her to grab as she was arguing with nevill, shooting him in the kitchen and then moving on to the rest. But as we know the shooting started upstairs not in the kitchen so the whole thing is BS.
J) Did Jeremy react as someone who received such a call would react? No someone receiving such call would call 999 to report it and then go over to investigate. Instead he called Julie so she could confirm that he told her Nevill called him thinking this would make his claim of Nevill phoning more credible. 20 minutes or more after this he finally called police. At trial he stated the delay was because at first he didn't think it was urgent but after thinking about it a while realized it was. All he cared about wan an alibi. Pretending Nevill called him was an alibi and he wanted that alibi to be established further by police. He didn't want police to arrive at WHF and see him there already because they could think he went in and did something prior to their arrival. His alibi was to be that Nevill phoned and was killed after calling while Jeremy was not there. So he needed the police to see he was not there. Thus he parked on the side of the road and after police passed him, then he slowly followed and arrived 3 minuts later so they could see him arrive. No one who actually received such a call would be engaged in such kind of behavior they would go to the house and try to listen and spy from outside at minimum to then talk to police when they arrive. Some would actually do more than just try to spy and listen and would actually have entered. I am one such person.
K) Would Nevill have been likely to make such a call to him? No because:
1) Nevill didn't trust him and intimated to others he thought Jeremy wanted him dead
2) Jeremy had an answering machine and the phone was on the ground floor thus the phone would be unlikely to wake Jeremy up and even if he did wake up the answering machine would have simply picked up. It would tkae Jeremy several minutes to reach the phone even if he had woken up. Thus if a true emergency Nevill would have dialled 999 not called Jeremy
3) Nevill was taller and stronger than Jeremy so could have disarmed Sheila as easily or more easily than Jeremy, why would he decide to have Jeremy disarms her instead? Worse, it would take Jeremy 20 minutes or more to answer, dress, drive there and find a way in even if Jeremy did get the message. Why would he decide to wait that long instead of trying to disarm her himself?
4) Jeremy antagonized Sheila so would agitate the situationa nd cause her to be more likely to fire not less likely. Nevill was the adult with the most calming effect on Sheila and thus best chance of calming her down.
5) How would Nevill be in a position to make the call? How did he get to the kitchen and where was Sheila while he was there? Why would June stay in bed yet he would run to use the phone? If Sheila was in front of him he could not have made the call she would have shot him. If she was not there in the room at that moment why would he choose to make a call that likely would not be answered and if answered would still not result in help coming for at least 20 minutes when he instead could have used the opportunity to arm himself? If he is truly frieghtened then he would have grabbed a knife, gun or some other weapon that were all readily available in the kitchen to use to confront Sheila with. In the meantime the evidence shows that the killer caught the parents in their bedroom and shot 11 times. June was killed but Nevill was merely wounded and managed to reach the kitchen where he struggled with his killer. His killer had an empty gun so had to beat Nevill unconscious in order to then be able to reload the gun and fire 4 more shots to kill him. There was no opportunity for Nevill to make any call.
So the evidence against Jeremy is strong.
I never ever have seen a Jeremy defender able to provide a list of reasons for their views let lone one that cites evidence which refutes the evidence that proves Jeremy is guilty.
