To be, or not to be...

[Myster]

... a psychopath, that is.   More explosive new evidence or another damp squib?  &%+((£

Bob Woffinden reveals all in a popular crime program...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bamber-planning-fourth-appeal-6303203

[sika]

What the hell is Woffinden on?

Why would anyone care what he thinks?

[Passer-by]

I think it's important to remember how hand-to-mouth many 'journalists' and 'writers' live.  A Discovery Channel programme fronted up by former Dynasty Star Emma Samms, eh?!

Personally I think he blew his credibility when blathering on about telephones - the case he built using just these was hardly even balance of probabilities let alone beyond reasonable doubt.

I also wouldn't be at all surprised if there aren't figures now quite high up in the police service who are able to put the frighteners on to make people 'change their mind' rather than lose expensive pensions if it's discovered the investigation was a monumental cock-up irrespective of whether or not Bamber did it.

Let's face it, the idea a psychopath is charming is hardly a revelation.

Any 'news' which is held back to be in a book or TV programme is just tidbit that pays off a bit more of the mortgage because Woffinden would make substantially more selling his story to a red top of it was earth-shattering.

[APRIL]

It looks as if the Mirror is saying that this is a conclusion Woffinden has recently arrived at, fortuitously timed to be included in a new programme. It's my understanding that he had made public, years ago, his change of mind and belief that Jeremy is guilty.

[Myster]

It looks as if the Mirror is saying that this is a conclusion Woffinden has recently arrived at, fortuitously timed to be included in a new programme. It's my understanding that he had made public, years ago, his change of mind and belief that Jeremy is guilty.

Yep... Bob Woffinden's reasons for his reversal in 2011...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1387438/I-wrong-Jeremy-Bamber-says-crime-writer.html

... so there'll be little if anything that's new, other than fresh reconstructions which bear no resemblance to the appearance of WHF and the actual location and position of the victims. Take a look at some of these stills from the program and spot the differences. Nevill and June have swapped bed places, and Sheila's wearing shiny pink leggings instead of a blue nightie... although I'll give them extra points for showing Jeremy Bamber in a wetsuit.

http://press.discovery.com/uk/id/programs/murder-behind-mansion-walls-emma-samms/

[Passer-by]

The wetsuit theory was one of the most stupid I've ever heard:  was that given in court?

[Myster]

The wetsuit theory was one of the most stupid I've ever heard:  was that given in court?

Police thought there was some mileage in the wetsuit theory, after RB's suggestion that JB could have worn one and their discovery of a top and bottom part in his bedroom at WHF. But the head-piece was found at his cottage, which struck Julie as odd because she seemed to think all parts were usually kept together there. And Bamber also told her that he would wear dark clothing and a mask.

That was another potential piece of evidence which wasn't investigated thoroughly enough - if miniscule but measurable spots of blood from the victims had been discovered on it, it would have been game over for JB. Although if he'd ever thought of wearing one, the idea was probably ditched as it would have restricted and hampered his movement anyway.

The shower-rose was found dangling and the tray might have been wet if he'd used them, but that wasn't significant because Nevill normally had a shower before going to bed.

Not sure whether the wetsuit was brought up in court, although RB might have mentioned it when questioned.

[steve_trousers]

This is the same Bob Woffinden who still thinks James Hanratty is innocent in the face of DNA evidence proving his guilt ? good grief

Someone above mentioned the wet suit theory, as Myster mentioned it was in fact quite plausible considering jeremy owned a wet suit.
Even he realised you can blast 5 people to death at close range, jump in the shower and hey presto! blood spatter gone.

I personally think he most likely would have worn it but only one person knows for sure

[Passer-by]

Why not just commit the murders in his pants and jump in the shower?  Why not dispose of the clothes in the pond he would have cycled past:  he could have weighted the bag with that phone he allegedly 'hid' under some magazines in the kitchen?!

Meanwhile in the kitchen Sheila had some bloodstained clothes in a bucket, including her outerclothes not just underwear.

Would these murders even have got much blood on the murderer - most of it seems to have slowly released from the wounds later.  There doesn't seem to have been much spatter on the walls and ceilings.

[Myster]

For anyone who missed it this is the same programme which was broadcast in Autumn 2014, although the narrator refers to Bamber protesting his innocence for 25 years, so it was probably made several years before.

Nothing new here though, just the same old-same old, with Andrew Hunter totally mistaken (in my view) siding as always with Bamber, and Bob Woffinden confirming what most rational people who have studied the evidence in great detail already believe.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=228.msg184627#msg184627

And poor Bamber has been saddled with yet another convenient psychiatric condition - "Narcissistic Immunity"...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYYov_wo_10

...but whatever labels the shrinks choose to paste on him, Jeremy Bamber was, is, and will forever be, the murderer of his parents, sister and nephews at White House Farm in August 1985.

[Passer-by]

Narcissistic Immunity?  I wonder what labels the people who dream up these labels give themselves . . . ?! 

[Holly Goodhead]

Why not just commit the murders in his pants and jump in the shower?  Why not dispose of the clothes in the pond he would have cycled past:  he could have weighted the bag with that phone he allegedly 'hid' under some magazines in the kitchen?!

Meanwhile in the kitchen Sheila had some bloodstained clothes in a bucket, including her outerclothes not just underwear.

Would these murders even have got much blood on the murderer - most of it seems to have slowly released from the wounds later.  There doesn't seem to have been much spatter on the walls and ceilings.

"The rifle bore blood smearing on the barrel in the region of the fore-sight and around the mechanism and there were splashes of blood to the left side of the weapon.  The appearance of the blood staining was consistent with it having been used to strike somebody already bleeding.  On analysis the blood was found to be human blood but tests to determine grouping were unsuccessful".

So no spatter on the rifle from the victims' gunshot wounds?  I would have thought spatter was unlikely with the small calibre rifle and low velocity bullets and drawback even less likely.  And why was the silencer the only exhibit capable of yielding full results for blood serology?

[Holly Goodhead]

This is the same Bob Woffinden who still thinks James Hanratty is innocent in the face of DNA evidence proving his guilt ? good grief

Someone above mentioned the wet suit theory, as Myster mentioned it was in fact quite plausible considering jeremy owned a wet suit.
Even he realised you can blast 5 people to death at close range, jump in the shower and hey presto! blood spatter gone.

I personally think he most likely would have worn it but only one person knows for sure

Not that old chestnut...the wetsuit...

Would the low calibre rifle used with low velocity bullets produce spatter? 

The wetsuit was forensically examined by EP and didn't turn anything up.  I'm not sure how a wetsuit would  afford JB much protection as unlike a dry suit it's porous.  As you will see a wetsuit allows water in so if it allows water in it will allow blood in and potentially trap any blood in the material even after showering.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/gds/What-s-the-Difference-Between-a-Wetsuit-and-Drysuit-/10000000177636115/g.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_suit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetsuit

[Holly Goodhead]

For anyone who missed it this is the same programme which was broadcast in Autumn 2014, although the narrator refers to Bamber protesting his innocence for 25 years, so it was probably made several years before.

Nothing new here though, just the same old-same old, with Andrew Hunter totally mistaken (in my view) siding as always with Bamber, and Bob Woffinden confirming what most rational people who have studied the evidence in great detail already believe.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=228.msg184627#msg184627

And poor Bamber has been saddled with yet another convenient psychiatric condition - "Narcissistic Immunity"...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jYYov_wo_10

...but whatever labels the shrinks choose to paste on him, Jeremy Bamber was, is, and will forever be, the murderer of his parents, sister and nephews at White House Farm in August 1985.

 

Spouting pet theories and engaging in non-objective analysis and commentary hardly makes for a credible 'expert witness'.

I have been meaning to email the psychologists who have commented in the various programmes: Kerry Daynes, David Holmes and Katherine Ramsland.  I will email Katherine first and copy to a new thread.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Ramsland

She doesn't appear to act as expert witness.

[Myster]

Oh my god!... she's back. 
Can't wait for those holiday snaps of you getting down n' dirty in the sewage on Blackpool beach.