Good lord no. I was referring to the theory that Bamber hired a third party, told them how to get in the window and then make a call to him from WHF as related by Julie. Or the theory that JB and another carried the crime out together.
I'm afraid I don't take AA seriously at all. If some powerful elite wanted him bumped off, a farming or car accident would be much more likely than to stage a crime people would still be talking about 35 years later and AA doesn't explain why the gun was found on Sheila and not Jeremy in her scenario.
Still the most plausible explanation of JBs innocence I've heard though! 
I agree with some of your thoughts, CS (and you always make such good ones), and I can see where you’re coming from here.
But there’s too many factors which show Jeremy did this all alone.
Firstly, he wouldn’t have got a hitman as he couldn’t afford it: no hitman would kill two little boys — and they’d balk at killing women too. To get a hitman to do such a heinous deed would cost THOUSANDS, many thousands, and Jeremy never have had that kind of money — even after the murders. Hitmen want paying at least half upfront , and he had nothing. Hitmen won’t kill a family in their house: they’ll kill a man on the street or on their doorstep. They won’t step foot in their house.
Hitmen wouldn’t deal with Bamber: he was a braggart, show-off, unstable...too risky.
Hitmen, crazy as it sounds have morals, albeit warped. They’ll kill a drug dealer, a man who’s ripped someone off, occasionally a cheating husband; but they don’t kill innocent women and children.
Hitmen do it anonymously when least expected, they don’t break into properties to kill a family of five.
Hitmen don’t run through fields...they have a stolen getaway car/bike which they burn out miles away from the scene. I know this, because it happened in the next road to where I used to live — I’ll find the link.
