JB's next CCRC submission/CoA hearing...

[Holly Goodhead]

I can't see there being another CCRC submission.

After 1989 & 2002 COA rejections & a 2012 CCRC rejection, it would be amazing if another CCRC application was submitted. And even more amazing if it was passed to the COA.

The relatives were disappointed when the CCRC passed Bamber's case onto the COA in 2002. Then the 2002 COA judges became more convinced the jury were right after looking at the case.

The views of the relatives are irrelevant to any future appeals.

It's clear to me the judges didn't look at the case objectively.  They actively look for ways to uphold convictions.  Same thing happened in financial services when customers complained they received poor advice.  Word from above, CEO's office, was defend at all costs and bat back.  Then the Financial Services Authority and Financial Ombudsman intervened and companies were ordered to pay redress for misselling and fined accordingly.

The judges are quite happy to witter on about the blood stains on the bible and yet oblivious to where the blood originated from.  The attitude of these people is there for all to see in the hearing with expert witness Mark Webster.  The judges are not qualified to give opinions on complex scientific matters.

Most cases involving high profile miscarriages of justice go to appeal on more than one occasion before eventually being quashed so JB's case is no different in this regard:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3394.msg129016#msg129016

We can see it with international cases too eg David Bain and Knox/Sollecito.         

[Holly Goodhead]

The blood in the silencer is but one element.  To overturn this conviction Jeremy Bamber would have to prove that the case against him was malicious.  It would also require Julie to retract her damning evidence and that will never happen imo.

The criteria for a successful appeal is fresh evidence that had jurors  have known about at trial
might have caused them to reach a different verdict. A successful appeal certainly isn't dependent on JM retracting her testimony.  We have no idea what sort of weight jurors attributed to the various aspects of the case.  According to former CCRC commissioner Ewan Smith the trial judge warned jurors about the reliability of JM's testimony. 

If I was an award winning investigative journalist, which I most definitely ain't, I would be working outwards and inwards.  By this I mean I wouldn't be looking to talk to the main players initially but those on the edge eg the Malcolm Waters, Liz Rimmington and Christine Bacon's of this world.  As the story goes JM shared her intimate knowledge with others.  There's always more than one way to skin a cat! 

[Caroline]

Yes the bible formed an appeal point at the 2002 hearing but as you've pointed out this was on the basis that the open pages were not disclosed to the defence at trial.  At the 2002 hearing MT sought to advance the theory the open pages represented SC's state of mind and some sort of suicide message.  Not a theory I subscribe to I hasten to add. 

To date all lawyers working on the case have overlooked the fact they do not know whose blood stained the pages.  There appears to be an assumption the blood originated from SC.  Whereas all the surrounding facts would seem to suggest the stains originate from June.  It's totally unacceptable that these lawyers are so incompetent and negligent as to overlook the most basic aspects.  There can be no excuses.  It is possible to include this in the next appeal ie the fact the blood stains on the bible were not disclosed to the defence at trial as it isn't something that has previously been addressed.  In addition to this it might well be possible to include an appeal point covering poor defence.

The defence sent Dr Lincoln to FSS to check all blood stained exhibits who sent a report detailing such.  This covered the following items but no bible:

- Sound moderator
- Rifle
- Pieces of carpet (main bedroom)
- Socks
- Watch
- Tufts of fibre (landing)
- Jacket
- Bathrobe
- Citroën Car
- Wallpaper
- Nightdress

You can read the report here pages 12 - 17 incl. 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=276.0;attach=939

What 'facts' suggest the prints were from June? And how would that point to an innocent Jeremy?

[Holly Goodhead]

What 'facts' suggest the prints were from June? And how would that point to an innocent Jeremy?

The only identifiable fingerprints found on the bible originated from June.  From CoA:

52. The Bible found by Sheila Caffell's body, belonged to her mother and was normally kept in a cupboard to the right of her bed. It was examined for fingerprints. Many belonged to June Bamber and there were a small number of insufficient detail for comparison, save for one which appeared to have been made by a small child.

I said all the facts surrounding the bible support June walking around the bed holding her bible and dropping it in the vicinity it was found as opposed to SC/JB seeking it out and dropping it in wet blood causing mirror staining:

- The bible belonged to June and was kept by her bed. 
- June was deeply religious
- June sustained 5/6 gsw's whilst in bed/getting out but still had the wherewithal mentally and physically to get out of bed, walk around to the other side and back again.  There's every reason such a person ie deeply religious would reach for a bible in their hour of need, carrying it and dropping it when she started to lose strength/consciousness.
- Other items in the vicinity the bible was found in were stained with blood originating from June: carpets and socks.
- June sustained gsw's causing significant bleeding to run down her arm onto her hand.
- Dr Vanezis confirmed June's hands were contaminated with blood.  At trial he confirmed SC's hands were blood free.  These facts were reiterated by others eg soc officer DC Hammersley. 
- I find it suspicious that blood stain test results for the bible remain undisclosed and will remain this way given it was destroyed along with most other exhibits.  Of course this was a failing on JB's defence at trial and appeal. 

Afaik the English judicial system isn't about proving innocence?  The bible is a relatively minor aspect of the case but it should be possible to advance the theory at appeal that rather than MM/JB staging bible as JM claims it might simply be that the stains originated from June as I've suggested.  As the bible was destroyed the court might well find in JB's favour as the theory is plausible and possible.  At the 2002 appeal the judges drubbed MT by focusing on the mirror stains ie how could SC have caused such albeit all were blissfully unaware of the origins of the bloodstains.  The June theory overcomes this.  It's not a biggie just another string to the bow so to speak!

It does show how incompetent and negligent the lawyers were at trial and appeal in not chasing the bible down and appreciating they had no idea where the bloodstains originated from.  MT going all round the houses with interpreting the open pages and yet oblivious to whose blood stained the pages.  It shows the appeal court judges as biased in that they are happy to attribute the bible/mirror stains to JB staging and yet oblivious as to whose blood stained the pages.

[Caroline]

The only identifiable fingerprints found on the bible originated from June.  From CoA:

52. The Bible found by Sheila Caffell's body, belonged to her mother and was normally kept in a cupboard to the right of her bed. It was examined for fingerprints. Many belonged to June Bamber and there were a small number of insufficient detail for comparison, save for one which appeared to have been made by a small child.

I said all the facts surrounding the bible support June walking around the bed holding her bible and dropping it in the vicinity it was found as opposed to SC/JB seeking it out and dropping it in wet blood causing mirror staining:

- The bible belonged to June and was kept by her bed. 
- June was deeply religious
- June sustained 5/6 gsw's whilst in bed/getting out but still had the wherewithal mentally and physically to get out of bed, walk around to the other side and back again.  There's every reason such a person ie deeply religious would reach for a bible in their hour of need, carrying it and dropping it when she started to lose strength/consciousness.
- Other items in the vicinity the bible was found in were stained with blood originating from June: carpets and socks.
- June sustained gsw's causing significant bleeding to run down her arm onto her hand.
- Dr Vanezis confirmed June's hands were contaminated with blood.  At trial he confirmed SC's hands were blood free.  These facts were reiterated by others eg soc officer DC Hammersley. 
- I find it suspicious that blood stain test results for the bible remain undisclosed and will remain this way given it was destroyed along with most other exhibits.  Of course this was a failing on JB's defence at trial and appeal. 

Afaik the English judicial system isn't about proving innocence?  The bible is a relatively minor aspect of the case but it should be possible to advance the theory at appeal that rather than MM/JB staging bible as JM claims it might simply be that the stains originated from June as I've suggested.  As the bible was destroyed the court might well find in JB's favour as the theory is plausible and possible.  At the 2002 appeal the judges drubbed MT by focusing on the mirror stains ie how could SC have caused such albeit all were blissfully unaware of the origins of the bloodstains.  The June theory overcomes this.  It's not a biggie just another string to the bow so to speak!

It does show how incompetent and negligent the lawyers were at trial and appeal in not chasing the bible down and appreciating they had no idea where the bloodstains originated from.  MT going all round the houses with interpreting the open pages and yet oblivious to whose blood stained the pages.  It shows the appeal court judges as biased in that they are happy to attribute the bible/mirror stains to JB staging and yet oblivious as to whose blood stained the pages.

Of course her prints were on it, it was her bible. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that even if the stains did originate from June, it somehow makes Jeremy less guilty? I doubt the bible even exists now anyway so one theory would only be as bad or as good as another. It would be interesting to know if any other photographs of the bible exist?

[tbl]

This case has been to the Court of Appeal twice. I don't think there have been any cases where a third appeal has been allowed?

Further to the 2002 appeal, there have been subsequent requests to the CCRC who have reviewed in detail. I doubt the CCRC would be prepared to consider this case again unless there is some really damning new evidence e.g. an admission of serious malpractice by a former police offer or an admission of perjury by Julie Mugford or other family members who gave evidence at the original trial.

[Holly Goodhead]

This case has been to the Court of Appeal twice. I don't think there have been any cases where a third appeal has been allowed?

Further to the 2002 appeal, there have been subsequent requests to the CCRC who have reviewed in detail. I doubt the CCRC would be prepared to consider this case again unless there is some really damning new evidence e.g. an admission of serious malpractice by a former police offer or an admission of perjury by Julie Mugford or other family members who gave evidence at the original trial.

There's no limit to the number of times an appellant can appeal.  If the application meets the criteria it will be passed to CoA.  If the evidence is strong the conviction will be quashed. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Of course her prints were on it, it was her bible. I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that even if the stains did originate from June, it somehow makes Jeremy less guilty? I doubt the bible even exists now anyway so one theory would only be as bad or as good as another. It would be interesting to know if any other photographs of the bible exist?

It doesn't necessarily make him less guilty but it shouldn't  make him more guilty either as the appeal court judges would have us believe by assuming the blood originated from SC.

The fact remains the bible was a bloodstained exhibit and should have been blood tested by Dr Lincoln for the defence when he visited the lab and tested all the other exhibits.  Experienced defence counsel like Rivlin and Turner shouldn't be making these sorts of schoolboy errors.  JB should not carry the can for lazy, greedy and inept lawyers.
 

[Caroline]

It doesn't necessarily make him less guilty but it shouldn't  make him more guilty either as the appeal court judges would have us believe by assuming the blood originated from SC.

The fact remains the bible was a bloodstained exhibit and should have been blood tested by Dr Lincoln for the defence when he visited the lab and tested all the other exhibits.  Experienced defence counsel like Rivlin and Turner shouldn't be making these sorts of schoolboy errors.  JB should not carry the can for lazy, greedy and inept lawyers.
 

I don't think the print would prove anything unless it was Jeremy's and it's far too small for that. However, like I said, I would be interested to know if other pictures were taken of the bible.

[Holly Goodhead]

I don't think the print would prove anything unless it was Jeremy's and it's far too small for that. However, like I said, I would be interested to know if other pictures were taken of the bible.

Is there any expert evidence confirming the stains represent a handprint? 

[Holly Goodhead]

JB's defence sent Dr Lincoln, a blood serologist, to FSS to carry out his own tests on all bloodstained exhibits:

- Sound moderator
- Rifle
- Pieces of carpet (main bedroom)
- Socks
- Watch
- Tufts of fibre (landing)
- Jacket
- Bathrobe
- Citroën Car
- Wallpaper
- Nightdress

Dr Lincoln visited the lab on 8th Sept '86 and sent a report to Paul Terzeon at Kingsley Napley dated 19th Sept '86 which can be read here:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=276.0;attach=929

No mention of the bible!

In 2002 Paul Terzeon produced a WS dated 2nd Sept 2002.  He states he was unaware of the open pages of the bible and recalled asking an officer whether the police knew of the open pages and/or had a photograph of such. He claims he was told the police were unaware of the open pages and did not have any photographs.  He states he can't recall the officer he spoke with!  You can read the WS pages 8/9 here:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=569.msg17097#msg17097

- Oblivious to the fact the bloodstains on the bible were overlooked although defence were aware the bible was bloodstained during Rivlin's questions to soc officer DC Hammersley at trial:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=165.0;attach=235

- He claims his firm was instructed shortly after JB was charged in 1985 and yet is instructing experts nearly a year later and just a few weeks before start of trial.

- The list of bloodstained exhibits, excluding the bible, only amounted to 11.  The appeal court judges (at the time of JB's 2002 appeal hearing Rivlin was a judge  ) refer to Rivlin as "Counsel with the experience of Geoffrey Rivlin QC, and with his acknowledged reputation for thoroughness.."

417. The explanation why the pages at which the Bible was open was not explored by the defence may be explicable by these matters. Counsel with the experience of Mr Rivlin QC, and with his acknowledged reputation for thoroughness, may well have decided that far from helping these matters might have presented a yet further major hurdle for the appellant to overcome and consequently decided to leave well alone. In any event we are satisfied that production of the original exhibit provided all the information that the photographs would have revealed and that there was no failure to disclose in this respect.

- Had Geoffrey Rivlin lived up to his reputation for thoroughness he would not have been oblivious as to whose blood stained the pages of the bible.  If it was the case it only came to his attention during his cross-examination of DC Hammersley then why not ask for an adjournment?

- Judges are suppose to be impartial truth seekers but it's clear from the above they are not.  Obviously the mirror staining could be detrimental to JB if the blood originated from SC.  But there's no evidence the blood originated from SC there's just as much evidence if not more that the blood originated from June.

[Holly Goodhead]

Here is JM's WS where she states JB told her MM put a bible on SC's chest:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1112

[Holly Goodhead]

The bible contained significant bloodstains so in all probability it would have been possible to identify whose blood stained the pages had it not been destroyed. 

[Holly Goodhead]

5 of the 11 exhibits bloodstained tested by Dr Lincoln feature in the CoA doc:

- SC's nightdress at point 51
- Carpet samples at point 57
- Wallpaper at point 57
- Rifle at point 71
- Sound moderator internally point 75
- Sound moderator externally point 76

The above points discuss whose blood featured on these exhibits. Some of the above exhibits are referred to at other points within the doc too.  However the point I'm endeavouring to make is that all concerned are aware the bible contains significant bloodstains and yet all concerned are oblivious whose blood?  The bible is the only exhibit where there's no evidence/discussion of bloodstain test results.  The bible is referred to at the following points:

- 35
- 52
- 405 - 421

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

Spot the difference?!

- IMO EP/FSS withheld bloodstain test results for the bible.
- The defence at trial and 2002 appeal overlooked this.
- Appeal court judges so far up their own a**** they're unable to see the wood for the trees! 

[Holly Goodhead]

The CoA doc confirms religion always played a strong part in June's life to the point it dominated her thoughts and might have been thought obsessive.

14. June Bamber was also 61 years old. Religion had always played a strong part in her life. In her latter years her interest in this regard had to an extent come to dominate her thinking, to a point that might have been thought to be obsessive. In 1982, she received treatment at a psychiatric hospital in Northampton.

The CoA doc confirms 5 bloodstained carpet samples taken from the main bedroom were found to match June's blood groupings:

57. Five carpet samples taken from the main bedroom were examined and found to bear numerous spots of dripped blood. These were tested and found to match the blood groupings of June Bamber.

The CoA doc confirms the bible found on/near SC's body belonged to June, was kept by her bedside and the only identifiable fingerprints originated June:

52. The Bible found by Sheila Caffell's body, belonged to her mother and was normally kept in a cupboard to the right of her bed. It was examined for fingerprints. Many belonged to June Bamber and there were a small number of insufficient detail for comparison, save for one which appeared to have been made by a small child.

The CoA doc confirms June/her nightdress were heavily bloodstained from her gsw's:

43. Mrs Bamber was bare footed and dressed in a nightdress. She had received seven gunshot wounds, of which one to her forehead and one to the right side of the head would have caused death very quickly. She also suffered shots to the right side of the lower part of her neck, the right forearm, two injuries to the right side of the chest and to the right knee. There was a great deal of blood on her body and clothing and from its pattern, it appeared that at some stage of the attack she had been in an upright position

The CoA acknowledge:

- June's interest in religion might be regarded as obsessive
- The bible belonged to June
- The bible was kept by June's bedside
- The bible contained June's fingerprints
- June sustained heavy bloodstaining to her person/nightdress from the gsw's sustained
- June's blood was found on the carpet where the bible was found (along with blue socks also found near bible)

Was it really beyond the defence at trial and 2002 hearing, and appeal court judges, to think  hey...

- June
- Obsessed with religion
- Her bible
- Kept by her bedside
- Her fingerprints on bible
- Her blood on carpets/socks where bible was found
- June found with heavy bloodstains including hands

Did June walk around the bed holding her bible hoping expecting God Almighty to help her in her hour of need?