Jeremy Bamber - The bloodied fingerprints and the Bible

[scipio_usmc]

This is from a study in 2007 called - The Role of Affect Regulation in a Case of Attempted Maternal Filicide–Suicide

The authors conducted a retrospective review of 30 records from coroners’ cases of filicide–suicide in the U.S. occurring from 1958 to 2002. These cases were screened for characteristics that might be specific to this kind of crime. Their findings for the mothers reveal that the filicide–suicide perpetrators presented a high rate of mental illness: 90% of the mothers had a history of psychiatric treatment and/or ongoing symptoms of a mood or thought disorder. Records showed that evidence of depressive symptoms could be found in 70% of the mothers, 30% showed signs of psychosis and 20% had a previously documented suicide attempt. However, information on this last point was incomplete. The mean age of the mothers was 31.8 years; most of them were married (70%) and unemployed (70%). Only one out of ten mothers had previously been charged for physical assault. The age of the victims killed by their mothers ranged from 3 months to 11 years. None of the mothers was reported to have attempted to kill their spouse. Previous domestic violence was noted in 30% of the mothers’ households, but none of the filicide–suicides appeared to be the culmination of abusive mother–childrelationships. The length of time that the mothers considered suicide and/or filicide prior to the act ranged from a complete lack of planning to several weeks. The authors conclude that the characteristics of this population differed from the traditional risk factors for violence (young—substance abuse—prior convictions for violence).

The differences are striking if one is not blind. There was no evidence of Sheila being depressed. She was employed, She was not married at the time.  In pretty much all the cases you reference the other killed the kids then herself. There was few instances of killing anyone else and those few instances where they did kill others it was virtually always someone else in their care thus who were basically like the kids.

A barrier to committing suicide is dependents. People who want to commit suicide will feel like they have to kill dependents first so they can be freed of responsibility and thus no longer be needed. In small number of cases that has included feeble adults that they had to care for.  Nevill and June were not dependents.

The studies you referenced also found that a majority of the women with mental illness were off their meds or not being treated period when they acted.

One has to ignore reality and strain severely to try fitting the claims of this case into any of the paradigms.  There is a first time for everything but this is not it.  The reason why this fails to fit any paradigm is quite clear, Jeremy killed everyone and tried unsuccessfully to frame Sheila.   

[Myster]

Have now found photos of kitchen at WHF set for breakfast the day after the murders. ( one photo is on the Bamber website!) This photo shows two smaller dishes and two larger dishes, alongside papers/mags, the smaller dishes are placed where JB says his parents were sitting having supper.  The other photo I found shows two small stools knocked over by the side of the table that JB states his parents were sitting.  I think JB was lying about the positions his parents were sitting on the night of the murders purely to imply that SC could see him best from her position.

JB certainly laid it on thick when he implied that Sheila was closely observing him while he was stood at the kitchen worktop loading the magazine. Sheila thinks - "Good old Jem, he's filling it up ready for me to use later... and saving my manicured nails from getting broken!". Apparently he was side on to Sheila, which places her sat near to the Welsh Dresser with her back to it. His parents might have been sitting closer to the AGA on the opposite side of the table, Nevill in his usual chair, but both facing Jeremy's back. I think it likely that the stools were for the twins and they were going to have cereal for breakfast, hence the bowl place settings on the side of the table nearest to the worktop.

[adam]

Why didn't Bamber put the rifle away himself ? It would only have taken him a few seconds.

It's normal to put things back where you found them after using them. It's why cupboards exist. Leaving a big, ugly and dengerous thing sprawled across a communal area in someone else's house is rather rude.

Did Neville or June not see him just leave the rifle in the middle of a communal area ?

Then during the rest of the evening Neville and June didn't notice the rifle.  Or did notice it but didn't put it away. By coincidence Sheila woke up in the middle of that same night and decided to use the available loaded rifle.

[Holly Goodhead]

This thread has branched out into a couple of  different themes. I will move posts to relevant threads later.  Meanwhile please try and stick to the existing themes in this thread.  Otherwise threads become unwieldy and difficult to manage.  If anyone wants to start new threads at any time then please do.

[Holly Goodhead]

Why didn't Bamber put the rifle away himself ? It would only have taken him a few seconds. It's normal to put things back where you found them after using them. It's why cupboards exist. Leaving a big, ugly and dengerous thing sprawled across a communal area in someone else's house is rather rude.

Did Neville or June not see him just leave the rifle in the middle of a communal area ?

Then during the rest of the evening Neville and June didn't notice the rifle.  Or did notice it but didn't put it away. By coincidence Sheila woke up in the middle of that same night and decided to use the available loaded rifle.

Firearms were found in various locations within WHF eg downstairs bathroom and an unused set of stairs.  I think it extremely unlikely that NB would leave the rifle in what appeared to be a busy area of the working farm.  Safety would paramount, especially with small children around, but also preserving the rifle from getting damaged by being knocked about.

Most domestic murder cases in the UK don't involve firearms as most don't have access to them.  Instead they involve everyday household items such as knives, hammers and ligatures for strangling.

Dr F said SC discussed suicide ideation with him but he didn't think she was at risk.  As far I'm aware that's all that is known in this regard.

I've no idea what sort of conversations might take place when a patient discusses suicide with a professional person.  Surely the patient would be encouraged to talk to enable the professional person to determine whether the patient is at risk of harm and/or harming others.  Ways of doing this might be trying to determine how the patient intends to carry out the act. A detailed plan might set the alarm bells ringing as opposed to something vague.  Also the method might indicate what's going on in the patient's head.  Another question might be how suicide would affect others especially young dependent children. This might also indicate whether any children involved are at risk of harm.  Did SC have these sorts of conversations with Dr F?

Had JB been found not guilty the spotlight would have fallen on Dr F.  CAL interviewed Dr F for her book. He said when he heard the verdict on the news "he was glad it wasn't SC after all".  Well of course he was glad.

Then we come to the bizarre statistic that two babies born to middle class families and adopted into a middle class family produce the following outcome:

- Mentally ill adoptive mother (in-patient psychiatric care before either of her adopted children were even conceived linked with her inability to conceive birth children).

- Mentally ill adopted daughter

- Adopted son found guilty of murdering entire immediate family - 5 members

The reason I emphasise middle class (socio-economic group) is that the above had all the advantages pre and post adoption that might beset economically disadvantaged families such as poor perinatal care, housing, education etc.  Also there's no evidence of any anti-social personality disorders in any of the families either birth or adoptive. 

And the reason I emphasis adoption is for the obvious reason that the Bamber family was created by adoption/law and not birth/biology.  I am just getting round to reading a book: 'The Psychology of adoption' by Dr's David Brodzinsky and Mashall Shechter.  It's not a light read.  I'll have to read it twice before I can deduce anything.

This leads me to conclude there was something far more complex at play than plain ol greed.  &%+((£

[John]

For info:

A request has been made for a 'LIKE'  button to be added to posts so I am happy to oblige.  'LIKE' statistics can be viewed from the header bar atop each page.

Should this function cause difficulties or be abused I will remove it.


John

[Holly Goodhead]

The differences are striking if one is not blind. There was no evidence of Sheila being depressed. She was employed, She was not married at the time.  In pretty much all the cases you reference the other killed the kids then herself. There was few instances of killing anyone else and those few instances where they did kill others it was virtually always someone else in their care thus who were basically like the kids.

A barrier to committing suicide is dependents. People who want to commit suicide will feel like they have to kill dependents first so they can be freed of responsibility and thus no longer be needed. In small number of cases that has included feeble adults that they had to care for.  Nevill and June were not dependents.

The studies you referenced also found that a majority of the women with mental illness were off their meds or not being treated period when they acted.

One has to ignore reality and strain severely to try fitting the claims of this case into any of the paradigms.  There is a first time for everything but this is not it.  The reason why this fails to fit any paradigm is quite clear, Jeremy killed everyone and tried unsuccessfully to frame Sheila.

As far as I'm aware SC was not employed at the time of the tragedy.  In fact this seemed to be one of the banes of her life.  Even prior to her illness and becoming a mum she seemed to struggle with permanent full-time employment albeit she seemed willing as opposed to lazy.
 

[Myster]

Sorry to keep harping on, but I doubt if anyone will convince me that the bible stain is anything other than a female's bloodied palm print, even the "expert" who examined the book for normal fingerprints but apparently overlooked this stain. It's just too complex to have come from a pool on the carpet - the Head Line is unmistakable as a thin white line running right across the stain, as is the Life Line which begins jointly with the former on the left, then curves down in an arc; the darker stains made by the ball of the thumb and the left-side of the palm indicate where greater pressure has been applied to the page by these prominent fleshy features; the lightest area is where the hollow of the hand made less contact with the page.

Furthermore, the stain is abruptly cut off at the top of the page, which means that if it was from the carpet there should be a continuation of the other part of this stain on the carpet just above the top edge of the bible between the arrows indicated... but there isn't any! And only a small section of page 657's width (indicated at 1) would have been in contact with the carpet at the book's top edge, much less than the actual width of the stain on the page.

The bible also looks like it was held between just a thumb and finger at the top corner where the pages are bent, as if someone was scared of getting their fingerprints on it while they placed the book face down near the existing carpet stain by Sheila's arm to make it appear that the page stain originated from there. This corner has obviously been flattened back to its original shape in the non-crime scene photo of the opened book.

[Holly Goodhead]

Getting back to the thread, it suddenly occurred to me that investigators didn't raise blood staining in the bible with JB during his interviews?  They didn't raise the blood in the silencer either?   &%+((£

Investigators did discuss and show JB the bible but nothing about blood staining  &%+((£

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1310

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1312

[Myster]

Getting back to the thread, it suddenly occurred to me that investigators didn't raise blood staining in the bible with JB during his interviews?  They didn't raise the blood in the silencer either?   &%+((£

Investigators did discuss and show JB the bible but nothing about blood staining  &%+((£

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1310

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1312

He made a very obvious Freudian slip there about threatening Crispy with the bible, followed by quickly pulling back with a "No Comment".  At what other time would he have done that, with June's bible of all things, if it was not during the murders when the dog happened to be getting in the way of his task?

[Holly Goodhead]

He made a very obvious Freudian slip there about threatening Crispy with the bible, followed by quickly pulling back with a "No Comment".  At what other time would he have done that, with June's bible of all things, if it was not during the murders when the dog happened to be getting in the way of his task?

Investigators showed JB the bible DRH/44.  Why not open it up and discuss the blood staining?

To my mind there's something odd about the bible/staining:

- Investigators show it to JB but don't discuss the blood staining
- The blood isn't analysed at lab or if it is no one knows about it
- No mention of the blood staining at trial

Then 16/17 years later the prosecution want to use at appeal  &%+((£

[david1819]

Did ANY of these mothers kill their parents too as a job lot?

Such events are rare. This is from a study in 2012 called The Female Family Annihilator

With the majority of female homicide perpetrators choosing their victims within the domestic context, it is interesting to note the lack of gender specific theories of family multiple murderers. Despite the common myth that multiple murderers kill strangers, Duwe (2007) noted that multiple murderers, (both male and female) are much more likely to kill someone they know, most commonly family members. Messing and Heeren (2004) found the majority of female multiple murderers were most likely to dispatch their biological children. Messing and Heeren also found that many women killed their children as a result of a loss of domestic status (i.e., no longer the primary caregiver). Instead of trying to recreate their lives creating new roles for themselves women chose to escape their distress through violence against their children. Furthermore, it was found that these multiple child murders seemed to be carefully calculated and very rarely committed in the spur of the moment (Messing & Heeren, 2004). Thus, when considered in a domestic context, women mass murder their biological children more frequently than any other member of their family. They also do so in a way that suggests forethought and preparation. For instance Messing and Heeren (2004) found that the female multiple murderers in their study were highly efficient, calculated and controlled killers, characteristics suggested by the lack of personal injuries and the infrequency of stranger victims killed. In addition, many researchers have suggested that some women kill their families as a method of exercising what they perceive to be care and protection (Alder & Polk, 2001; Daly & Wilson, 1988;

Patricia Bolin was 40 years old, an American citizen and resident of Arlington, Ohio when she annihilated her family. She was married to Ronald Bolin, a successful businessman, and founder of his own mechanical-design company. The couple lived together with their three children in the family home, which was located in a wealthy Columbus suburb (Ohio mother, 1976). Friends of the family described the Bolin‘s life as ―ideal‖ (Ohio mother, 1976). Patricia‘s occupation was unlisted in source material, however it appeared that Mr. Bolin was the breadwinner for the family and the couple was financially settled. On December 8th 1976 Patricia Bolin shot and killed her husband Ron (age 43), daughter Tamela (age 12) , and son Todd (age 9) . She attempted to kill daughter Alicia (age 15), but her gun misfired (Mom kills, 1976). According to news reports, police who arrived at the scene said, ―the place looked like a slaughter house‖ (Mom kills, 1976). The triggering events remains unknown to police


After killing their victims, five of the six women attempted suicide—two were successful, one shot herself in the head and the other threw herself off a bridge. With respect to the three women who were unsuccessful: one shot herself in the stomach, one in the head and, the other tried to strangle herself with a cord. None of the women who successfully committed suicide left a suicide note, although one unsuccessful woman did.

[david1819]

One has to ignore reality and strain severely to try fitting the claims of this case into any of the paradigms.  There is a first time for everything but this is not it.  The reason why this fails to fit any paradigm is quite clear, Jeremy killed everyone and tried unsuccessfully to frame Sheila.

The evidence to suggest this does not stand up to scrutiny

[puglove]

The evidence to suggest this does not stand up to scrutiny

I don't know what you're seeing, David, but it's not what I'm seeing. And I believed that Bamber was innocent for 25 years. Thanks to Mike Tesko, I realised how wrong I'd been.

[puglove]

He made a very obvious Freudian slip there about threatening Crispy with the bible, followed by quickly pulling back with a "No Comment".  At what other time would he have done that, with June's bible of all things, if it was not during the murders when the dog happened to be getting in the way of his task?

Absolutely, Myster, a massive Freudian slip, I've always thought that! Maybe Bamber batted at Crispy with the bible when he'd shot Sheila and was arranging her body, and Crispy was barking at him from under the bed. It might also explain his crack about "if only dogs could talk."

Poor Crispy, witnessing such horror then, although the last link to Bamber's "beloved Mum", put to sleep in case Bamber's stereo wires got chewed. Yet another tick in the "Bamber is a callous, murdering arsehole" box.