UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: Holly Goodhead on February 09, 2020, 01:46:26 PM
-
John has recently asked that threads remain on topic.
I've set up this thread for those who wish to upload the above. If such content is relevant to any other thread(s) please add a link. Please do not copy the full text of any social media commentary to threads other than this one. Than you.
-
Aunt Agatha over on blue re https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZILACHl544&feature=youtu.be
“When this first came out, I can catagorically state, without any hesitation, that when the police first entered the house, entered the kitchen, the police officer reported ‘one dead male, one dead female’.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477493.html#msg477493
“For over twenty five years both Jeremy and I have stated that that was what was stated in the very beginning. He has never changed his view on this.
Michael Winner made this film based on documented evidence....and it originally stated ‘one dead male, one dead female!’
Someone has made a decision to omit that from the film and therefore change the events of that day.
*%87
-
Aunt Agatha over on blue re https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZILACHl544&feature=youtu.be
“When this first came out, I can catagorically state, without any hesitation, that when the police first entered the house, entered the kitchen, the police officer reported ‘one dead male, one dead female’.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477493.html#msg477493
“For over twenty five years both Jeremy and I have stated that that was what was stated in the very beginning. He has never changed his view on this.
Michael Winner made this film based on documented evidence....and it originally stated ‘one dead male, one dead female!’
Someone has made a decision to omit that from the film and therefore change the events of that day.
*%87
JB has a poor understanding of his case imo.
The above is clearly muddled communication between first respondents and those recording events remotely.
All the expert evidence shows all 5 victims died around the same time ie early hours 7th Aug.
Both pathologists ruled out SC shooting herself once in the bedroom, leaving the bedroom and returning to shoot herself a second time. Both pathologists also pointed out the obvious ie the lack of vertical blood staining down the front of her nightdress.
This theory needs consigning to the rubbish bin.
-
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/defence-case
The OS is still saying Sheila shot herself in the kitchen. Then went upstairs and shot herself again. While the police were inside WHF!
-
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/defence-case
The OS is still saying Sheila shot herself in the kitchen. Then went upstairs and shot herself again. While the police were inside WHF!
If this is the official line, then Jeremy has zero chance of an appeal.
-
Has anyone considered the OS/CT are government stooges?!
-
Has anyone considered the OS/CT are government stooges?!
No @)(++(*
-
Aunt Agatha over on blue re https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZILACHl544&feature=youtu.be
“When this first came out, I can catagorically state, without any hesitation, that when the police first entered the house, entered the kitchen, the police officer reported ‘one dead male, one dead female’.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477493.html#msg477493
“For over twenty five years both Jeremy and I have stated that that was what was stated in the very beginning. He has never changed his view on this.
Michael Winner made this film based on documented evidence....and it originally stated ‘one dead male, one dead female!’
Someone has made a decision to omit that from the film and therefore change the events of that day.
*%87
I think that's just bad recall.
-
Has anyone considered the OS/CT are government stooges?!
Seriously? so the conspiracy to keep Jeremy locked up has now gone beyond Essex Police, the Judiciary and the surviving relatives to include the government as well?
-
I think that's just bad recall.
I think there’s still a possibility JM may give an exclusive interview
-
I think there’s still a possibility JM may give an exclusive interview
We shall have to see. In that recent interview, she said he doubted that she would ever seen the drama as she didn't think it would be shown there. It was sold to the US and there are plans to air it later this year.
-
We shall have to see. In that recent interview, she said he doubted that she would ever seen the drama as she didn't think it would be shown there. It was sold to the US and there are plans to air it later this year.
Isn’t that interesting.
Just goes to show what little interest she has in it all.
-
Trudi and Michelle having a gos’
Jeremy Bamber
@JBamberFacebook
1h
#WhiteHouseFarm
The Bible is recorded in case material as being on Sheila’s chest, being 10-12 inches away at waist height and resting against the top of her arm. Who moved it and why? Essex police state they did not interfere with the scene.
Really!!
@Bambertweets
🎀 Michelle Diskin Bates 🎀
@Michelle_Diskin
Replying to
@JBamberFacebook
and
@Bambertweets
They moved many things...they thought it was murder/suicide so it was used to train others in forensics! Of course they moved it. photos show they moved the BODY!
6:26 PM · Feb 10, 2020·Twitter Web App
-
https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/defence-case
The OS is still saying Sheila shot herself in the kitchen. Then went upstairs and shot herself again. While the police were inside WHF!
They're all crazy.
-
Trudi and Michelle having a gos’
Jeremy Bamber
@JBamberFacebook
1h
#WhiteHouseFarm
The Bible is recorded in case material as being on Sheila’s chest, being 10-12 inches away at waist height and resting against the top of her arm. Who moved it and why? Essex police state they did not interfere with the scene.
Really!!
@Bambertweets
🎀 Michelle Diskin Bates 🎀
@Michelle_Diskin
Replying to
@JBamberFacebook
and
@Bambertweets
They moved many things...they thought it was murder/suicide so it was used to train others in forensics! Of course they moved it. photos show they moved the BODY!
6:26 PM · Feb 10, 2020·Twitter Web App
The Bible being left on Sheila's body by her killer was too obvious.
-
The Bible being left on Sheila's body by her killer was too obvious.
Precisely, what a smugly arrogant flourish to finish the evening with as he was cleaning up. And thought people here in the real world wouldn't notice.
All this after having a nice warm bubble bath before bungling the first shot then asking crispy to fire the second fatal one... whilst reading the bible
-
The Bible being left on Sheila's body by her killer was too obvious.
Whose blood stained the pages of the Bible?
-
Precisely, what a smugly arrogant flourish to finish the evening with as he was cleaning up. And thought people here in the real world wouldn't notice.
All this after having a nice warm bubble bath before bungling the first shot then asking crispy to fire the second fatal one... whilst reading the bible
Whose blood stained the pages of the bible?
-
I’m not aware that they tested the blood on the bible or some of the other bloodied items.
-
I’m not aware that they tested the blood on the bible or some of the other bloodied items.
All blood stained items were tested incl
Rifle
SC's nightdress
Blue socks
Carpet samples
Wallpaper
Why wasn't the bible tested or if it was why were the results not disclosed?
-
I was viewing an old thread earlier that stated not all of those items were tested for blood group. Admittedly I didn't read all 20 pages though.
Regardless, the blood on the bible could have got there more than one way. It was extraordinary arrogance from Jeremy to plant the bible.
-
All blood stained items were tested incl
Rifle
SC's nightdress
Blue socks
Carpet samples
Wallpaper
Why wasn't the bible tested or if it was why were the results not disclosed?
How do you know they weren't?
-
I was viewing an old thread earlier that stated not all of those items were tested for blood group. Admittedly I didn't read all 20 pages though.
Regardless, the blood on the bible could have got there more than one way. It was extraordinary arrogance from Jeremy to plant the bible.
How do you know that it was Jeremy who planted The Bible?
-
I was viewing an old thread earlier that stated not all of those items were tested for blood group. Admittedly I didn't read all 20 pages though.
Regardless, the blood on the bible could have got there more than one way. It was extraordinary arrogance from Jeremy to plant the bible.
No need to speculate about how the blood stains were deposited and whose blood stained the pages when biologists are capable of answering both questions.
If only all trial exhibits hadn't been destroyed by EP against all protocols.
-
How do you know they weren't?
All relevant docs confirm the outcome of blood stained exhibits insofar as type/groupings but the bible is omitted.
Again this was an oversight by the defence and appeal lawyers. At the 2002 appeal MT QC bangs on about which pages of the bible were open and how these represented SC's state of mind when he seems oblivious to the fact the blood stains are an unknown in terms of whose blood and how they got there.
-
All relevant docs confirm the outcome of blood stained exhibits insofar as type/groupings but the bible is omitted.
Again this was an oversight by the defence and appeal lawyers. At the 2002 appeal MT QC bangs on about which pages of the bible were open and how these represented SC's state of mind when he seems oblivious to the fact the blood stains are an unknown in terms of whose blood and how they got there.
John Hayward's hand written report re blood stained exhibits but no bible!?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=260.msg4425#msg4425
-
How do you know that it was Jeremy who planted The Bible?
The bible could have been more problematic for defence at the trial, and were relieved that the prosecution didn't pursue the matter too diligently in court. This old thread explains why and discusses the matter in great detail. It also answers Holly's questions above about why the blood wasn't tested. note Scipio's excellent posts. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=977.30
In short, it doesn't prove Jeremy was guilty but yet another of those strange incidences we are asked to swallow whole.
-
How do you know that it was Jeremy who planted The Bible?
All supporting evidence points to June carrying her bible with her as she walked around the bed and dropping it in the vicinity it was found as she started losing consciousness:
- The bible was June's and kept on her bedside table.
- June was known to have been extremely religious to the point it featured in her mental illness, as confirmed by her psychiatrist
- June sustained 5 entry gunshot wounds and 3 exit wounds before she walked around the bed, as confirmed by testing of the blood stains on the carpet
- June's hands were heavily blood stained, as per the pathologist, and the pages of the bible contained various blood stains most probably transferred from June.
-
The bible could have been more problematic for defence at the trial, and were relieved that the prosecution didn't pursue the matter too diligently in court. This old thread explains why and discusses the matter in great detail. It also answers Holly's questions above about why the blood wasn't tested. note Scipio's excellent posts. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=977.30
In short, it doesn't prove Jeremy was guilty but yet another of those strange incidences we are asked to swallow whole.
Scipio makes an assumption that the blood wasn't tested because the scientists assumed it originated from SC. Scientists don't assume they test everything.
You're telling me it doesn't prove JB guilty! What it does indicate is that the prosecution withheld the results and the defence were asleep at the wheel!
It needs to be remembered that the bible features in JM's testimony and that this came before most of the blood stained exhibits were tested.
-
All supporting evidence points to June carrying her bible with her as she walked around the bed and dropping it in the vicinity it was found as she started losing consciousness:
- The bible was June's and kept on her bedside table.
- June was known to have been extremely religious to the point it featured in her mental illness, as confirmed by her psychiatrist
- June sustained 5 entry gunshot wounds and 3 exit wounds before she walked around the bed, as confirmed by testing of the blood stains on the carpet
- June's hands were heavily blood stained, as per the pathologist, and the pages of the bible contained various blood stains most probably transferred from June.
The least thing June would be doing when riddled with bullets is carrying a bible around the room!
-
Quite. And then dropped it right beside where Sheila's body was found? poppycock.
Jeremy planted it there in a smug attempt to lend credence to the deranged nature of the crime.
-
The least thing June would be doing when riddled with bullets is carrying a bible around the room!
June was extremely religious and it stands to reason faced with such a crisis she would reach for her bible. If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed there's no reason whatsoever she couldn't have carried the bible with her.
-
Quite. And then dropped it right beside where Sheila's body was found? poppycock.
Jeremy planted it there in a smug attempt to lend credence to the deranged nature of the crime.
If the bible had been retained, as it should have been, we wouldn't be speculating.
Why were all exhibits destroyed against protocols?
-
If the bible had been retained, as it should have been, we wouldn't be speculating.
Why were all exhibits destroyed against protocols?
I thought the bible was eventually returned to the relatives?
-
I thought the bible was eventually returned to the relatives?
Indeed, in 2006.
Holly, the bible is clearly not enough to secure a conviction by itself but it is damning. he told JM that Matty McDonald left it there to make it appear as if she took her own life in a manic religious episode.
Extraordinary arrogance from Bamber to bring June's bible into it.
-
June was extremely religious and it stands to reason faced with such a crisis she would reach for her bible. If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed there's no reason whatsoever she couldn't have carried the bible with her.
We all know June was religious but it doesn't make sense to reach for a bible when you have been shot multiple times and in severe pain. One would reach for the wounds. Besides which June doesn't need reminding of the contents of the good book she could recite a passage from heart.
-
June was extremely religious and it stands to reason faced with such a crisis she would reach for her bible. If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed there's no reason whatsoever she couldn't have carried the bible with her.
That's just daft Holly. The only reason she might have grabbed the Bible was to throw it at Bamber.
-
I thought the bible was eventually returned to the relatives?
What evidence exists showing the bible was returned to the relatives? Why on earth would they want to take possession of it?
The Bible should have remained the property of EP as per CPS.
-
Indeed, in 2006.
Holly, the bible is clearly not enough to secure a conviction by itself but it is damning. he told JM that Matty McDonald left it there to make it appear as if she took her own life in a manic religious episode.
Extraordinary arrogance from Bamber to bring June's bible into it.
I never said it was enough to secure a referral to Coa but it will feature as an additional point and given the appeal judges have already said they will rule in JB's favour where exhibits have been destroyed its game over for the idea JB planted the bible.
-
Carol Ann Lee states in her book that the bible was returned to the surviving relatives in 2006, and I have seen that stated elsewhere on threads here preceding the time her book was published.
-
If the bible had been retained, as it should have been, we wouldn't be speculating.
Why were all exhibits destroyed against protocols?
The bible was given back to the family.
-
I thought the bible was eventually returned to the relatives?
It was.
-
I never said it was enough to secure a referral to Coa but it will feature as an additional point and given the appeal judges have already said they will rule in JB's favour where exhibits have been destroyed its game over for the idea JB planted the bible.
I wouldn't bet on that 8(0(*
-
We all know June was religious but it doesn't make sense to reach for a bible when you have been shot multiple times and in severe pain. One would reach for the wounds. Besides which June doesn't need reminding of the contents of the good book she could recite a passage from heart.
If June had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door she had the wherewithal to carry her bible.
In times of crisis the religious turn to God. This can be evidenced by Kate McCann turning to the bible physically and spiritually.
David Boutflour:
"I prayed to God that he would save Simon telling Him that I would go to church for the rest of my life".
-
That's just daft Holly. The only reason she might have grabbed the Bible was to throw it at Bamber.
The shooter didn't stand in the area where the bible was found as per all the physical evidence.
-
Carol Ann Lee states in her book that the bible was returned to the surviving relatives in 2006, and I have seen that stated elsewhere on threads here preceding the time her book was published.
How does the above make it factually correct?
-
The bible was given back to the family.
Evidenced by what?
-
I wouldn't bet on that 8(0(*
Coa are already committed to doing this:
165. In February 1996, the Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits without reference to the appellant or his legal representatives. It might have been necessary for this court to examine the circumstances in which this had happened. The police officer responsible contended that it was done without his appreciating that there was any on-going legal process that might require the further use of the exhibits. However, during argument it was agreed that the court could protect the appellant's position by making assumptions in his favour and that, therefore, it was unnecessary to resolve precisely how this came about.
-
If June had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door she had the wherewithal to carry her bible.
In times of crisis the religious turn to God. This can be evidenced by Kate McCann turning to the bible physically and spiritually.
David Boutflour:
"I prayed to God that he would save Simon telling Him that I would go to church for the rest of my life".
The obvious difference being that Boutflour and McCann weren't mortally wounded at the time.
-
The obvious difference being that Boutflour and McCann weren't mortally wounded at the time.
Neither was June evidenced by the fact she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door.
-
Neither was June evidenced by the fact she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door.
Yes, she had already been mortally wounded regardless that she was able to walk a short distance around the bed.
Mortally wounded people have a tendency to be more concerned with their wounds than having a quick read of the bible.
-
Yes, she had already been mortally wounded regardless that she was able to walk a short distance around the bed.
Mortally wounded people have a tendency to be more concerned with their wounds than having a quick read of the bible.
If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door there was no reason for her not to carry her bible. You don't know what she was concerned with in those last moments and what took precedence.
-
If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door there was no reason for her not to carry her bible. You don't know what she was concerned with in those last moments and what took precedence.
And I've never suggested she did attempt to read the bible during her last moments just that she carried it as part of her strong faith and maybe for comfort too.
-
And I've never suggested she did attempt to read the bible during her last moments just that she carried it as part of her strong faith and maybe for comfort too.
June was covered in blood, the cover would be blood stained had that happened, it wasn't.
-
Coa are already committed to doing this:
165. In February 1996, the Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits without reference to the appellant or his legal representatives. It might have been necessary for this court to examine the circumstances in which this had happened. The police officer responsible contended that it was done without his appreciating that there was any on-going legal process that might require the further use of the exhibits. However, during argument it was agreed that the court could protect the appellant's position by making assumptions in his favour and that, therefore, it was unnecessary to resolve precisely how this came about.
Yes, I have read that but NEW evidence is always considered.
-
Evidenced by what?
I am sure you are aware, that as interested parties on Internet forums, we don't have full access to all the evidence. Just because there is no document backing this up on the internet, doesn't mean it didn't happen. It remains a possibility that the bible still exists.
-
If she had the wherewithal to walk around the bed and back to the door there was no reason for her not to carry her bible. You don't know what she was concerned with in those last moments and what took precedence.
I know it's splitting hairs but I would use the term stagger not walk to describe any movement from June.
It seems reasonable to assume that a mortally wounded person shot several times in the face and limbs would have been preoccupied with their pain/wounds at that stage, not the bible.
And then she conveniently dropped this bible exactly beside where Sheila was later found laying after she had taken her shower to wash the blood, residue and sugar off her in order to frame Jeremy? Good grief!
No, It was arrogant stupidity from Jeremy to plant the bible. Things went broadly according to his plan that night but he must have turned white when he realised a second shot was needed to finish Sheila. The bible was a convenient prop to shore up the deranged nature of her crime.
-
June was covered in blood, the cover would be blood stained had that happened, it wasn't.
We don't know how it was carried.
-
Yes, I have read that but NEW evidence is always considered.
Your research into this shows the appeal court judges were wrong insofar as the page with the heaviest staining was furthest away from SC's body not nearest. This shows the 3 appeal court judges have poor spatial skills
-
I am sure you are aware, that as interested parties on Internet forums, we don't have full access to all the evidence. Just because there is no document backing this up on the internet, doesn't mean it didn't happen. It remains a possibility that the bible still exists.
If it exists insofar as it was returned to the relatives it begs the question why the police returned any exhibits to the relatives?
-
I know it's splitting hairs but I would use the term stagger not walk to describe any movement from June.
It seems reasonable to assume that a mortally wounded person shot several times in the face and limbs would have been preoccupied with their pain/wounds at that stage, not the bible.
And then she conveniently dropped this bible exactly beside where Sheila was later found laying after she had taken her shower to wash the blood, residue and sugar off her in order to frame Jeremy? Good grief!
No, It was arrogant stupidity from Jeremy to plant the bible. Things went broadly according to his plan that night but he must have turned white when he realised a second shot was needed to finish Sheila. The bible was a convenient prop to shore up the deranged nature of her crime.
June did not sustain any gunshot wounds to her face.
What evidence exists that SC had a shower? Why would she have sugar on her feet and/or blood other than from her own self-inflicted gunshot wounds? SC and/or her nightdress were not tested for gunshot residue.
-
June did not sustain any gunshot wounds to her face.
What evidence exists that SC had a shower? Why would she have sugar on her feet and/or blood other than from her own self-inflicted gunshot wounds? SC and/or her nightdress were not tested for gunshot residue.
Yes she did, she was shot between the eyes.
-
June did not sustain any gunshot wounds to her face.
What evidence exists that SC had a shower? Why would she have sugar on her feet and/or blood other than from her own self-inflicted gunshot wounds? SC and/or her nightdress were not tested for gunshot residue.
Then the 'facts' section on here is wrong, as well as other sources.
The kitchen floor was carnage, covered in sugar and all manner of debris after the struggle in the kitchen where she battered Nevill to death with the butt of the gun. Yet her feet were clean as if she had just gotten out of bed. When challenged, Bambers campaign explain this away by her having a quick shower before her suicide.
-
Yes she did, she was shot between the eyes.
Steve was referring to the first gunshot wounds June sustained prior to walking around the bed.
-
Then the 'facts' section on here is wrong, as well as other sources.
I would refer to the pathological evidence here for reliable info on victims' gunshot wounds.
The kitchen floor was carnage, covered in sugar and all manner of debris after the struggle in the kitchen where she battered Nevill to death with the butt of the gun. Yet her feet were clean as if she had just gotten out of bed. When challenged, Bambers campaign explain this away by her having a quick shower before her suicide.
Soc officers do not describe the kitchen floor as you have nor do soc images depict such.
SC's found position is entirely consistent with her as perp. No shower required.
On the one hand you think June incapable of carrying her bible having sustained gunshot wounds and yet you can see NB entering into a violent struggle with his assailant having sustained gunshot wounds that would have killed him had others not supervened?
There was no violent struggle in the kitchen as NB was too badly injured from the gunshot wounds he sustained upstairs.
I can't account for the views of Bamber's campaign team. They talk a lot of rubbish imo.
-
There was indeed a violent struggle in the kitchen, as shown at the trial. Dr Vanezis agreed with this. A bowl of raw sugar had been spilled, in addition to the floor being littered with broken crockery. And then there is the blood.
Yet the soles of her feet were clean, Not a scene entirely consistent with her being the perpetrator.
-
My source - Her majesty versus Bamber
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
-
There was indeed a violent struggle in the kitchen, as shown at the trial. Dr Vanezis agreed with this. A bowl of raw sugar had been spilled, in addition to the floor being littered with broken crockery. And then there is the blood.
Yet the soles of her feet were clean, Not a scene entirely consistent with her being the perpetrator.
The only person qualified to say whether or not a violent struggle took place was the pathologist who uses no such term. He states NB sustained blows from a blunt instrument and that the force was difficult to gauge. I'm not doubting SC inflicted blows on a very badly injured NB with the rifle but that isn't the same as a violent struggle.
What would you expect to find on her feet and why?
-
My source - Her majesty versus Bamber
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
That's a lengthy doc with over 500 points and covers many aspects of the case. What specifically are you referring to?
-
The only person qualified to say whether or not a violent struggle took place was the pathologist who uses no such term. He states NB sustained blows from a blunt instrument and that the force was difficult to gauge. I'm not doubting SC inflicted blows on a very badly injured NB with the rifle but that isn't the same as a violent struggle.
What would you expect to find on her feet and why?
And what did Mr Vanezis testify in court, when it mattered ?
Points 33, 47 & 49 for a start
-
AuntAgatha states here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477730.html#msg477730
“As I say, I’m no psychiatrist but I’ve been next to him when appeals have been prepared for, and lost. When he’s been betrayed and when incorrectly portrayed. Beside him when he’s had some money and watched him as he’s lost it. Witnessed his behaviour as he struggles to have more information revealed and when he has seen it, I’ve seen him trying to come to terms with it all.
Our information was limited at the time, our resources were nil as was our support. We both knew we were not being told the truth, how what little information we did have did not quite fit the jigsaw puzzle we saw before us. Thankfully, through jeremys focused perseverance alone, he has amassed a small army of supporters who along with Mike have diligently examined all the new info and have had the ability to question the old.
Sadly, I don’t believe Jeremy will ever be freed....but miracles can happen and his supporters must continue with their research and people should be supporting them when pressing the authorities for answers to so many unanswered questions. There is very little translucency in this case.
Who’s she suggesting ‘betrayed’ him?
What does she mean about him being ‘incorrectly portrayed”?
What money is she referring to, the compensation for his alleged neck injury? And where is she suggesting it’s been ‘lost’?
Not being ‘told the truth’ by who?
What ‘jigsaw puzzle’ is she referring to?
Is she suggesting in the early days it was just her and Bamber? What about his previous girlfriends, where were they?
Was AuntAgatha alone responsible for starting the public campaigning?
-
And what did Mr Vanezis testify in court, when it mattered ?
Points 33, 47 & 49 for a start
Not a word from Dr Vanezis at points 33, 47 and 49. These are the views of police officers after much leaning on!
-
Aunt Agatha over on blue re https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NZILACHl544&feature=youtu.be
“When this first came out, I can catagorically state, without any hesitation, that when the police first entered the house, entered the kitchen, the police officer reported ‘one dead male, one dead female’.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477493.html#msg477493
“For over twenty five years both Jeremy and I have stated that that was what was stated in the very beginning. He has never changed his view on this.
Michael Winner made this film based on documented evidence....and it originally stated ‘one dead male, one dead female!’
Someone has made a decision to omit that from the film and therefore change the events of that day.
*%87
AuntAgatha
“I don’t think that’ll ever apply with regards to Jeremy's case.
At the back of my mind, looking into the family history and their connections, I’ve always felt that some people believe Jeremy knows something that must never be put into the public domain, therefore, giving him a whole life tariff and putting one of his previous solicitors at the CCRC Ensures Jeremy remains where he is, as does the information.
However saying that, I honestly believe Jeremy is not aware of anything that he knows of, that would make others fear his release.
I know it sounds strange and weird.....but it’s always been at the back of mind and remains there to this day.
What is it that Jeremy could expose that would justify such a sentence and would have others lie to secure his imprisonment?
Crazy, I know!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10188.msg477744.html#msg477744
-
Not a word from Dr Vanezis at points 33, 47 and 49. These are the views of police officers after much leaning on!
I didn't mean Vanezis commented on those 3 points.
So we go back to the conspiracy theories again, when something cannot be explained away. It appears the only way to free Bamber is to suggest incompetence, lies and corruption every step of the way. Yesterday it was suggested central government were in on the conspiracy by infiltrating the campaign team.
-
AuntAgatha states here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477730.html#msg477730
“As I say, I’m no psychiatrist but I’ve been next to him when appeals have been prepared for, and lost. When he’s been betrayed and when incorrectly portrayed. Beside him when he’s had some money and watched him as he’s lost it. Witnessed his behaviour as he struggles to have more information revealed and when he has seen it, I’ve seen him trying to come to terms with it all.
Our information was limited at the time, our resources were nil as was our support. We both knew we were not being told the truth, how what little information we did have did not quite fit the jigsaw puzzle we saw before us. Thankfully, through jeremys focused perseverance alone, he has amassed a small army of supporters who along with Mike have diligently examined all the new info and have had the ability to question the old.
Sadly, I don’t believe Jeremy will ever be freed....but miracles can happen and his supporters must continue with their research and people should be supporting them when pressing the authorities for answers to so many unanswered questions. There is very little translucency in this case.
Who’s she suggesting ‘betrayed’ him?
What does she mean about him being ‘incorrectly portrayed”?
What money is she referring to, the compensation for his alleged neck injury? And where is she suggesting it’s been ‘lost’?
Not being ‘told the truth’ by who?
What ‘jigsaw puzzle’ is she referring to?
Is she suggesting in the early days it was just her and Bamber? What about his previous girlfriends, where were they?
Was AuntAgatha alone responsible for starting the public campaigning?
I've no idea. Aunt Agatha has an account here, and Afaik has always been welcomed, so may wish to join in our discussions.
-
I didn't mean Vanezis commented on those 3 points.
So we go back to the conspiracy theories again, when something cannot be explained away. It appears the only way to free Bamber is to suggest incompetence, lies and corruption every step of the way. Yesterday it was suggested central government were in on the conspiracy by infiltrating the campaign team.
What conspiracy theories are you referring to?
I jested about the Campaign Team being gov stooges as they're so ineffective - we do tolerate humour Steve 8((()*/
-
What conspiracy theories are you referring to?
I jested about the Campaign Team being gov stooges as they're so ineffective - we do tolerate humour Steve 8((()*/
It appeared you were being deadly serious at the time. However I am sorry if I missed that and I now chuckle at your joke.
-
It appeared you were being deadly serious at the time. However I am sorry if I missed that and I now chuckle at your joke.
A misunderstanding but thanks for the apology. I'm never deadly serious as far as the so-called Campsign Team go. I lost any respect for it after the 'bake-off' and 'graveside reading'.
-
White House Farm highlights the *other* crime taking place
“Jeremy Bamber was not involved in the making of White House Farm and he has branded it a disgrace. But in the series, which is "based on extensive research, interviews and published accounts", what we get is a portrait of coercive control.
https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/a30712041/white-house-farm-tv-murders-julie-mugford/
Jeremy Bamber 'used sex' to keep girlfriend 'under his spell' before gruesome murders
“But Bamber's supporters are still trying to discredit her second statement, claiming she as "bitter" and changed her story out of revenge.
However, Julie has never changed her belief that Bamber is guilty of the horrific crimes that saw him shoot parents, Nevill and June, sister, Sheila, and his two young nephews, Nicholas and Daniel, in his childhood home.
But how was the killer able to hide his crimes from the woman he was so close to she supported her sobbing boyfriend on the day of the funerals?
In an interview with the News Of The World after Bamber's conviction, Julie says she was "under his spell".
She added: "Jeremy completely swept me off my feet. He was a skilful lover. He taught me how to enjoy sex in a way I never had before.
"I did everything for him. As long as he was happy, I was happy. I gave everything to him, including myself. He knew I was under his spell. But he reckoned without my conscience."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-bamber-used-sex-keep-21476739
I have read both this and the blue forum for sometime and with the utmost respect, many of those on both forums have formed opinions on Jeremy as regards his innocence/guilt and what type of person he is. Many have never written, spoken to or met him. This is why I have decided to share with you the friendship I have had with Jeremy for almost three years. He was, I thought one of my dearest and closest friends but I seriously misjudged this man. This will probably be a long post so I will do it in chunks so you don't get bored!
I started writing to Jeremy sometime ago after reading new information about the case and feeling that all didn't seem right. I live not far from Essex so have always read about his case in the local papers. I very soon became involved in the Campaign and typed some of the documents for his last CCRC submissions. I have also done all I can to ask those in power to listen and have written to my MP, the Prime Minister,the MOJ, the Home Secretary, CPS, IPCC etc. I have had conversations with officials at the CCRC and also exchanged emails and spoken on the phone to Professional Standards at Essex Police. I also phoned some of the scientists who examined the sound moderator who were very pleasant towards me but adament they had come to the right conclusion. The Campaign Team told me that I was getting more results and responses than themselves. When the Campaign mysteriously closed down for a while, I never heard from them again and my emails went unanswered.
Jeremy and I spoke on the phone two or three times a week and I sent him a generous monthly allowance. We shared our hopes and dreams and I always told him he was an extended part of my family. I just wanted him to feel that he belonged and I told him I would always support him no matter what. He always told me I was one of his closest friends and one of the only people he could trust. When I went on holiday, he made me promise to email him, he always phoned me on Christmas day and I truly believed our friendship was genuine. I continued to do whatever I could to help him, even tracking down a retired senior Essex Police Officer for his help which he initially said he would do, then asked me never to contact him again! Jeremy has sent me many documents which have never been in the public domain but I can say that none of them absolutely proved his innocence. There is one though, which indicates that there MAY have been life inside the house while Jeremy was outside but that needs investigating further.
Jeremy is witty, makes me laugh and usually cheeful in spite of the conditions he lives under. I discovered though that he has a dark side. He was often very evasive when I asked him questions about the case and if I ever disagreed with a piece of evidence or events, he would turn on me and shout and swear. He told me lots of lies and in the end I took everything he said with a pinch of salt. On my birthday last year, he sent me a lovely card telling me what a special friend I was and he promised to be with me to celebrate in 2014. Then things changed drasticall between us. . . . . . . .
In September he phoned me and said he and the Campaign Team wanted me to pay for the new forensics tests. He demanded I send him £4,000. Before answering "no" I asked him who the scientists were as I wanted to check out their credentials. He told me to mind my own business and just pay up. He said if I didn't have the funds available then I should take out a bank loan. He was very threatening and abusive. When I started getting upset he shouted at me "stop playing the F*****ng victim." I was so worried and concerned, I phoned the prison and discussed this call. For anyone out there who thinks I may be telling lies, the prison confirmed that this call was recorded and retained so I have the proof.
I had already arranged a visit for October and went as planned and intended to discuss this matter with him. He was quite unpleasant and told me he had never liked me and would never want me as a friend, along with other very hurtful remarks. He told me himself that he had sacked Simon McKay. I tried to talk some sense into him but he said "everyone plays to my tune or I dispose of them". That appears to have been a lie as Simon claims to still be working for him. I now realise I was there purely for the money. I didn't turn up for the afternoon visit.
Back home, I wrote to Jeremy telling him how devastated I was that our friendship was a complete farce on his behalf and I was heartbroken that I was forced to walk away from him. I have given him three months to reply and all I wanted was an apology and an explanation as to why he had lied to me for three years, pretending he was my friend. This is why I have decided to tell my story as I don't want anyone else to be hurt by Jeremy. I feel so guilty abandoning him but what choice did I have? Andrea and Goatboy have got it absolutely spot on when they say Jeremy uses and abuses friends and then tosses them aside. I feel desperately sorry for him.
I hear what you are saying Holly but there is a difference between offloading on friends and being controlling, manipulative and abusive. No one treats their friends like that. This is certainly not the way to behave if you claim to be a MOJ. Jeremy comes from a decent family and had an excellent education and should have been taught basic manners.
Also you say you would never become involved with a person in his position. Well, he is no different to the rest of us - he is just locked away. If we didn't become emotionally involved with our friends then we would all be robots!
When we look back at his life before and shortly after the murders he was described as arrogant and controlling. It seems he hasn't changed and is losing friends left right and centre. I have been to the highest level and take it from me MOJ or not, Jeremy is never ever going to be released.
Many of Daisy’s posts on Bamber could be suggestive of ‘coercive control’ which became a crime in 2015 https://rightsofwomen.org.uk/get-information/violence-against-women-and-international-law/coercive-control-and-the-law/
Although Daisy claims she reported Bamber to the prison before this date the prison should have recorded this on his security file
-
My reason for writing to Jeremy initially was that the Government appointed an adoption czar and compiled a report which was published in The Times entitled 'Narey Report'. I disagreed with most of it and wrote to the individuals concerned airing my views as an adoptee. I made reference to the Bamber family in terms of the fact that the mother (June) was mentally ill as a result of adopting her daughter (Sheila). Sheila developed mental illness and the adopted son (Jeremy) is serving life for murdering 5 members of his adoptive family. I believe at the heart of this tragic case is an adoption that went awry. I wanted Jeremy's views on the matter.
[attachment deleted by admin]
What were his views Holly?
And did you see Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstones article in the Guardian (Aug 2015) headed,
‘G4S paid author of 'independent' youth prison report as consultant’
‘A former prisons chief who wrote a glowing “independent” report about a controversial youth offender unit run by G4S had previously been paid thousands of pounds as a consultant for the private security firm, the Guardian has learned.
Sir Martin Narey, former director general of the prison service, published a report in July on Rainsbrook secure training centre in which he wrote that “very challenging children” were treated “overwhelmingly well”. He concluded: “My test in visiting places of custody for over 30 years is to reflect about how I’d feel if my son or daughter were incarcerated there. In Rainsbrook’s case, I would consider him or she to be safe and to be generally well treated.”
Narey’s verdict was delivered months after a joint report by Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission and the chief inspector of prisons in May into the centre condemned it for a series of failings . It pointed to the dismissal of six members of staff after a series of incidents of gross misconduct, staff who were on drugs on duty, and others who had behaved “extremely inappropriately” with young people, causing distress and humiliation.
Ofsted inspectors, who visited Rainsbrook in February, also revealed that a child who suffered a fracture, possibly as a result of being restrained, did not receive treatment for 15 hours because senior staff overruled clear clinical advice that he needed treatment.
The Ofsted report rated Rainsbrook “inadequate”– the lowest grading, prompting Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, to call it the “the worst report on a prison I have ever seen” and the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers to demand that the Youth Justice Board (YJB) cease placing children there.
Narey’s subsequent report, which appeared to show significant improvement at the unit, was referred to as an “independent report” on the YJB website despite Narey’s admission within the background notes that: “Since 2012, I have offered occasional advice to G4S on their care and custody of children.”
In fact, he has been a paid consultant for G4S for three years and in 2014 was paid more than £10,000 by the company. Narey was also paid to advise G4S on bidding for renewal of its contract to run Rainsbrook in 2016.
When approached by the Guardian, Narey confirmed he had been employed by G4S as a consultant until the end of the last financial year and that he agreed to offer an independent view of Rainsbrook as a one-off piece of work.
“My past financial relationship with G4S is made explicit in my report,” Narey said. “G4S will pay for that review although my report was written primarily for the YJB and the secretary of state.”
Asked if he had been part of the G4S bid team to run Rainsbrook for another seven years – a contract that is worth £92m –Narey said he advised the team on how their plans for Rainsbrook might be more child-friendly and how access to, and success in, education might be increased.
“I realised I would be criticised for defending G4S, as people have suggested my reputation is damaged,” Narey told the Guardian. “Life would have been easier if I had not agreed to do this report,” he said, but, he added, he saw a centre that “was not all perfect, but very good, very caring in fact” and that if he had found Rainsbrook to be unsafe, he would have said so “very loudly”. He also criticised the earlier Ofsted report into Rainsbrook, saying: “Ofsted are independent but not omniscient and their conclusions are misconceived.”
More here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/05/g4s-paid-martin-narey-independent-youth-prison-report-consultant
-
Jeremy Bamber
@JBamberFacebook
4h
#WhiteHouseFarm The jury questioned the motives of Robert Boutflour in his evidence against #JeremyBamber as they obviously doubted the integrity of the wider family!!
@jbcampaignltd
@FreeBamberNow
@Bambertweets
https://mobile.twitter.com/JBamberFacebook/status/1228230203488366593
What this shows is that the jury, whether or not they ‘doubted the integrity of the wider family’ were thorough
-
The CT via twitter are still attempting to get people to sign a pointless petition
They’ve tweeted a comment supposedly by someone who’s recently signed,
"I am uneasy about this conviction on the grounds that the police were severely lacking in their duty. The way the case was handled was downright mind boggling.."
The police weren’t ‘severely lacking in their duty’ they were clearly ‘duped’ by Bamber (excluding Stan Jones,Bob Miller, Micky Barlow, Chris Bews and probably a few others.)
They are also now quoting ‘Mahatma Gandhi’ -
“There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts."
-
The CT via twitter are still attempting to get people to sign a pointless petition
They’ve tweeted a comment supposedly by someone who’s recently signed,
"I am uneasy about this conviction on the grounds that the police were severely lacking in their duty. The way the case was handled was downright mind boggling.."
The police weren’t ‘severely lacking in their duty’ they were clearly ‘duped’ by Bamber (excluding Stan Jones)
They are also now quoting ‘Mahatma Gandhi’ -
“There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts."
... Bob Miller, Micky Barlow, Chris Bews and probably a few others.
-
... Bob Miller, Micky Barlow, Chris Bews and probably a few others.
Have edited my post according
-
They are also now quoting ‘Mahatma Gandhi’ -
“There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts."
Oh the irony!
-
Jeremy Bamber
@JBamberFacebook
Replying to
@GoldenGuineaPig
@Bambertweets
and 2 others
The 5 officers who entered initially wore helmets, had loud radio transmissions going on, were moving from room to room, and the gun when fired was only as audible as a handclap.
3:22 PM · Feb 18, 2020·Twitter for Android
https://mobile.twitter.com/JBamberFacebook/status/1229788234697277446
-
Jeremy Bamber
@JBamberFacebook
Replying to
@GoldenGuineaPig
@Bambertweets
and 2 others
The 5 officers who entered initially wore helmets, had loud radio transmissions going on, were moving from room to room, and the gun when fired was only as audible as a handclap.
3:22 PM · Feb 18, 2020·Twitter for Android
https://mobile.twitter.com/JBamberFacebook/status/1229788234697277446
Do they honestly think that no one has hear a .22 rifle being fired? @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
JBtruth
@BtruthJ
Replying to
@bambermurder
and
@YouCommon
I never grew up in a quiet rural Essex village in the 70s/80s. So whether it was common or not to call the local police back then I don't know. It sounds crazy in a modern context I agree. But this happened in a different time. 999 had only gone nationwide in 1976.
5:28 PM · Feb 18, 2020·Twitter Web App
https://mobile.twitter.com/bambermurder/status/1229817382056681479
-
and the gun when fired was only as audible as a handclap
Hilarious, another one for the scrap book. It's really embarrassing for them, toe-curling. Jeremy must surely know the games up with coco the clown and friends for campaigners.
-
Seriously? so the conspiracy to keep Jeremy locked up has now gone beyond Essex Police, the Judiciary and the surviving relatives to include the government as well?
Oh, it goes further than that
Margaret Thatcher, President Gorbachev, Ronald Reagan....they all had it in for Jem !
-
Oh, it goes further than that
Margaret Thatcher, President Gorbachev, Ronald Reagan....they all had it in for Jem !
Holly later assured me it was a joke. It was a reference to her despair at the campaign team being so unrelentingly dreadful, which is one of the things we are united on. Even Jeremy must wince at their incompetence.
-
What were his views Holly?
And did you see Eric Allison and Simon Hattenstones article in the Guardian (Aug 2015) headed,
‘G4S paid author of 'independent' youth prison report as consultant’
‘A former prisons chief who wrote a glowing “independent” report about a controversial youth offender unit run by G4S had previously been paid thousands of pounds as a consultant for the private security firm, the Guardian has learned.
Sir Martin Narey, former director general of the prison service, published a report in July on Rainsbrook secure training centre in which he wrote that “very challenging children” were treated “overwhelmingly well”. He concluded: “My test in visiting places of custody for over 30 years is to reflect about how I’d feel if my son or daughter were incarcerated there. In Rainsbrook’s case, I would consider him or she to be safe and to be generally well treated.”
Narey’s verdict was delivered months after a joint report by Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission and the chief inspector of prisons in May into the centre condemned it for a series of failings . It pointed to the dismissal of six members of staff after a series of incidents of gross misconduct, staff who were on drugs on duty, and others who had behaved “extremely inappropriately” with young people, causing distress and humiliation.
Ofsted inspectors, who visited Rainsbrook in February, also revealed that a child who suffered a fracture, possibly as a result of being restrained, did not receive treatment for 15 hours because senior staff overruled clear clinical advice that he needed treatment.
The Ofsted report rated Rainsbrook “inadequate”– the lowest grading, prompting Frances Crook, the chief executive of the Howard League for Penal Reform, to call it the “the worst report on a prison I have ever seen” and the Association of Youth Offending Team Managers to demand that the Youth Justice Board (YJB) cease placing children there.
Narey’s subsequent report, which appeared to show significant improvement at the unit, was referred to as an “independent report” on the YJB website despite Narey’s admission within the background notes that: “Since 2012, I have offered occasional advice to G4S on their care and custody of children.”
In fact, he has been a paid consultant for G4S for three years and in 2014 was paid more than £10,000 by the company. Narey was also paid to advise G4S on bidding for renewal of its contract to run Rainsbrook in 2016.
When approached by the Guardian, Narey confirmed he had been employed by G4S as a consultant until the end of the last financial year and that he agreed to offer an independent view of Rainsbrook as a one-off piece of work.
“My past financial relationship with G4S is made explicit in my report,” Narey said. “G4S will pay for that review although my report was written primarily for the YJB and the secretary of state.”
Asked if he had been part of the G4S bid team to run Rainsbrook for another seven years – a contract that is worth £92m –Narey said he advised the team on how their plans for Rainsbrook might be more child-friendly and how access to, and success in, education might be increased.
“I realised I would be criticised for defending G4S, as people have suggested my reputation is damaged,” Narey told the Guardian. “Life would have been easier if I had not agreed to do this report,” he said, but, he added, he saw a centre that “was not all perfect, but very good, very caring in fact” and that if he had found Rainsbrook to be unsafe, he would have said so “very loudly”. He also criticised the earlier Ofsted report into Rainsbrook, saying: “Ofsted are independent but not omniscient and their conclusions are misconceived.”
More here: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/aug/05/g4s-paid-martin-narey-independent-youth-prison-report-consultant
No I hadn't seen the article above.
Re the adoption report by Martin Narey he said his adoption experience was positive and he was happy in his adootive family. He said the same was so for SC until she became mentally unwell.
Around this time I also spoke briefly with CC and sent him a copy of my letter.
-
No I hadn't seen the article above.
Re the adoption report by Martin Narey he said his adoption experience was positive and he was happy in his adootive family. He said the same was so for SC until she became mentally unwell.
Around this time I also spoke briefly with CC and sent him a copy of my letter.
What else was he going to say?
-
What else was he going to say?
Well from memory I made comment about June's mental illness in 1959 having a detrimental effect on SC but he was nonplussed. Maybe he didn't trust me and thought I was trying to incriminate him but I returned to this theme on numerous occasions and he never said anything negative about his family.
-
Well from memory I made comment about June's mental illness in 1959 having a detrimental effect on SC but he was nonplussed. Maybe he didn't trust me and thought I was trying to incriminate him but I returned to this theme on numerous occasions and he never said anything negative about his family.
Of course he wouldn't. He's not that silly. I didn't really ask him about his family (didn't see the point) but he was pretty nasty about Colin - which disturbed me.
-
Of course he wouldn't. He's not that silly. I didn't really ask him about his family (didn't see the point) but he was pretty nasty about Colin - which disturbed me.
Neither am I that silly! He could have over-egged my suggestion SC's issues were brought about by June but he didn't.
-
Neither am I that silly! He could have over-egged my suggestion SC's issues were brought about by June but he didn't.
He knows better than to slag off the victims.
-
He knows better than to slag off the victims.
By the way, I didn't say you were silly - nor did I imply it.
-
No I hadn't seen the article above.
Re the adoption report by Martin Narey he said his adoption experience was positive and he was happy in his adootive family. He said the same was so for SC until she became mentally unwell.
Around this time I also spoke briefly with CC and sent him a copy of my letter.
I can understand that he said his adoption experience was a positive one. I understand that many adopted children who have it drummed into them how lucky they are simply repeat it. Sheila, who, it seems, came in for more stick than Jeremy, probably had to try harder to make it feel like a positive experience.
-
He knows better than to slag off the victims.
He didn't need to slag off the victims. I put it to him about the June/SC relationship with much supporting evidence he could have agreed but he didn't really. He seemed oblivious to it all.
-
He didn't need to slag off the victims. I put it to him about the June/SC relationship with much supporting evidence he could have agreed but he didn't really. He seemed oblivious to it all.
I don't find that surprising -and not just because it's Jeremy, although I suspect he never had any great affection for her- siblings are rarely aware of what goes on in each other's worlds.
-
He didn't need to slag off the victims. I put it to him about the June/SC relationship with much supporting evidence he could have agreed but he didn't really. He seemed oblivious to it all.
You mean he made no comment?
-
AuntAgatha states here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477730.html#msg477730
“As I say, I’m no psychiatrist but I’ve been next to him when appeals have been prepared for, and lost. When he’s been betrayed and when incorrectly portrayed. Beside him when he’s had some money and watched him as he’s lost it. Witnessed his behaviour as he struggles to have more information revealed and when he has seen it, I’ve seen him trying to come to terms with it all.
Our information was limited at the time, our resources were nil as was our support. We both knew we were not being told the truth, how what little information we did have did not quite fit the jigsaw puzzle we saw before us. Thankfully, through jeremys focused perseverance alone, he has amassed a small army of supporters who along with Mike have diligently examined all the new info and have had the ability to question the old.
Sadly, I don’t believe Jeremy will ever be freed....but miracles can happen and his supporters must continue with their research and people should be supporting them when pressing the authorities for answers to so many unanswered questions. There is very little translucency in this case.
Who’s she suggesting ‘betrayed’ him?
What does she mean about him being ‘incorrectly portrayed”?
What money is she referring to, the compensation for his alleged neck injury? And where is she suggesting it’s been ‘lost’?
Not being ‘told the truth’ by who?
What ‘jigsaw puzzle’ is she referring to?
Is she suggesting in the early days it was just her and Bamber? What about his previous girlfriends, where were they?
Was AuntAgatha alone responsible for starting the public campaigning?
Bump
-
And JackieD stated here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477629.html#msg477629
”Sorry for the late reply but I have been out
If Jeremy had any marks on him at all 100% Mugford would have told the police
JM appears to have kept her distance therefore unlikely she’d have noticed anything
Julie Mugford stated,
“I’d been unable to make love to him or respond to him in anyway.
But sleep that night was impossible. Suddenly I heard his voice in the darkness: “Julie, I really do you love you, you know. And I’m so terribly sorry.”
Looking back now, I think that was the only nice thing Jeremy said to me during the whole terrible business”
(Source: News of the World )
Though Brett Collins may have as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time
including Anji Greaves
If it was Virginia why has Anji suggested otherwise ?
“”Anji later told the Sun that she and Jeremy had become lovers before his arrest and it was their affair, rather than with her sister, that had led to Julie being so inflamed with jealousy that she named him as the murderer.””
(Courtesy of Carol Ann Lee from her book, ‘The Murders at White House Farm’)
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Rj14BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA317&lpg=PA317&dq=the+sun+anji+greaves+jeremy+bamber&source=bl&ots=h8PnNHTkTl&sig=ACfU3U1NpuMY9WW_GJ0UKEtiEAeZmVwONg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwics4rWi4LpAhWEoFwKHYIID8oQ6AEwBHoECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20sun%20anji%20greaves%20jeremy%20bamber&f=false
-
Aunt Agatha stated here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.0.html
“One may have to copy and paste into browser, apologies I couldn’t get the full link up. Techno dinosaur.
When this first came out, I can catagorically state, without any hesitation, that when the police first entered the house, entered the kitchen, the police officer reported ‘one dead male, one dead female’.
The words ‘one dead female’ has been removed from this Michael winner film.
I wonder why.”
“For over twenty five years both Jeremy and I have stated that that was what was stated in the very beginning. He has never changed his view on this.
Michael Winner made this film based on documented evidence....and it originally stated ‘one dead male, one dead female!’
Someone has made a decision to omit that from the film and therefore change the events of that day.
Also, a police officer radioed in that he saw a female on the kitchen floor, when he looked through the window, before entry.
So yes, this is all I have!!
This reads a lot like Michelle Diskin Bates statement on Bamber’s case
It’s still online here https://jeremybamber.blogspot.com/2016/08/justice-is-never-served-by-conviction.html *&^^&
-
And JackieD stated here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10181.msg477629.html#msg477629
”Sorry for the late reply but I have been out
If Jeremy had any marks on him at all 100% Mugford would have told the police
JM appears to have kept her distance therefore unlikely she’d have noticed anything
Though Brett Collins may have as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time
including Anji Greaves
Unless he killed therm all wearing just his underpants and gloves, I see no reason for him to have sustained any marks.
-
Unless he killed therm all wearing just his underpants and gloves, I see no reason for him to have sustained any marks.
Thing is we don’t know if he did or didn’t because he wasn’t arrested and forensically examined until weeks later
But as I say Brett Collins may have noticed something as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time - including Anji Greaves
Crispy could have nipped his ankle for example but how would JM have known unless he told her and unless she got that close to him
-
Thing is we don’t know if he did or didn’t because he wasn’t arrested and forensically examined until weeks later
But as I say Brett Collins may have noticed something as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time - including Anji Greaves
Crispy could have nipped his ankle for example but how would JM have known unless he told her and unless she got that close to him
Someone would have to be intimate with Bamber early on and unless they did a full body search, any abrasions could go unnoticed. However, he doesn't have to have sustained any.
-
Thing is we don’t know if he did or didn’t because he wasn’t arrested and forensically examined until weeks later
But as I say Brett Collins may have noticed something as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time - including Anji Greaves
Crispy could have nipped his ankle for example but how would JM have known unless he told her and unless she got that close to him
Someone would have to be intimate with Bamber early on and unless they did a full body search, any abrasions could go unnoticed. However, he doesn't have to have sustained any.
Isn’t that what I said ?
-
Isn’t that what I said ?
I didn't see you post - I don't read the whole thread, just the last couple, if something spikes an interest, I trace back.
-
Thing is we don’t know if he did or didn’t because he wasn’t arrested and forensically examined until weeks later
But as I say Brett Collins may have noticed something as would anyone else he was intimate with at the time - including Anji Greaves
Crispy could have nipped his ankle for example but how would JM have known unless he told her and unless she got that close to him
I believe JB and JM continued to make love until the end.
-
I believe JB and JM continued to make love until the end.
Who inspects their partner in such circs?
-
You mean for suppurating sores on you know where?
-
You mean for suppurating sores on you know where?
Well, there's a reason she might have seen them @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
I believe JB and JM continued to make love until the end.
The point is moot as there is no evidence that Nevill managed to do any more than fend off the final savage blows of his attacker. He didn't flee downstairs because he felt like fighting after he was shot and was simply left with no choice once he was cornered in the kitchen.
JM did not mention seeing any marks or bruises (despite her supposedly being hellbent on framing JB) and thanks to the idiots 2002 appeal, (ground 13 para 445) we know that Ann Eaton observed his hands reporting no scratches ( despite her supposedly being hell bent on framing JB )
the fact that at no point during the trial was any evidence led from any witness, nor any witness cross-examined, to establish or suggest that the appellant had at any material time had any scars or scratches on his hands. Indeed, on the hand-written postcard note from Ann Eaton (CAE/4) which was disclosed at trial, the entry for the 8 August recorded "No scratches on his hands - no shaking at all"
The only caveat being that JB was probably wearing gloves whereas Sheila was certainly not.
-
Who inspects their partner in such circs?
No need for inspection. If you're making love and sleeping with someone surely it stands to reason that the entire body is exposed? Unless you're ultra inhibited and insist in the lights off and just poke about through nightwear?
JM said they had a 'normal' sex life!
-
I believe JB and JM continued to make love until the end.
JM told NOTW that after the murders she never had sex with him again.
-
JM told NOTW that after the murders she never had sex with him again.
But according to JM she continued to sleep with JB up until 31st Aug. She states she begged him to stay the night and he left the following morning.
-
But according to JM she continued to sleep with JB up until 31st Aug. She states she begged him to stay the night and he left the following morning.
Tat doesn't mean they had sex.
-
But according to JM she continued to sleep with JB up until 31st Aug. She states she begged him to stay the night and he left the following morning.
Sleeping with and having sex with aren't necessarily related.
-
Tat doesn't mean they had sex.
No it doesn't but I doubt either of them donned wincyette nightwear. We're talking about whether JM had the opportunity to observe any marks on JB's body. Not that I think what occurred caused anyone to sustain marks to their person.
Bet they did it.
-
No it doesn't but I doubt either of them donned wincyette nightwear. We're talking about whether JM had the opportunity to observe any marks on JB's body. Not that I think what occurred caused anyone to sustain marks to their person.
Bet they did it.
I don't believe that Bamber necessarily received injuries but by the same token, if he did, it doesn't mean that Julie would have noticed them.
-
I don't believe that Bamber necessarily received injuries but by the same token, if he did, it doesn't mean that Julie would have noticed them.
If Julie had any suspicion (and surely, she must have done) that Jeremy had killed his family, she would (IMO) have been looking for them, so, as you say, perhaps he didn't have any.
-
No it doesn't but I doubt either of them donned wincyette nightwear. We're talking about whether JM had the opportunity to observe any marks on JB's body. Not that I think what occurred caused anyone to sustain marks to their person.
Bet they did it.
Well, IF he'd had any marks, I feel certain he'd have managed to cover them some how. Whether or not "they did it" -and Julie says not, and Jeremy hasn't contradicted her- rather depends on how much Julie could be turned on by having sex with a murderer.
-
Well, IF he'd had any marks, I feel certain he'd have managed to cover them some how. Whether or not "they did it" -and Julie says not, and Jeremy hasn't contradicted her- rather depends on how much Julie could be turned on by having sex with a murderer.
Are you back to your apparent fascination with hybristophilia again
-
Are you back to your apparent fascination with hybristophilia again
Sounds rather like the Latin name for a flower, doesn't it? Or do I mean gypsophila?
-
Well, IF he'd had any marks, I feel certain he'd have managed to cover them some how. Whether or not "they did it" -and Julie says not, and Jeremy hasn't contradicted her- rather depends on how much Julie could be turned on by having sex with a murderer.
“In court Mugford commented on how she did not want Bamber being with her or touching her following the shootings”
(S.Lomax)
-
I don't believe that Bamber necessarily received injuries but by the same token, if he did, it doesn't mean that Julie would have noticed them.
My point was someone could have seen ‘injuries’ if he had any - and has yet to come forward about them
Maybe they didn’t recognise the significance at the time?
-
My point was someone could have seen ‘injuries’ if he had any - and has yet to come forward about them
Maybe they didn’t recognise the significance at the time?
Like who?
-
Like who?
Did the police track down everyone Bamber came into contact with following the murders and interview them all and ask them if they’d noticed any injuries on his body?
It’s possible Brett Collins may have seen something - did the police ever ask him about possible injuries?
And would he have offered up this knowledge if he had it?
-
If Julie had any suspicion (and surely, she must have done) that Jeremy had killed his family, she would (IMO) have been looking for them, so, as you say, perhaps he didn't have any.
Possibly, although it may not have been something she thought about. I really don't think that it's a given that he would have sustained injuries though.
-
Did the police track down everyone Bamber came into contact with following the murders and interview them all and ask them if they’d noticed any injuries on his body?
It’s possible Brett Collins may have seen something - did the police ever ask him about possible injuries?
And would he have offered up this knowledge if he had it?
Not then, IMO, but (again IMO), I think he would now. He has recently spoken out, and wouldn't he have said anything about injuries, had he seen any, do you think?
-
There is no evidence that NB got the chance to cause any injury to anyone. It might have changed the whole case if JB had a black eye develop while he was outside with police pretending he'd been to bed.
Makes you wonder why Julie didn't lie about seeing marks or bruises though - I thought she was hell bent on framing Bamber?
-
Not then, IMO, but (again IMO), I think he would now. He has recently spoken out, and wouldn't he have said anything about injuries, had he seen any, do you think?
Don’t know but maybe the police have made contact with him so he cannot say too much in any interview?
-
Not then, IMO, but (again IMO), I think he would now. He has recently spoken out, and wouldn't he have said anything about injuries, had he seen any, do you think?
I don't think the perp sustained any injuries.
JB went windsurfing in East Sussex w/e 17th/18th Aug with JM and the Bishops. He may have been part exposed then.
CC also claimed his mother accidentally bumped into JB at CC's when JB was naked or semi-naked having had a bath/shower. I'm not sure when this was. But interestingly his mother recounts the two occasions she met JB and it wasn't at CC's!?
-
I don't think the perp sustained any injuries.
JB went windsurfing in East Sussex w/e 17th/18th Aug with JM and the Bishops. He may have been part exposed then.
CC also claimed his mother accidentally bumped into JB at CC's when JB was naked or semi-naked having had a bath/shower. I'm not sure when this was. But interestingly his mother recounts the two occasions she met JB and it wasn't at CC's!?
@ 4 mins in CC refers to what I've posted above and yet this doesn't chime with his mother's wit stat:
https://youtu.be/afIXWrexiWk
-
@ 4 mins in CC refers to what I've posted above and yet this doesn't chime with his mother's wit stat:
https://youtu.be/afIXWrexiWk
Bambers witness statement doesn't chime with the figure at the window, the times he's not claiming, lights going on and off, curtains being open and closed - he's still at odds with who he called first, police or Julie and that changes like the wind or when he gets a new idea. Bambers statement chimes like bent rods in a grandfather clock!
-
I don't think the perp sustained any injuries.
JB went windsurfing in East Sussex w/e 17th/18th Aug with JM and the Bishops. He may have been part exposed then.
CC also claimed his mother accidentally bumped into JB at CC's when JB was naked or semi-naked having had a bath/shower. I'm not sure when this was. But interestingly his mother recounts the two occasions she met JB and it wasn't at CC's!?
Not saying he wore one but what a perfect time to wash the wet suit 8((()*/
-
Bambers witness statement doesn't chime with the figure at the window, the times he's not claiming, lights going on and off, curtains being open and closed - he's still at odds with who he called first, police or Julie and that changes like the wind or when he gets a new idea. Bambers statement chimes like bent rods in a grandfather clock!
Much of the testimony doesn't chime whether it be from experts or lay witnesses!
-
I don't think the perp sustained any injuries.
JB went windsurfing in East Sussex w/e 17th/18th Aug with JM and the Bishops. He may have been part exposed then.
CC also claimed his mother accidentally bumped into JB at CC's when JB was naked or semi-naked having had a bath/shower. I'm not sure when this was. But interestingly his mother recounts the two occasions she met JB and it wasn't at CC's!?
Weren’t the Bishops the couple who’s house he said he wanted to burgle ?
-
Not saying he wore one but what a perfect time to wash the wet suit 8((()*/
And plenty of opportunity to dispose of anything he needed to further afield than Essex
-
Weren’t the Bishops the couple who’s house he said he wanted to burgle ?
I believe JM said something about JB burgling the Bishops.
-
And plenty of opportunity to dispose of anything he needed to further afield than Essex
Possibly, but he also burned his parents clothes in the farm fire pit the following week after the murders. Easy to hide what he needed to amongst all those clothes.
-
@ 4 mins in CC refers to what I've posted above and yet this doesn't chime with his mother's wit stat:
https://youtu.be/afIXWrexiWk
Reading thru the wit stats of CC, FE and CC's mother I'm finding them inconsistent.
-
Possibly, but he also burned his parents clothes in the farm fire pit the following week after the murders. Easy to hide what he needed to amongst all those clothes.
Such as?
-
Such as?
Clothes he may have been wearing.
-
Of course he wouldn't. He's not that silly. I didn't really ask him about his family (didn't see the point) but he was pretty nasty about Colin - which disturbed me.
He wrote nasty letters to Colin too...they’re in CC’s book
And then said nasty things about Colin to you too, Caroline
Colin was always kind to Jeremy, and even felt sorry for him when he put on his act of grief stricken son...then Jeremy showed his true evil colours by writing cruel venomous letters to him — for no reason at all!
Anyone else would be heartbroken for Colin at having lost his two little boys...
-
He wrote nasty letters to Colin too...they’re in CC’s book
And then said nasty things about Colin to you too, Caroline
Colin was always kind to Jeremy, and even felt sorry for him when he put on his act of grief stricken son...then Jeremy showed his true evil colours by writing cruel venomous letters to him — for no reason at all!
Anyone else would be heartbroken for Colin at having lost his two little boys...
He did indeed.
-
Not saying he wore one but what a perfect time to wash the wet suit 8((()*/
In CAL’s book (my friend has it at the mo) she wrote that when Julie’s friends invited her and Jeremy to Pevensey Bay specifically to go windsurfing, they went in two cars from Goldhanger.
Can’t recall the male friend’s name but his parents lived down there.
When they reached PB Jeremy announced that he’d “forgotten” his wetsuit, so the friend got his spare one and lent it to Jeremy.
Jeremy never forgot his wetsuit, that’s BS. Besides, he knew it was hanging in his bedroom at WHF 🙄
On top of that, how could he have been in the mood to go windsurfing just two days after his Shakespearean grief stricken collapse at his parents funeral...
Also, I doubt he stripped off in front of everyone, so no-one would have seen any bruises or marks on his body, anyway
-
In CAL’s book (my friend has it at the mo) she wrote that when Julie’s friends invited her and Jeremy to Pevensey Bay specifically to go windsurfing, and they went in two cars from Goldhanger.
Can’t recall the male friend’s name but his parents lived down there.
When they reached PB Jeremy announced that he’d “forgotten” his wetsuit, so the friend got his spare one and lent it to Jeremy.
Jeremy never forgot his wetsuit, that’s BS. Besides, he knew it was hanging in his bedroom at WHF 🙄
On top of that, how could he have been in the mood to go windsurfing just two days after his Shakespearean grief stricken collapse at his parents funeral...
That would also be around the same time he called at Anji Greaves flat in Kensington and made a ‘pass’ on her.
The same Anji Greaves who also sold her story to journalists
If Bamber expected to be paid £100k how much was Anji paid in the end?
From "The Murders at White House Farm" by Carol Ann Lee...
Anji Greaves had waited for the verdict in a hotel not far from Chelmsford with two friends and a journalist. Her room was decorated with ‘Welcome Home, Jeremy!’ banners, and she wore her glitziest outfit, with a bag packed; the journalist intended to write Jeremy’s story when he was acquitted and then hustle the couple off on holiday. But when the television news delivered the outcome, Anji walked out in a daze, narrowly avoiding being run over. She told the journalist: ‘I feel so much loyalty for Jeremy but I do not know if I can bring myself to go on visiting now. It could be a life sentence for both of us.’
-
In CAL’s book (my friend has it at the mo) she wrote that when Julie’s friends invited her and Jeremy to Pevensey Bay specifically to go windsurfing, they went in two cars from Goldhanger.
Can’t recall the male friend’s name but his parents lived down there.
When they reached PB Jeremy announced that he’d “forgotten” his wetsuit, so the friend got his spare one and lent it to Jeremy.
Jeremy never forgot his wetsuit, that’s BS. Besides, he knew it was hanging in his bedroom at WHF 🙄
On top of that, how could he have been in the mood to go windsurfing just two days after his Shakespearean grief stricken collapse at his parents funeral...
Also, I doubt he stripped off in front of everyone, so no-one would have seen any bruises or marks on his body, anyway
Was it Bamber’s original wetsuit in the wardrobe or did he take home the borrowed male friends wetsuit ?
-
And who was the other person Bamber mentioned burning down WHF to?
Julies WS is in different parts -
Events after the massacre:
The eating out, drug buying, wind surfing, expensive hotels, trips around the country and abroad, clearing out WHF & Sheila's flat.
There is no point in Julie lying here. A lot of other people joined them for some of these. Hotel bookings can be checked and friends or relatives asked.
Bamber's hatred & resentment towards his family:
This could be her word against Bamber's. But was not.
Bamber himself testified he had a very poor/non existent relationship with June.
He also called Sheila a 'nutter', 'looney', 'do lally' & 'pychotic depressive' on the massacre night. Saying they did not like each other and she had committed child abuse on the twins. Decades later saying he did not understand her illness.
There are also a lot of other people who said Bamber did not like his family or the raw deal he had. The facts back this up, Sheila living rent free in London, Bamber working long hours after reluctantly starting to work on the farm as a last resort.
The massacre plans:
This is again Julies word against Bamber's. However some of the things Julie said are backed up.
She said he planned to ride to WHF. This is backed up by the fact that the bike was brought over just before the massacre.
Julie also knew about the bible and kitchen fight. Which was not reported in the papers. And knew about the lockable from outside window.
The judge and appeal courts found it hard to understand Bamber's 3am call to Julie. Julie saying Bamber said 'he had not slept all night' and 'everything is going well'. When the police asked him about the call, he just said 'no comment'.
Julie also knew about the under insurance of WHF and the items inside.
Bamber had also mentioned to someone else about burning down WHF.
-
Was it Bamber’s original wetsuit in the wardrobe or did he take home the borrowed male friends wetsuit ?
Bamber had just one wetsuit which he kept at Goldhanger. Julie saw it there.
After the murders his wetsuit was found in his old bedroom at WHF.
After borrowing Julie’s friend’s wetsuit in Pevensey Bay he changed back into his clothes and gave the wetsuit back to the friend.
-
Bamber had just one wetsuit which he kept at Goldhanger. Julie saw it there.
After the murders his wetsuit was found in his old bedroom at WHF.
After borrowing Julie’s friend’s wetsuit in Pevensey Bay he changed back into his clothes and gave the wetsuit back to the friend.
8((()*/