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: ISpyWithMyEye on April 21, 2020, 10:57:31 AM
-
I tried to find Holly’s thread where she suggested it would be a good idea to do a reconstruction of the murders, and even said she was trying to arrange one (I think?)
I can’t find that thread now!
However, I did say in the thread that it wouldn’t prove anything as everyone was dead, Jeremy is never going to admit to being the murderer, and a reconstruction wouldn’t prove who the perpetrator was. But thinking about it again, I think a reconstruction WOULD be good.
A reconstruction showing how Sheila shot herself. Twice.
All you’d need is a woman of the exact same height and build; an identical rifle and silencer, and a mock up of the master bedroom. You could also do a reconstruction of her overpowering a 6”4” man of Nevill’s same build/fitness...
I think it’s an excellent idea, actually!
Thoughts anyone?
-
You're actually going to need rather more than a Sheila lookalike. I'm a little uncertain about how you'll find someone who will math with, what's believed as being, Sheila's mind set, because that's crucial. We have one faction who believes her to have been psychotic and therefore acting on impulse, and another who sees her as almost having thought it through prior to acting. How will you satisfy both?
-
You're actually going to need rather more than a Sheila lookalike. I'm a little uncertain about how you'll find someone who will math with, what's believed as being, Sheila's mind set, because that's crucial. We have one faction who believes her to have been psychotic and therefore acting on impulse, and another who sees her as almost having thought it through prior to acting. How will you satisfy both?
The reconstruction would show if Sheila was PHYSICALLY capable of beating Nevill to a pulp.
Capable of shooting herself in the same exact spot of her neck with the rifle & silencer attached, then shooting herself a second time without the silencer. I don’t see how she could have shot herself WITHOUT the silencer.
It would just be establishing her physical capability...
Doesn’t matter if some people claim she planned it, or some claim she went psychotic...it’s a fallacy that people who have a psychotic episode start ranting and raging: they don’t.
The reason I’m suggesting it, though I know it won’t happen, is that none of JB’s campaign team would be prepared to do that as they know it was physically impossible for Sheila to have shot everyone and beaten Nevill to a pulp.
-
Due to the current activity levels on the board we need to maintain the following rule set out on the homepage:
* Posters are asked to keep to thread topics where possible
Going forward I will be removing all posts that are off topic.
Thanks.
-
The reconstruction would show if Sheila was PHYSICALLY capable of beating Nevill to a pulp.
Capable of shooting herself in the same exact spot of her neck with the rifle & silencer attached, then shooting herself a second time without the silencer. I don’t see how she could have shot herself WITHOUT the silencer.
It would just be establishing her physical capability...
Doesn’t matter if some people claim she planned it, or some claim she went psychotic...it’s a fallacy that people who have a psychotic episode start ranting and raging: they don’t.
The reason I’m suggesting it, though I know it won’t happen, is that none of JB’s campaign team would be prepared to do that as they know it was physically impossible for Sheila to have shot everyone and beaten Nevill to a pulp.
Good points
-
The reconstruction would show if Sheila was PHYSICALLY capable of beating Nevill to a pulp.
Capable of shooting herself in the same exact spot of her neck with the rifle & silencer attached, then shooting herself a second time without the silencer. I don’t see how she could have shot herself WITHOUT the silencer.
It would just be establishing her physical capability...
Doesn’t matter if some people claim she planned it, or some claim she went psychotic...it’s a fallacy that people who have a psychotic episode start ranting and raging: they don’t.
The reason I’m suggesting it, though I know it won’t happen, is that none of JB’s campaign team would be prepared to do that as they know it was physically impossible for Sheila to have shot everyone and beaten Nevill to a pulp.
Agreed. I don't even think she was capable of doing the shooting part alone, never mind overpowering Nevill.
-
Agreed. I don't even think she was capable of doing the shooting part alone, never mind overpowering Nevill.
Given that Vanezis believes that he was also hit in the face with a blunt object (possibly a fist), it makes it even less likely.
-
Make sure you drug the Sheila stand-in too.
-
Given that Vanezis believes that he was also hit in the face with a blunt object (possibly a fist), it makes it even less likely.
And not a trace of gunshot residue or her father's blood from those gaping mouth wounds to be found on her face, chest, hands, arms or nightdress, according to an experienced pathologist and firearms' expert (despite 'only playing with a rifle as a teenager').
From CAL, who interviewed both in 2014...
"Sheila’s turquoise nightdress was also tested for firearm residue and oil. None was detected, although the 1986 internal review stated that ‘the significance of this would depend on the position of the gun in relation to her body and the nightdress at the time it was fired.’ But Fletcher remains confident that wax discharged from the fired bullets would have resulted in ‘some of that material ending up on the shooter. I tested the surface of Sheila’s nightdress and I got no indication, either visual or chemical, of lead or wax material. I would have expected to find it, especially with the number of shots that were fired. I tested it thoroughly and there was no evidence of the spots of waxy material that showed up on the test fires.’ The blood on the nightdress was Sheila’s own; both Fletcher and Vanezis agree that had she been the killer, blood from the other victims would have been detected on the garment."
-
The reconstruction would show if Sheila was PHYSICALLY capable of beating Nevill to a pulp.
Capable of shooting herself in the same exact spot of her neck with the rifle & silencer attached, then shooting herself a second time without the silencer. I don’t see how she could have shot herself WITHOUT the silencer.
It would just be establishing her physical capability...
Doesn’t matter if some people claim she planned it, or some claim she went psychotic...it’s a fallacy that people who have a psychotic episode start ranting and raging: they don’t.
The reason I’m suggesting it, though I know it won’t happen, is that none of JB’s campaign team would be prepared to do that as they know it was physically impossible for Sheila to have shot everyone and beaten Nevill to a pulp.
But you're missing my point. I imagine that shooting herself in a psychotic episode would look rather different from shooting herself whilst in command of her faculties. In the former, she'd be capable. In the latter...........?
-
But you're missing my point. I imagine that shooting herself in a psychotic episode would look rather different from shooting herself whilst in command of her faculties. In the former, she'd be capable. In the latter...........?
I did explain that a psychotic state doesn’t mean a person is hysterical or violent.
But that’s besides the point, April
We’re talking about the PHYSICAL possibility
Her strength, gait, size, build, height, length of arms, physical power, quickness of step, agility, ability to avoid attack like a boxer, ability to notice and jump over shattered glass, sugar and blood , ability to run upstairs holding a 4ft rifle after beating a giant of a man to death, and then casually lying on the floor to shoot herself — twice — then after realising the first shot hasn’t killed her immediately dashes downstairs, hides silencer, sticks just ONE bullet in (second time lucky, eh) runs upstairs on her hands so blood trails upwards, long-jumps over June’s dead body, then shoots herself again
-
But you're missing my point. I imagine that shooting herself in a psychotic episode would look rather different from shooting herself whilst in command of her faculties. In the former, she'd be capable. In the latter...........?
She’d have been physically incapable regardless of her state of mind, though I understand your point
She certainly wouldn’t have bothered, or even thought of looking in the gun cupboard to put the silencer on...doubt she barely knew what it was. Nor would she have then taken it off after shooting herself the first time, gone downstairs, put it away, then returned ...for some reason went back to same exact spot where she’d first shot herself — then tried again in her neck (which had failed first time) holding the gun with just one hand while resting her left arm up by her head and shoulder.
Experts in America prove that when people shoot themselves, first choice is in the mouth, second in the temple, and third in the chest
In the extremely rare cases where they shoot themselves twice they ALWAYS choose a different are e.g Chest, then Temple
They NEVER shoot themselves in the same area
And it’s always men who shoot themselves. Women choose overdoses or occasionally hanging.
-
She’d have been physically incapable regardless of her state of mind, though I understand your point
She certainly wouldn’t have bothered, or even thought of looking in the gun cupboard to put the silencer on...doubt she barely knew what it was. Nor would she have then taken it off after shooting herself the first time, gone downstairs, put it away, then returned ...for some reason went back to same exact spot where she’d first shot herself — then tried again in her neck (which had failed first time) holding the gun with just one hand while resting her left arm up by her head and shoulder.
Experts in America prove that when people shoot themselves, first choice is in the mouth, second in the temple, and third in the chest
In the extremely rare cases where they shoot themselves twice they ALWAYS choose a different are e.g Chest, then Temple
They NEVER shoot themselves in the same area
And it’s always men who shoot themselves. Women choose overdoses or occasionally hanging.
Have you got a cite for all of this?
-
Given that Vanezis believes that he was also hit in the face with a blunt object (possibly a fist), it makes it even less likely.
And Sheila didn’t have ONE mark on her hands....
-
She’d have been physically incapable regardless of her state of mind, though I understand your point
She certainly wouldn’t have bothered, or even thought of looking in the gun cupboard to put the silencer on...doubt she barely knew what it was. Nor would she have then taken it off after shooting herself the first time, gone downstairs, put it away, then returned ...for some reason went back to same exact spot where she’d first shot herself — then tried again in her neck (which had failed first time) holding the gun with just one hand while resting her left arm up by her head and shoulder.
Experts in America prove that when people shoot themselves, first choice is in the mouth, second in the temple, and third in the chest
In the extremely rare cases where they shoot themselves twice they ALWAYS choose a different are e.g Chest, then Temple
They NEVER shoot themselves in the same area
And it’s always men who shoot themselves. Women choose overdoses or occasionally hanging.
Quite. I was only looking at the immediacy of the act of firing, rather than the back story.
-
Holly, when you do your reconstruction where will Sheila fit into it? Will you do a reconstruction that does not have either Sheila or Jeremy id’ed as the killer? How will your reconstruction demonstrate that JB could not have committed the crimes in the way he was adjudged to have done so?
-
Holly, when you do your reconstruction where will Sheila fit into it? Will you do a reconstruction that does not have either Sheila or Jeremy id’ed as the killer? How will your reconstruction demonstrate that JB could not have committed the crimes in the way he was adjudged to have done so?
It won't. I have asked this question continuously - and never had an answer. If it doesn't identify a killer, the CCRC will no way sanction such frivolity.
-
It won't. I have asked this question continuously - and never had an answer. If it doesn't identify a killer, the CCRC will no way sanction such frivolity.
It seems that I keep on asking questions that Holly isn’t interested in answering. I happen to think this is a valid one and am looking forward to an honest reply from her shortly.
-
It seems that I keep on asking questions that Holly isn’t interested in answering. I happen to think this is a valid one and am looking forward to an honest reply from her shortly.
Well, I have been asking it for a couple of years and still have no response. The farthest I have gotten to an answer is that it might show some support for Nevill having had an opportunity to have made the phone call. Not that he did you understand, just that he might have. It's something that wouldn't hold up to scrutiny because there are no definites. Prove the call, put the gun in Sheila's hand and you might get somewhere - being unable to prove either leaves us right where we are now and that's no enough for. an appeal.
-
It seems that I keep on asking questions that Holly isn’t interested in answering. I happen to think this is a valid one and am looking forward to an honest reply from her shortly.
What you seem to overlook is that I'm the only one here who's happy to hang her hat on JB's innocence therfore I have a lot of posts to answer!
Why not just pm the links?
-
What you seem to overlook is that I'm the only one here who's happy to hang her hat on JB's innocence therfore I have a lot of posts to answer!
Why not just pm the links?
There are some points you do. keep ignoring, like your notion of a recon, doesn't show who the killer was.
-
Holly, when you do your reconstruction where will Sheila fit into it? Will you do a reconstruction that does not have either Sheila or Jeremy id’ed as the killer? How will your reconstruction demonstrate that JB could not have committed the crimes in the way he was adjudged to have done so?
As I've said previously a reconstruction will show NB's exact position in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the location of the perp. It will not reveal JB or SC.
The contentious issue is whether NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom as the prosecution claimed or whether he sustained them on the landing stairs and main staircase with the perp already in the bedroom firing at June and then turning to inflict the gsw's to NB who just arrived on the landing.
-
There are some points you do. keep ignoring, like your notion of a recon, doesn't show who the killer was.
I don't think I've ever suggested it would?
A reconstruction is only capable of determining NB's precise location in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the precise location of the perp when he/she inflicted them.
If the reconstruction shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom this supports the prosecution case.
If the reconstructiin shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's on the landing stairs and the main staircase this supports the defence case.
-
I don't think I've ever suggested it would?
A reconstruction is only capable of determining NB's precise location in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the precise location of the perp when he/she inflicted them.
If the reconstruction shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom this supports the prosecution case.
If the reconstructiin shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's on the landing stairs and the main staircase this supports the defence case.
It's not even capable of that with 100% accuracy and it certainly does NOT support a phone call.
-
As I've said previously a reconstruction will show NB's exact position in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the location of the perp. It will not reveal JB or SC.
The contentious issue is whether NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom as the prosecution claimed or whether he sustained them on the landing stairs and main staircase with the perp already in the bedroom firing at June and then turning to inflict the gsw's to NB who just arrived on the landing.
And what will that prove in turn?
-
I don't think I've ever suggested it would?
A reconstruction is only capable of determining NB's precise location in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the precise location of the perp when he/she inflicted them.
If the reconstruction shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom this supports the prosecution case.
If the reconstructiin shows NB sustained his upstairs gsw's on the landing stairs and the main staircase this supports the defence case.
How? Furthermore it is something that cannot be proven by a recon IMO.
-
How? Furthermore it is something that cannot be proven by a recon IMO.
The word precise is problematic.
-
Holly, what obstacles stand in your way from carrying out this reconstruction and what are you doing to try and overcome them?
-
Holly, what obstacles stand in your way from carrying out this reconstruction and what are you doing to try and overcome them?
I can think of a couple - it's not strong enough for the CCRC to sanction and AE would be out with the pitchforks should anyone turn up with such a suggestion. @)(++(*
-
I can think of a couple - it's not strong enough for the CCRC to sanction and AE would be out with the pitchforks should anyone turn up with such a suggestion. @)(++(*
It could surely be done as a computer simulation?
-
It could surely be done as a computer simulation?
Possibly, but that is still open to error, the simulation is only as good as the data provided.
-
Possibly, but that is still open to error, the simulation is only as good as the data provided.
If a dilettante can knock something up with simple tools, just think what a pro can achieve...
https://vimeo.com/user51282558 (https://vimeo.com/user51282558)
-
As I've said previously a reconstruction will show NB's exact position in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the location of the perp. It will not reveal JB or SC.
The contentious issue is whether NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom as the prosecution claimed or whether he sustained them on the landing stairs and main staircase with the perp already in the bedroom firing at June and then turning to inflict the gsw's to NB who just arrived on the landing.
Is this contentious with you,or his defence team?
-
As I've said previously a reconstruction will show NB's exact position in the farmhouse when he sustained the upstairs gsw's and the location of the perp. It will not reveal JB or SC.
The contentious issue is whether NB sustained his upstairs gsw's in the bedroom as the prosecution claimed or whether he sustained them on the landing stairs and main staircase with the perp already in the bedroom firing at June and then turning to inflict the gsw's to NB who just arrived on the landing.
How is that a contentious issue - the case certainly doesn't stand or fall on it.
-
It's not even capable of that with 100% accuracy and it certainly does NOT support a phone call.
If a reconstruction places NB on the landing stairs when he sustained the face wounds and the perp just inside the main bedroom this contradicts what jurors were told at trial. It supports the tel call in three ways:
- shows NB was potentially coming from downstairs having been in the kitchen
- shows he could have made the call before the injuries he sustained upstairs which made purposeful speech thereafter impossible
- accounts for the lack of blood stains on the phone.
-
If a reconstruction places NB on the landing stairs when he sustained the face wounds and the perp just inside the main bedroom this contradicts what jurors were told at trial. It supports the tel call in three ways:
- shows NB was potentially coming from downstairs having been in the kitchen
- shows he could have made the call before the injuries he sustained upstairs which made purposeful speech thereafter impossible
- accounts for the lack of blood stains on the phone.
I don’t believe there was a phone call
But if you think it happened, while NB was waiting for Bamber to answer why didn’t he use that opportunity to get rid of the ammunition next to the phone
-
If a reconstruction places NB on the landing stairs when he sustained the face wounds and the perp just inside the main bedroom this contradicts what jurors were told at trial. It supports the tel call in three ways:
- shows NB was potentially coming from downstairs having been in the kitchen
- shows he could have made the call before the injuries he sustained upstairs which made purposeful speech thereafter impossible
- accounts for the lack of blood stains on the phone.
Equally he could have been shot as he was getting out of bed, and the cartridge on the stairs ended up there because it was accidentally knocked there by boot or dog, or came up in the tread of a police boot, how can you prove it didn’t?
-
Holly, what obstacles stand in your way from carrying out this reconstruction and what are you doing to try and overcome them?
It's extremely unlikely the case will go anywhere until the blood/silencer evidence is undermined. In fact I would say until it can be demolished. This is currently being worked on. If it goes the way anticipated it allows other aspects eg a reconstruction to be added to the main appeal points ie blood/silencer.
JB is not entitled to any Legal Aid so the blood/silencer is being funded privately. Once an appeal has been granted perversely he becomes eligible for Legal Aid which will cover other tests including a reconstruction.
Also a reconstruction will require entry to WHF to take measurements and this will probably require an order from CCRC.
-
If a reconstruction places NB on the landing stairs when he sustained the face wounds and the perp just inside the main bedroom this contradicts what jurors were told at trial. It supports the tel call in three ways:
- shows NB was potentially coming from downstairs having been in the kitchen
- shows he could have made the call before the injuries he sustained upstairs which made purposeful speech thereafter impossible
- accounts for the lack of blood stains on the phone.
It doesn't prove a call.
-
It's extremely unlikely the case will go anywhere until the blood/silencer evidence is undermined. In fact I would say until it can be demolished. This is currently being worked on. If it goes the way anticipated it allows other aspects eg a reconstruction to be added to the main appeal points ie blood/silencer.
JB is not entitled to any Legal Aid so the blood/silencer is being funded privately. Once an appeal has been granted perversely he becomes eligible for Legal Aid which will cover other tests including a reconstruction.
Also a reconstruction will require entry to WHF to take measurements and this will probably require an order from CCRC.
Then it will never happen, as the forensics can never now be demolished.
-
Is this contentious with you,or his defence team?
The following was part of the prosecution case at trial:
vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:
a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;
b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;
The prosecution case at trial is that JB entered his parents bedroom whilst they were in bed and opened fire, therefore how could NB have made the call when the pathologist said the injuries sustained upstairs rendered him incapable of purposeful speech and why wasn't the phone blood stained?
The physical evidence shows NB wasn't shot in the bedroom but on the landing with the perp already in the bedroom shooting out onto the landing.
-
How is that a contentious issue - the case certainly doesn't stand or fall on it.
I've never said it does stand or fall on it. I've always made clear the blood/silencer underpins the conviction.
-
Then it will never happen, as the forensics can never now be demolished.
.
What forensics?
-
It doesn't prove a call.
It doesn't have to.
-
The following was part of the prosecution case at trial:
vii) The appellant's account of the telephone call from his father could be proved to be false for the following reasons:
a) His father was too badly injured to have spoken to anybody;
b) The telephone in the kitchen was not obviously blood stained;
The prosecution case at trial is that JB entered his parents bedroom whilst they were in bed and opened fire, therefore how could NB have made the call when the pathologist said the injuries sustained upstairs rendered him incapable of purposeful speech and why wasn't the phone blood stained?
The physical evidence shows NB wasn't shot in the bedroom but on the landing with the perp already in the bedroom shooting out onto the landing.
I don't think that was the prosecution case exactly Holly, the point about NB being too injured to call JB at Goldhanger is moot if JB is in the bedroom shooting him!
I do like your idea of NB first being shot on the stairs as he realises his folly in turning his back on SC to phone JB and rushes up to tackle the situation.. so he gets shot on the stairs, carries on rushing at Sheila..gets to the top of the stairs, She retreats, fires 3 more rounds into him, he turns back around without being able to lay a finger on her and runs/stumbles back downstairs to meet his brutal end.
It's not impossible and even plausible but I can't see how any reconstruction can prove it
-
It doesn't have to.
It's of no worth Holly, all you're left with is did Nevill make that call - it's where we are now.
-
I've never said it does stand or fall on it. I've always made clear the blood/silencer underpins the conviction.
And JM’s evidence ?
-
I don't think that was the prosecution case exactly Holly, the point about NB being too injured to call JB at Goldhanger is moot if JB is in the bedroom shooting him!
I do like your idea of NB first being shot on the stairs as he realises his folly in turning his back on SC to phone JB and rushes up to tackle the situation.. so he gets shot on the stairs, carries on rushing at Sheila..gets to the top of the stairs, She retreats, fires 3 more rounds into him, he turns back around without being able to lay a finger on her and runs/stumbles back downstairs to meet his brutal end.
It's not impossible and even plausible but I can't see how any reconstruction can prove it
Such a reconstruction would probably be able to support several different theories which makes it pretty useless for that reason.
-
And JM’s evidence ?
The judge warned the jury about its reliability.
-
It's of no worth Holly, all you're left with is did Nevill make that call - it's where we are now.
That's your opinion Caroline. It's not the opinion of experts.
-
That's your opinion Caroline. It's not the opinion of experts.
Experts you can't mention? However, any expert should be impartial.
-
.
What forensics?
the blood in the silencer forensics.
-
Such a reconstruction would probably be able to support several different theories which makes it pretty useless for that reason.
Exactly - unless a reconstruction can prove Jeremy didn’t do it what is the point of it?