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 December 18, 2013, 09:35:29 AM
-
The following link states:
"Many adoptees manufacture fantasies about their birth parents which can lead to dissociative feelings of rage. The idea of rejection by the adoptees birth parents can sometimes be the catalyst for violent action".
http://ijo.sagepub.com/content/40/3/204.abstract
I believe Sheila was reunited with her birth mother for the first time during April 1985. Colin Caffell states in his book that Sheila's birth mother, Christine S*****, had not told her other children about Sheila and that her husband was unsupportive of the reunion. Also given that Christine was based permanently in Canada I guess it would have been difficult to develop a relationship. I wonder if Sheila felt rejected by her birth mother and was hoping for more especially as by all accounts her relationship with June appeared strained to say the least.
-
Actually this was the link I intended to post above which relates to the quote above:
http://www.readabstracts.com/Psychology-and-mental-health/Catathymic-violence-dissociation-and-adoption-pathology-implications-for-the-mental-status-defense.html
-
The conclusion on page 7 is interesting:
http://www.adoptionunchartedwaters.com/catathymic-violence.php
-
This was all covered in detail on page 12 of Blue on a thread started by egap1 entitled "Did Sheila Suffer An Attachment Disorder Resulting In Affectionless Psychopathy?"
A theory was put forward re dissociative disorder and catathymic rage linked to adoption pathology with attachment disorder as a somewhat separate issue.
I guess those closest to Sheila and Jeremy were Colin and Julie respectively. In this regard and taking into account the above it is interesting to note that throughout Julie Mugford's witness statements not once does she make reference to adoption even insofar as stating Jeremy was adopted. I believe the reason for this is that Jeremy very rarely gave the matter any thought. He considered his adoptive parents as his Mum and Dad period. This can be further evidenced by the fact that he showed no interest whatsoever in reuniting with his birth parents until after his failed 2002 appeal when he sought their help and support.
Julie Mugford's mother, Mary Mugford, makes reference to the fact he referred to her as "Mummy" and made some adverse comments regarding June specifically around her interest in religion.
The witness statements of Colin Caffell, Freddie Emami, Mrs Brencher (Colin's mother) and Dr Ferguson all make a point of stating that Sheila was adopted and refer to Nevill and June as her adoptive parents. Or in the case of Freddie Emami he incorrectly refers to June as Sheila's "step-mother". This to my mind is telling and I believe indicative of the fact that Sheila had a lot of unresolved/unidentified issues surrounding her adoption which she may have touched on with others, hence their comments, and were brought to the fore by her reunion with her birth mother only weeks before the murders.
I accept this is just my take and I may be wildly wrong but I really think it is time that psychiatrists/psychologists and other professionals appropriately qualified in adoption pathology and attachment review the case.
Imo there is a real lack of understanding regarding adoption pathology and attachment. Consequently these vital aspects are overlooked and instead other more readily understandable motivations for the murders fill the vacuum ie hatred and greed.
How many people have heard of adoption pathology and attachment -v- hatred and greed? Less than 1% of the population that's for sure. So in the absence of any real forensic evidence from the soc, certainly based on today's standards, we are presented with two explanations:
Jeremy - motivated by hatred and greed - easily understood by almost everyone
Sheila - mentally ill and diagnosed as a schizophrenic
What if Sheila's diagnosis was incorrect and she was suffering from various issues associated with adoption pathology and attachment? Might she have suffered a catathymic rage brought on by the reunion with her birth mother and Nevill and June's discussion over the twins' welfare? Sheila's visit to WHF in August may well have been the first time she had spent any length of time with Nevill and June since meeting with her birth mother in April.
I certainly think the above should have either been eliminated or accepted as a possibility with some statistical likelihood of it being correct and presented to the jury accordingly.
-
Its all very well constructing these theories about Sheila but it will never alter the evidence. Jeremy Bamber murdered his family and not Sheila.
-
Its all very well constructing these theories about Sheila but it will never alter the evidence. Jeremy Bamber murdered his family and not Sheila.
Yes they are just that theories which need eliminating or supporting by relevant professionals.
Imo the 'evidence' would never get to trial today.
I understand a book is due for release in early spring which is based on fact and approaches the case from a new perspective. The author I believe is ex-police and served in Essex at one time. His research has taken his across the globe. I think I'll reserve judgement until then. May turn out to be much ado about nothing of course.
There again this might be JB's last prison Christmas dinner 8-)(--)
All I want is the truth and at the moment what is considered the truth doesn't sit comfortably with me.
-
Just an afterthought which is me talking out loud since I have no friends on Blue or Red aka Billy No-Mates 8)><( 8)><( 8)><( In fact I've played solo so much on both forums I feel my eyesight has been permanently damaged 8(0(* 8(0(* 8(0(*
The reason Freddie Emami probably referred to June as Sheila's step-mother is that I believe he was from Iran and adoption is not something practiced in Islamic countries. So it may well be it was something he was unfamiliar with. Adoption, or certainly 'closed' adoption, is in the main something practiced by English speaking countries. Now how relevant is that in the grand scheme of things? @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Holly, Thank you for the mentions. However, to keep things accurate. I've never served in Essex police, try the National Criminal Intelligence Service. Somebody else on here, for whatever reason, tried to ridicule me with grossly inaccurate fact, associating me with a book upon the Suffolk Strangler - Ipswich Murders. Not me. Try damning Sky Television's Royal correspondent for that.
Further, to stop supposition and guess work, my book is solely based on fact, and whilst being most useful for propping up wobbly tables or other unstable items of furniture, it will also be available in all good book shops, and DIY stores, if its use is for the earlier suggestion!
Hope this helps in some small way.
Hey Mason Doyle you're welcome! Was that 10% commission on all sales generated from this forum ?>)()<
Think we were introduced via M 8**8:/: or was that Z @)(++(*
-
It will have to be something pretty remarkable to upset the very strong evidence that we all have jointly uncovered here on the forum which clears Sheila of any involvement and by default puts Jeremy firmly in the frame.
Should be interesting but just pray it has nothing to do with ali Bongo, Z or dare I say it, Mr T.
In any event isn't the proper place for new evidence with the police or the CCRC? >@@(*&)
-
Oh Myster 8**8:/: I'm so pleased you posted about Brett Collins. I was wracking my errrm brains as to why MD would visit New Zealand for his research. I was even thinking he might be looking at the David Bain case to provide some answers but now realise it is likely to be BC...doh!
I'm pretty sure MD posted up on Blue that many had been responsive to his requests re his research but not JM but that it was her prerogative. I will try and turn up the relevant post on Blue.
Pretty sure I have seen on Blue that new submissions from SM are winging their way to CCRC.
Think authors are tied up legally with publishers so don't expect he will be spilling the beans on here. If indeed there are any beans to be spilled 8-)(--)
-
Would love to know if he has spoken to Matthew McDonald. I would buy his book if he has!
-
Myster 8**8:/:
I remember how helpful you were to me when I joined the forum so the following is the least I could do to return the favour:
If you care to Google 'Jeremy Bamber Forum Mason Doyle' it will bring up relevant links:
'Hello - I'm her too'! Reply #40 relates to JM (wow I remembered that from 2012)
'Paul Harrison AKA Mason Doyle' Reply #6 relates to research taking him to New Zealand
-
Reader has just posted up on Blue wondering whether MD has interviewed JB. Reader is normally spot on but has obviously missed the fact that MD posted up that he had met with JB, on several occasions I believe.
MD's background certainly seems to lend itself to the type of book he intends to have published. I've read all the other JB books bar Scot Lomax's. Colin's is obviously unique and poignant written by a grieving father. It does offer some valuable insights into the family dynamics too.
Claire Powell is the equivalent of a tabloid.
Roger Wilkes I found very informative and objective but I don't think his investigative skills were up to much in terms of digging 8(0(*
None seem to have the background of MD: ex-cop/NCIS, judges' clerk, experienced true crime-writer.
All will be revealed with the passage of time >@@(*&)
-
Hello hun, good to see you back ! (at least for a little while)... Wie geht's ?
-
Hello hun, good to see you back ! (at least for a little while)... Wie geht's ?
Es gehts mir gut, danke!! 8((()*/
-
Well, I'm sure we all welcome Mason Doyle to the board, what struck me as a little odd (and please correct me if I am wrong) was that for an author of so many books he seemed reluctant to disclose what previous publications he had written which didn't go unnoticed on the blue forum at the time. And if there is any prospect of releasing Bamber surely a book isn't going to help as much as evidence given to the courts?
Judging by this link (assuming this is Mason Doyle) it does look like he is going to try to claim Bamber is innocent.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Book+cop+I'll+show+Bamber's+innocent.-a0337437563
It also looks like the tasters of what he is going to focus on have been done to death on the Blue forum and successfully debunked by the Red forum each and every time.
Obviously I'll withhold further judgement until we have seen what he has to say in detail.
I'm pretty sure I've seen posts on Blue from MD saying if its not from him personally take it all with a pinch of salt and that he has been misquoted. We have no idea how accurate the article from 'thefreelibrary.com' actually is? There again how do we know for sure the 'MD' posting on Blue and Red is the real McCoy?
This tells a little more about what appears to be the real McCoy:
http://www.murderarchiveuk.com/
-
I kind of understand why he doesn't want to discuss the actual content of the book until it's published, that kind of makes a little sense. However, if you have written a load of other publications why wouldn't you want to publicise these so a lot more people who were previously unaware of your work might want to check these out? I always thought published authors wanted to widen their potential readership as more readers means more money. I guess I was wrong. If you have written 30 books then why not name them and tell people where you can buy them or read them? Of course this would give potential readers a clue as to what sort of a writer he is and allows us a hint at what sort of format the Bamber book would take as well.
I could only find a couple. Does he write under different pseudonyms?
I believe with the Cuckoo's Calling by J K Rowling written under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith the entire book was analysed by computer to look for similarities with other authors and that's how they hit on J K Rowling. Many critics had overlooked this.
-
The Queen's Christmas Message 2013:
I have the utmost respect for the Queen and I am neutral on monarchy-v-republic but this year I found the following interesting:
"I once knew someone who spent a year in a plaster caste recovering from an operation on his back. He read a lot and thought a lot and felt miserable. Later he realised this time of forced retreat from the world had helped him to understand the world more clearly."
I do hope that if Jeremy Bamber's conviction is ever quashed he is afforded similar consideration despite it being unconstitutional to do so!
"Here at home my own family is a little larger this Christmas. As so many of you will know the arrival of a baby gives everyone the chance to contemplate the future with renewed happiness and hope"
The civil servants obviously forget to advise the Queen about the apology earlier this year by the former PM of Australia, Julia Gillard, regarding forced adoption:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg
-
I can understand tragic old gimmers like Belton, susan ingham and Methuselah Lookout wishing that Bamber was innocent; Mike is as mad as a hatter (how's his brain rumour, by the way? It must be as big as a melon by now), and Nellybelly is vainly hoping for a bob or two to bail him out.......but why someone as obviously intelligent as you, Holly? Do you honestly think that Sheila shot herself twice?
-
I can understand tragic old gimmers like Belton, susan ingham and Methuselah Lookout wishing that Bamber was innocent; Mike is as mad as a hatter (how's his brain rumour, by the way? It must be as big as a melon by now), and Nellybelly is vainly hoping for a bob or two to bail him out.......[/color]but why someone as obviously intelligent as you, Holly? Do you honestly think that Sheila shot herself twice?[/color]
Well thank you puglove for your kind words 8((()*/
Based on the pathologist's report I certainly think it is possible that Sheila shot herself twice 8(8-))
Point 46 from CoA document:
46. From the pathological evidence alone, the pathologist could not say, one way or the other, whether Mrs Caffell had been murdered or had taken her own life.
-
On 21st March 2013 Julia Gillard, former PM of Australia, made a public apology to birth families and adoptees regarding forced adoption. At 5.27 in she states:
"In particular we remember those affected by these practices who took their own lives. Our profound sympathies, our profound sympathies go to their families."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg
How do we know Sheila was not affected by the above and took her own life?
-
Well thank you puglove for your kind words 8((()*/
Based on the pathologist's report I certainly think it is possible that Sheila shot herself twice 8(8-))
Point 46 from CoA document:
46. From the pathological evidence alone, the pathologist could not say, one way or the other, whether Mrs Caffell had been murdered or had taken her own life.
Apologies for going off topic but there is no way in this world that Sheila Caffell could have shot herself in the neck twice without leaving blood smears all over her neck, on the trigger mechanism and on her fingers. In any event how did she aim the second shot? Did she use a mirror to place the muzzle of the rifle?
Truth is that only an assassin could have taken that shot, a shot which just so happened to be the last bullet in the rife. There is much much more of course relating to the shooting of Sheila which I won't go into on this thread. One last point though, the pathologist did say that the first shot would have stunned/incapacitated Sheila so she must have been Superwoman to have taken that second shot.
The reality is that the shooter had to be Jeremy or Sheila, nobody else could have managed it. By default therefore if it wasn't Sheila who shot herself it doesn't take much to work out who really did it.
The saying goes, there are none so blind as those who will not see and the Bamber case is the classic example of this.
-
Apologies for going off topic but there is no way in this world that Sheila Caffell could have shot herself in the neck twice without leaving blood smears all over her neck, on the trigger mechanism and on her fingers. In any event how did she aim the second shot? Did she use a mirror to place the muzzle of the rifle?
Truth is that only an assassin could have taken that shot, a shot which just so happened to be the last bullet in the rife. There is much much more of course relating to the shooting of Sheila which I won't go into on this thread. One last point though, the pathologist did say that the first shot would have stunned/incapacitated Sheila so she must have been Superwoman to have taken that second shot.
The reality is that the shooter had to be Jeremy or Sheila, nobody else could have managed it. By default therefore if it wasn't Sheila who shot herself it doesn't take much to work out who really did it.
I don't feel qualified to say one way or the other just relying on the pathologist's report as above where he states he is unable to confirm suicide or murder.
I think he is still practising and I'm not aware of any professional misconduct ie incompetence etc
http://www.petervanezis.com/
-
Just noticed on his website under the 'high profile cases' section he has not mentioned WHF >@@(*&)
-
Just noticed on his website under the 'high profile cases' section he has not mentioned WHF >@@(*&)
Now noticed it states "recent" so this would explain why he has not made ref to WHF
-
FAO Reader on Blue
Hi Reader Hun 8**8:/:
I'm replying to your post #202 from the innocence project thread (page 3 of main discussion board as @ 03.01.14) due to my lifetime ban from Blue by the 3 x witches: April Fool, Hayley and Saggie over Susan's weight (of course all 3 know Susan and her weight intimately).
I'm puzzled that it took you over 4 months to respond! And even more puzzled by the points you make!
You regard boarding school, especially when there's little need for it, as unusual. How does one decide when there's a need for it? I assume you would see a need if the parents are away eg military, diplomatic services, working overseas?
Our current PM was a boarder. His father a stockbroker in the City and his mother, I believe, a stay-at-home wife/mother so I guess no need for DC to board at Eton? I believe he followed his father and elder brother. These things are often family tradition. Nevill I believe was a boarder so he probably thought he was doing good by Sheila and Jeremy by providing the same education as he had experienced.
Do you have any firm evidence of an increase in social hierarchy at boarding school? I think you will find hierarchies exist either formally or informally in all social settings including elite boarding schools and high security prisons.
You believe boarders find life outside of school more difficult than would otherwise be the case? Doesn't seem to hold back many of the ruling elite who attended boarding school? In terms of JB imo he seemed well-adjusted. He held down paid employment in customer facing roles ie he was able to get along with customers, colleagues and managers/owners alike. He was able to look after himself and form new friendships whilst travelling around the Antipodes. He formed intimate relationships with Suzette Ford, Julie Mugford and Anji Greaves. Noone came forward with any adverse comments about the relationship per se.
June's version of Christianity appears to be bound up with sexual morality which she seemed to think women were responsible for! Hence we have Sheila as Devil's child and Julie Mugford as a harlot. No such evidence of name calling towards Jeremy or Colin Caffell. There is evidence that the twins were forced to spend time praying in June's company. I am not sure what they were to atone for.
How do you know Jeremy was caused "slight problems" by having to put with Nevill and June? I'm pretty sure that more restrictions would have existed at boarding school than time spent at WHF. I guess he was isolated from other boarders/friend's when at WHF but no doubt they all exchanged visits. As a boy I am sure he would have enjoyed time on the farm with Nevill. He also had a sister in Sheila.
The only documented evidence re warped states is from Peter Vanezis as follows:
"I then discussed the two possibilities: If it wasn't Sheila it had to be Jeremy. We went over the information and I expressed the views that Jeremy would have to be a nutter to have done what occurred, in that he must have had such a warped state of mind to engineer it in the manner in which it was presented. This was almost too incredible to believe".
Often victims of MoJ's are a little different from mainstream society in some shape or form eg Stephen Downing had a low iq; Stefan Kiszko was socially akward, Maguire seven etc were Irish etc, etc. IMO the fact Jeremy was adopted and attended boarding school singled him out and others perceived him, wrongly IMO, as being cold and detached. Of course Sheila was also adopted and attended boarding school but society/culture tells us that men are aggressive and capable of extreme violence and women passive and yielding.
The only other person I am aware of who was adopted and attended boarding school is the country's much respected former journalist, Kate Adie.
Over and out Reader 8**8:/: xxx
-
You believe boarders find life outside of school more difficult than would otherwise be the case? Doesn't seem to hold back many of the ruling elite who attended boarding school? In terms of JB imo he seemed well-adjusted. He held down paid employment in customer facing roles ie he was able to get along with customers, colleagues and managers/owners alike. He was able to look after himself and form new friendships whilst travelling around the Antipodes. He formed intimate relationships with Suzette Ford, Julie Mugford and Anji Greaves. Noone came forward with any adverse comments about the relationship per se.
Have a read of Matthew McDonalds statement. His opinion was that he believed that JB had hit Suzette when they were in a relationship and that JB was a cold person. There are so many contradictory opinions of JB's personality, all from different sources. The truth is probably somewhere in between the two extremes.
I wonder how many of his friends from the time of the crime have stayed in touch with him?
-
I would like to read Matthew McDonald's statement, are you able to make it available?
There's a thread on here re Suzette Ford and as far as I can see she seems to portray JB in a positive light:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=193.msg2097#msg2097
She also attended his trial throughout I believe for moral support.
I believe some of JB's pre-prison friends have stayed in touch with him.
I don't believe Brett Collins keeps in touch which I find a little odd >@@(*&) Perhaps he so believed in JB's innocence and found the trial/outcome so upsetting that the only way he could deal with it was to remove himself physically and mentally >@@(*&)
For all we know some of the posters on Blue might know JB of old 8(0(*
-
I'd be very surprised if he's still in contact with pre-prison friends. Something that seems to crop up again and again with Bamber is that he very quickly falls out with people (or just dumps them when he feels they have outgrown their usefulness), Mike Tesko, Jackie Preece (you remind me very much of her, Holly), Giovanni di Stefano (I had quite an amusing exchange of views about Bamber with his son on Facebook once who is a mutual friend of one of mine), Ewen Smith etc.
This to me (coupled with the fact that even when they do fall out people seem to continue to be blindly loyal even when they would have every right to be angry with Jeremy for dumping them) would seem to back up the theory that he is a very manipulative person.
I sometimes think Brett Collins might hold a lot of answers to many of the questions we have about the case. It would be good if he were to resurface and come forward.
-
I would like to read Matthew McDonald's statement, are you able to make it available?
There's a thread on here re Suzette Ford and as far as I can see she seems to portray JB in a positive light:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=193.msg2097#msg2097
She also attended his trial throughout I believe for moral support.
I believe some of JB's pre-prison friends have stayed in touch with him.
I don't believe Brett Collins keeps in touch which I find a little odd >@@(*&) Perhaps he so believed in JB's innocence and found the trial/outcome so upsetting that the only way he could deal with it was to remove himself physically and mentally >@@(*&)
For all we know some of the posters on Blue might know JB of old 8(0(*
McDonalds police statements are already on the forum Holly.
www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=57.0
-
I'm not seeing them John, only the blue header... nor Matthew McDonalds!
I asked quite a while ago if you could put them up when you had time, but the McCann debate took over. >@@(*&)
-
I'm not seeing them John, only the blue header... nor Matthew McDonalds!
I asked quite a while ago if you could put them up when you had time, but the McCann debate took over. >@@(*&)
Sorry, you're right. I will upload them shortly, have to go to the main computer as they are stored there. There must have been some reason why they weren't uploaded at the time...
-
I'm not seeing them John, only the blue header... nor Matthew McDonalds!
I asked quite a while ago if you could put them up when you had time, but the McCann debate took over. >@@(*&)
Sorry !... I meant the remainder of Ann Eaton's statements 31 - 49
-
I'd be very surprised if he's still in contact with pre-prison friends. Something that seems to crop up again and again with Bamber is that he very quickly falls out with people (or just dumps them when he feels they have outgrown their usefulness), Mike Tesko, Jackie Preece (you remind me very much of her, Holly), Giovanni di Stefano (I had quite an amusing exchange of views about Bamber with his son on Facebook once who is a mutual friend of one of mine), Ewen Smith etc.
This to me (coupled with the fact that even when they do fall out people seem to continue to be blindly loyal even when they would have every right to be angry with Jeremy for dumping them) would seem to back up the theory that he is a very manipulative person.
I sometimes think Brett Collins might hold a lot of answers to many of the questions we have about the case. It would be good if he were to resurface and come forward.
I was thinking the very same thing!
-
Sorry !... I meant the remainder of Ann Eaton's statements 31 - 49
They should be there too Myster. I will upload them all.
-
I'd be very surprised if he's still in contact with pre-prison friends. Something that seems to crop up again and again with Bamber is that he very quickly falls out with people (or just dumps them when he feels they have outgrown their usefulness), Mike Tesko, Jackie Preece (you remind me very much of her, Holly), Giovanni di Stefano (I had quite an amusing exchange of views about Bamber with his son on Facebook once who is a mutual friend of one of mine), Ewen Smith etc.
This to me (coupled with the fact that even when they do fall out people seem to continue to be blindly loyal even when they would have every right to be angry with Jeremy for dumping them) would seem to back up the theory that he is a very manipulative person.
I sometimes think Brett Collins might hold a lot of answers to many of the questions we have about the case. It would be good if he were to resurface and come forward.
Thank you Goatboy for those few kind words after welcoming me to the forum! Have you ever read the book 'How to win friends and influence people'? Lol. Someone mentioned JP earlier and I was wondering what had happened to her?
I'm not blindly loyal to JB at all. I am interested and fascinated by the case from many different perspectives. I have studied all aspects of the case since about 2010 when I read an article in the DM which sparked my initial interest. To a large extent this was based on the fact that like Sheila and Jeremy I was adopted and many of my posts are themed against this. I have come to the conclusion that JB is innocent and has suffered the worst moj in British criminal history. Just my take. Might be wrong of course. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone who holds opposing views. In any event JB is serving life and it looks like a tory led government are to circumvent the ECHR legislation re life sentences by imposing 100 year tariffs. Meaning JB is going nowhere fast unless some VERY FIRM evidence surfaces to the contrary. Time and time again JB has thought he had it in the bag: ccrc referral re dna plus add on points, Peter Sutherest's photographic evidence and more recently the tests carried out in Arizona with and without silencer. All rejected. From time-to-time they get excited on Blue eg palm print on bible etc but anyone looking at it objectively can see that there's no way it is strong enough to overturn the conviction. Imo there's nothing in the public domain that is anywhere near strong enough. They can pore over all the stuff on Blue until their dying days but imo there's nowt there. Some very sharp posters exist on Blue/Red from both camps and no one has turned up anything yet of significance hence we go round and round in circles and it gets kinda boring. Sleep tight Goatboy ?{)(** Unless of course Mason Doyle has turned something up during the course of researching his book >@@(*&)
-
I have uploaded most of the statements requested and many more. I will upload the Stokenchurch ones tomorrow.
-
I have uploaded most of the statements requested and many more. I will upload the Stokenchurch ones tomorrow.
Thank you !!!... been waiting for those since I joined many moons ago !!! 8((()*/
Grown a long beard to my feet since then.... (only joking for all those who like clean-shaven men) 8**8:/:
-
Thank you Goatboy for those few kind words after welcoming me to the forum! Have you ever read the book 'How to win friends and influence people'? Lol. Someone mentioned JP earlier and I was wondering what had happened to her?
I'm not blindly loyal to JB at all. I am interested and fascinated by the case from many different perspectives. I have studied all aspects of the case since about 2010 when I read an article in the DM which sparked my initial interest. To a large extent this was based on the fact that like Sheila and Jeremy I was adopted and many of my posts are themed against this. I have come to the conclusion that JB is innocent and has suffered the worst moj in British criminal history. Just my take. Might be wrong of course. I have no problem whatsoever with anyone who holds opposing views. In any event JB is serving life and it looks like a tory led government are to circumvent the ECHR legislation re life sentences by imposing 100 year tariffs. Meaning JB is going nowhere fast unless some VERY FIRM evidence surfaces to the contrary. Time and time again JB has thought he had it in the bag: ccrc referral re dna plus add on points, Peter Sutherest's photographic evidence and more recently the tests carried out in Arizona with and without silencer. All rejected. From time-to-time they get excited on Blue eg palm print on bible etc but anyone looking at it objectively can see that there's no way it is strong enough to overturn the conviction. Imo there's nothing in the public domain that is anywhere near strong enough. They can pore over all the stuff on Blue until their dying days but imo there's nowt there. Some very sharp posters exist on Blue/Red from both camps and no one has turned up anything yet of significance hence we go round and round in circles and it gets kinda boring. Sleep tight Goatboy ?{)(** Unless of course M...... D.... has turned something up during the course of researching his book >@@(*&)
I did think you may not have found the comparison flattering! It's just when you tracked down the psychologist featured in the recent Bamber documentary to berate and threaten him, then boasted about it on this forum I remember thinking that was classic Jackie Preece. She joined this forum to try to convince people of his innocence when she was booted out of the blue forum and had no other outlet to discuss the case. Two things about you which seemed familiar to me.
Please don't go thinking that I would be upset if evidence came to light which proved Bamber was innocent! In the extremely unlikely event this ever happens I would naturally welcome the fact that an innocent man is free, don't go thinking my mind is completely closed on the matter. It's just the wealth of evidence supporting his conviction seems pretty clear to me, I suppose I could try to decide one day that I wanted him to be innocent and go in to the minutiae of the case to try to find something, anything, which suggested he was definitely innocent. But I prefer to weigh up all of the evidence and come to a conclusion based on that.
Regarding the Bamber case, if we are to believe that he is innocent what is certain is that Julie Mugford stood up in court and perjured herself. For what motive? It's not enough to say she was a woman scorned. Most scorned women would have been happy to key his Astra. No one would risk a prison sentence just because they have been jilted. Money? Well apart from the one exclusive interview she's kept her head down ever since. If money was a motivation she could have sold her story many times over, I don't doubt for a second that there are lots of people who would offer a great deal of money for this even today which would make the £25000 she received at the time look like small change. And if she was going to lie why didn't she come out and say outrightly that Bamber admitted his guilt to her? If you read her evidence she never actually states expicitly that he confessed to her. If you're going to lie be creative. Also, how many people would have to have been involved in this conspiracy to convict him if he was innocent? I admire your tenacity and your attention to detail but I really think you are barking up the wrong tree.
-
McDonalds police statements are already on the forum Holly.
www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=57.0
Thank you John 8((()*/
These were not on Blue so I look forward to reading them shortly.
-
Long post. I'll have to reply in bite size chunks due to time constraints if that's ok ?{)(**
For the record I didn't join this forum when I was kicked out of Blue - I wouldn't want you to feel second best or that you are being used ?{)(** I joined on 2nd Mar '13 and made circa 100 posts. I would have stayed longer but it was around the time when the McCann board took off and there wasn't much interest in Jeremy Bamber so I went back to Blue.
I wasn't kicked out of Blue. I was given a week long ban which I thought was most unfair. I was not prepared to take my punishment and sit on the 'naughty step' for a week. I contacted NGB, who has all my contact details, in an attempt to get the ban lifted. As I didn't hear within 48 hours I made a conscious decision to start posting on here and make my views known on the mods/my ban. The rest is history....
If I had a mind to I could start up a Jeremy Bamber/WHF topic on many of the thousands of forums that exist eg mumsnet. Or start up my own website - no chance of getting banned then @)(++(* At the moment I am quite happy here and hope you are happy to have me too ?{)(**
-
PS I forgot to say an added attraction here is the board that John started up re financial/business/economic stuff etc which I can have a little rant on ?{)(** Not much interest on that yet but it has the potential to be developed ?{)(**
-
Re - Matthew McDonald's Interviews.
Dear me !!!... Specsavers ?... I think I need to go to Sightsavers instead. That's some of the worst handwriting I've ever seen in Police interview statements. Like wading through a peat bog. Whatever happened to copperplate ?
What's noticeable though is the lack of hesitation in McDonald's replies, and a total absence of "No Comments", which Bamber's own statements are peppered with throughout.
What does that tell you about an interviewee wanting to tell the truth and not being deliberately obstructive ?
-
Yes they're not easy on the eyes. It will take me a while to read them all thoroughly.
From what little I've read so far the style of interview seems very different to those that Jeremy underwent. Matthew's seems open and a fact-finding exercise. With Jeremy's being closed and accusatory, which I would imagine felt quite personal, insulting and upsetting if he's innocent and having just lost his nearest and dearest.
-
I did think you may not have found the comparison flattering! It's just when you tracked down the psychologist featured in the recent Bamber documentary to berate and threaten him, then boasted about it on this forum I remember thinking that was classic Jackie Preece. She joined this forum to try to convince people of his innocence when she was booted out of the blue forum and had no other outlet to discuss the case. Two things about you which seemed familiar to me.
Please don't go thinking that I would be upset if evidence came to light which proved Bamber was innocent! In the extremely unlikely event this ever happens I would naturally welcome the fact that an innocent man is free, don't go thinking my mind is completely closed on the matter. It's just the wealth of evidence supporting his conviction seems pretty clear to me, I suppose I could try to decide one day that I wanted him to be innocent and go in to the minutiae of the case to try to find something, anything, which suggested he was definitely innocent. But I prefer to weigh up all of the evidence and come to a conclusion based on that.
Regarding the Bamber case, if we are to believe that he is innocent what is certain is that Julie Mugford stood up in court and perjured herself. For what motive? It's not enough to say she was a woman scorned. Most scorned women would have been happy to key his Astra. No one would risk a prison sentence just because they have been jilted. Money? Well apart from the one exclusive interview she's kept her head down ever since. If money was a motivation she could have sold her story many times over, I don't doubt for a second that there are lots of people who would offer a great deal of money for this even today which would make the £25000 she received at the time look like small change. And if she was going to lie why didn't she come out and say outrightly that Bamber admitted his guilt to her? If you read her evidence she never actually states expicitly that he confessed to her. If you're going to lie be creative. Also, how many people would have to have been involved in this conspiracy to convict him if he was innocent? I admire your tenacity and your attention to detail but I really think you are barking up the wrong tree.
I perhaps should have added to my previous post in response to yours above that I most definitely have no desire whatsoever to try and convince people of Jeremy's innocence. People need to form their own opinions and base their decisions on them accordingly.
Yes I guess I did do a bit of a Jackie Preece with my rant over the psychologist, David Holmes, on the recent C5 programme. I must confess I was quite 8()(((@# at the time @)(++(* Hope I didn't scare you! I think it is very unprofessional for a psychologist to offer up opinion as fact without ever meeting the individual concerned. According to David Holmes Jeremy suffered feelings of abandonment as a result of being adopted and attending boarding school. And resentment, jealousy and envy as a result of Sheila being physically attractive and a successful model. Implying that this led Jeremy to slaughter his family.
We hear nothing about the psychology of adoption; June's mental illness circa 1959 and admission to a psychiatric unit and the potential adverse affects on Sheila for an attachment disorder; the connection between an attachment disorder and lack of empathy; the connection between a lack of empathy and psychopathy; the potential for Sheila to have been adversely affected by the reunion with her birth mother which took place only weeks before the murders.
Both Sheila and Jeremy were adopted, attended boarding school and were physically attractive so the only difference is the modelling aspect. There's no evidence that Sheila was a successful model. I would like to see any accounts/p45 showing remuneration. Sheila completed a modelling course paid for by June. Often these courses include a guaranteed first assignment which in Sheila's case might have been the assignment in Tokyo, from where she wrote to Colin telling him she was unable to cope and asked him to arrange an appointment for her to see a psychiatrist on her return. The media created a myth about Sheila having a glamorous London lifestyle which imo could not be further from the truth. She had little, if any, surplus income; claimed DSS; relied on her parents for financial support with June delivering weekly food parcels; was unable to secure any paid employment; suffered low self-esteem; had difficult parenting her children; according to Claire Powell wanted a man in her life but this seemed to elude her. I have every sympathy as apart from Dr Ferguson diagnosing her as a paranoid schizophrenic I suggest she had a few more unidentified issues.
-
Many excuses have been offered as to why Jeremy did what he did but in the end it came down to jealousy and greed. He knew that his chances of inheriting any substantial assets were diminishing by the day so the thought that Sheila and her twin boys were going to be moving home was the straw which broke the camel's back. We were always suspicious that Nevill was wise to Jeremy and the recent revelations that he knew who did the robbery at Osea confirms this.
Jeremy was about to lose it all and he knew it!
-
Many excuses have been offered as to why Jeremy did what he did but in the end it came down to jealousy and greed. He knew that his chances of inheriting any substantial assets were diminishing by the day so the thought that Sheila and her twin boys were going to be moving home was the straw which broke the camel's back. We were always suspicious that Nevile was wise to Jeremy and the recent revelations that he knew who did the robbery at Osea confirms this.
Jeremy was about to lose it all and he knew it!
I agree. Holly's right, Sheila seemed to lack the emotional strength and ambition to become a successful model, but we can't possibly imagine how she was affected, or unaffected by adoption, her upbringing, her relationship with Colin etc. What we do have is photographic evidence, post mortem reports and example after example of Bamber's behaviour. Now we know that Ralph (at least) knew who had burgled the caravan park, we have to wonder what the repercussions were - perhaps Ralph and June had discussed disinheritance?
-
I agree. Holly's right, Sheila seemed to lack the emotional strength and ambition to become a successful model, but we can't possibly imagine how she was affected, or unaffected by adoption, her upbringing, her relationship with Colin etc. What we do have is photographic evidence, post mortem reports and example after example of Bamber's behaviour. Now we know that Ralph (at least) knew who had burgled the caravan park, we have to wonder what the repercussions were - perhaps Ralph and June had discussed disinheritance?
Remember too that Jeremy sought out his parents wills prior to the murders such was his concern with what they were planning. Lovely guy!
-
I agree the OCP was a real low down thing to do but I am not sure one ? misdemeanour would cause Nevill and June to change their feelings towards Jeremy so much that they intended to change their wills in favour of others?
Shortly after the murders Julie found a letter in Jeremy's glove compartment which according to Jeremy was from June and in it she apologises over her recent treatment of him. Another letter from June was read out at trial by Basil Cock in it she thanks Sheila and Jeremy for all that they gave her...I have no idea of the dates of these letters but they seem at odds with Jeremy being disinherited.
I am also mindful of the fact that JM took part in OCP by acting as look-out. This was not the first time she was involved in crime (cheque book fraud) and yet she was deemed to be a credible prosecution witness >@@(*&) Were the jury made aware of her involvement in OCP and the separate incident of cheque book fraud?
-
I did think you may not have found the comparison flattering! It's just when you tracked down the psychologist featured in the recent Bamber documentary to berate and threaten him, then boasted about it on this forum I remember thinking that was classic Jackie Preece. She joined this forum to try to convince people of his innocence when she was booted out of the blue forum and had no other outlet to discuss the case. Two things about you which seemed familiar to me.
Please don't go thinking that I would be upset if evidence came to light which proved Bamber was innocent! In the extremely unlikely event this ever happens I would naturally welcome the fact that an innocent man is free, don't go thinking my mind is completely closed on the matter. It's just the wealth of evidence supporting his conviction seems pretty clear to me, I suppose I could try to decide one day that I wanted him to be innocent and go in to the minutiae of the case to try to find something, anything, which suggested he was definitely innocent. But I prefer to weigh up all of the evidence and come to a conclusion based on that.
Regarding the Bamber case, if we are to believe that he is innocent what is certain is that Julie Mugford stood up in court and perjured herself. For what motive? It's not enough to say she was a woman scorned. Most scorned women would have been happy to key his Astra. No one would risk a prison sentence just because they have been jilted. Money? Well apart from the one exclusive interview she's kept her head down ever since. If money was a motivation she could have sold her story many times over, I don't doubt for a second that there are lots of people who would offer a great deal of money for this even today which would make the £25000 she received at the time look like small change. And if she was going to lie why didn't she come out and say outrightly that Bamber admitted his guilt to her? If you read her evidence she never actually states expicitly that he confessed to her. If you're going to lie be creative. Also, how many people would have to have been involved in this conspiracy to convict him if he was innocent? I admire your tenacity and your attention to detail but I really think you are barking up the wrong tree.
I am now responding to your comments re JM. I think I need to learn how to split quotes. Bridget did try to help but I think I have a mental block!
Unfortunately a transcript of the trial doesn't exist so we have no real idea of her testimony and the cross examination by Geoffrey Rivlin QC. I am not sure she was motivated by the 25k from the NoW as much as having the charges dropped against her for the cheque book fraud in exchange for acting as a prosecution witness? Had she have been charged and ended up with a criminal record that would have been bye bye teaching career. Were the jury aware of this?
It strikes me that some rather strange goings on took place with JM and Stan Jones with SJ finding JM a safe house, meeting up with her on his days off, escorting her and Susan Battersby to the bank to sort out the cheque book incident. To my mind its not straightforward and places too many ????? over her impartiality and credibility as a prosecution witness.
I am also mindful of the fact that in the Stefan Kiszko case four of the prosecution witnesses perjured themselves just for a laugh 8(8-))
-
I agree. Holly's right, Sheila seemed to lack the emotional strength and ambition to become a successful model, but we can't possibly imagine how she was affected, or unaffected by adoption, her upbringing, her relationship with Colin etc. What we do have is photographic evidence, post mortem reports and example after example of Bamber's behaviour. Now we know that Ralph (at least) knew who had burgled the caravan park, we have to wonder what the repercussions were - perhaps Ralph and June had discussed disinheritance?
Yes I agree we have no real idea how affected or unaffected Sheila and Jeremy were by being adopted. There's much evidence Sheila was troubled eg her poor start in life, what appeared to be a difficult relationship with June and her reunion with her birth mother. Perhaps Jeremy was troubled but suppressed it. Much more is known now about the psychology of adoption hence the apology from Julia Gillard, former PM of Australia, re the poor practices carried out in the 50's - 70's. The expert witnesses at trial: Dr Ferguson, Dr Bradley and Prof Knight made no reference to adoption at all >@@(*&) Those that have offered up comment since eg Kerry Danes and David Holmes also made no reference. It would be good to see the likes of Dr Brodzinsky, Dr Grotevant, Dr Kirschner and Dr Verrier who specialise in adoption to provide opinion. For example:
http://www.adoptioninstitute.org/about/dbrodzinsky.php
-
Both Sheila and Jeremy undoubtedly suffered from the thought that their natural parents had effectively rejected them but that doesn't turn normal people into murderers. There was much more going on with Jeremy imo.
-
Both Sheila and Jeremy undoubtedly suffered from the thought that their natural parents had effectively rejected them but that doesn't turn normal people into murderers. There was much more going on with Jeremy imo.
According to Dr David Kirschner Ph.D, psychologist and psychoanalyst, adoption is often the key to the psychopathology of adopted killers, yet its importance is rarely noted:
http://www.adoptionunchartedwaters.com/understanding-adoptees-who-kill.php
That is why I think it would be a good idea for a suitably qualified person to review the case in light of the above.