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: Angelo222 on October 22, 2012, 09:40:48 AM
-
I know we have touched on this subject previously but I feel the time is right to explore the issue properly given the refusal on Friday by the High Court to refer the case back to the CCRC for a further review.
Is this crime so dastardly and heinous that Jeremy Bamber should never be eligible for parole or is 30 years sufficient punishment for slaying five innocent people including two 6-year-old boys?
Should LIFE mean life for people like Jeremy Bamber?
-
Until Bamber confesses in detail I say let him rot.
I would accept a deal allowing Bamber to be considered for parole after he has done 50 years (in 24 years time) subject to that full confession and he works everyday from now until then doing something worthwhile. He also agrees to shut up in the media so we don't hear hhim whinging for another 24 years and he isn't allowed to write a book or retract any confession upon release.
That's my opinion today because the sun's out and it's warm, lots of things are happening and I am well looking forward to the winter snows. Perhaps I wouldn't be so lenient if I was in a bad mood!
8(>((
-
Until Bamber confesses in detail I say let him rot.
I would accept a deal allowing Bamber to be considered for parole after he has done 50 years (in 24 years time) subject to that full confession and he works everyday from now until then doing something worthwhile. He also agrees to shut up in the media so we don't hear hhim whinging for another 24 years and he isn't allowed to write a book or retract any confession upon release.
That's my opinion today because the sun's out and it's warm, lots of things are happening and I am well looking forward to the winter snows. Perhaps I wouldn't be so lenient if I was in a bad mood!
8(>((
He should be granted the same opportunity to enjoy the rest of his life as he allowed Daniel and Nicholas.
-
He should be granted the same opportunity to enjoy the rest of his life as he allowed Daniel and Nicholas.
I can sympathise with that view and rightly so that he be deprived of his liberty as he so callously took that liberty from those two little souls but sometimes we have to look further for an answer. The telling bit for me is that even with so mauch evidence against him that he continues to plead innocence. I must therefore agree with Tim and say that as long as he denies his gult he must never be released.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
I thought it highly amusing when he wrote in his latest blog on the official site that he enjoys translating test to braille. Quite appropriate really as it amounts to the blind leading the blind where his actions and the blue forum are concerned. Looks like he will become quite an expert on it if the recent court ruling is anything to go by.
-
Jeremy Bamber should never be released.
Firstly, the victims never get a second chance at life. The two little boys in particular were robbed of their lives simply because Jeremy Bamber is greedy.
Secondly, over the last 27 years Jeremy Bamber has continued to haunt, taunt and threaten the Bamber relatives. The pain, suffering and grief he has caused should ensure that that he never tastes freedom again.
-
Jeremy Bamber should never be released.
Firstly, the victims never get a second chance at life. The two little boys in particular were robbed of their lives simply because Jeremy Bamber is greedy.
Secondly, over the last 27 years Jeremy Bamber has continued to haunt, taunt and threaten the Bamber relatives. The pain, suffering and grief he has caused should ensure that that he never tastes freedom again.
Sheila's real mother lives in Canada I believe. She must often wonder what could have been had she not given her daughter up for adoption. Does anyone know if June's sister Pam is still alive?
-
I agree with everything Mat says. Bamber and his team's behaviour throughout his incarceration has been disgusting, particularly the threat they made to track down and summons poor Julie Mugford - they're sick the lot of them.
Jeremy Bamber should never be released.
Firstly, the victims never get a second chance at life. The two little boys in particular were robbed of their lives simply because Jeremy Bamber is greedy.
Secondly, over the last 27 years Jeremy Bamber has continued to haunt, taunt and threaten the Bamber relatives. The pain, suffering and grief he has caused should ensure that that he never tastes freedom again.
-
Jeremy Bamber should never be released.
Firstly, the victims never get a second chance at life. The two little boys in particular were robbed of their lives simply because Jeremy Bamber is greedy.
Secondly, over the last 27 years Jeremy Bamber has continued to haunt, taunt and threaten the Bamber relatives. The pain, suffering and grief he has caused should ensure that that he never tastes freedom again.
Sheila's real mother lives in Canada I believe. She must often wonder what could have been had she not given her daughter up for adoption. Does anyone know if June's sister Pam is still alive?
Pam is still alive. Bamber has caused a great deal of unhappiness to the family over the years . He is still a relatively fit, vengeful and potentially dangerous man who IMO should be kept under lock and key for the foreseeable future.
-
Jeremy Bamber should never be released.
Firstly, the victims never get a second chance at life. The two little boys in particular were robbed of their lives simply because Jeremy Bamber is greedy.
Secondly, over the last 27 years Jeremy Bamber has continued to haunt, taunt and threaten the Bamber relatives. The pain, suffering and grief he has caused should ensure that that he never tastes freedom again.
Sheila's real mother lives in Canada I believe. She must often wonder what could have been had she not given her daughter up for adoption. Does anyone know if June's sister Pam is still alive?
Pamela will be above 88 years now, as June who was the younger sister was born in 1924.
-
My last post somehow got incorporated into the quotes. Pam is a lovely lady and one of the least materialistic people you could imagine . She lives in a lovely old farmhouse lacking most of the comforts most people expect these days. The wiring harks back to the 1950's. Anyone who thinks that Pam and her late husband Bobby benefited from the massacre at WHF have no knowledge of the real ordinary, decent hardworking people who have suffered at the hands of the revolting childkiller, Bamber . Let him rot in gaol as he so richly deserves.
-
My last post somehow got incorporated into the quotes. Pam is a lovely lady and one of the least materialistic people you could imagine . She lives in a lovely old farmhouse lacking most of the comforts most people expect these days. The wiring harks back to the 1950's. Anyone who thinks that Pam and her late husband Bobby benefited from the massacre at WHF have no knowledge of the real ordinary, decent hardworking people who have suffered at the hands of the revolting childkiller, Bamber . Let him rot in gaol as he so richly deserves.
If what you say about the electric wiring is accurate, I would imagine it's overdue for re-wiring especially if the sheathing is rubber as over time it does become hard and brittle, and not too safe. It reminds me of the old switch at the top of the stairs in the WHF photo.
-
If Jeremy lived here (Denmark), I think he would have been out of prison ten to fourteen years ago. The maximum sentence is sixteen years. UNLESS you are given a life sentence because of extreme dangerousness, mental sickness or straight out psychopathy.
In average those "lifers" do 17 years. After 12 years, the minister of justice reviews the case and decides whether the convict should be eligible for parole. If that is not granted, the case will be reviewed once a year.
So, as you can see, it is much, much more lenient here, though some (a handful) actually serve a full life sentence.
That fact of course influences my stance. I think Jeremy has done enough time - if he is not deemed too dangerous to let out. To be honest, I just don't know. I don't think he will pose a danger, I am not sure he committed those murders in the first place, but I don't know.
-
Thank god we are not Denmark then. I would not like to live in a society where someone who has massacred his whole family in cold blood, including his two little nephews, is walking around after 17 years. As for your bit about not knowing whether he did it, he was convicted by a jury, has had two appeals dismissed and is about to have a judicial review thrown out too. I dont think there is much doubt that he did it.
If Jeremy lived here (Denmark), I think he would have been out of prison ten to fourteen years ago. The maximum sentence is sixteen years. UNLESS you are given a life sentence because of extreme dangerousness, mental sickness or straight out psychopathy.
In average those "lifers" do 17 years. After 12 years, the minister of justice reviews the case and decides whether the convict should be eligible for parole. If that is not granted, the case will be reviewed once a year.
So, as you can see, it is much, much more lenient here, though some (a handful) actually serve a full life sentence.
That fact of course influences my stance. I think Jeremy has done enough time - if he is not deemed too dangerous to let out. To be honest, I just don't know. I don't think he will pose a danger, I am not sure he committed those murders in the first place, but I don't know.
-
I just wonder if in Denmark the judicial system is mamaged better in that they do punish and rehabilitate sucessfully? I can't say I've heard of many instances of 'mass' crime in Denmark or someone leaving jail and then committing another mass crime. We've had Peter Tobin, he's the only one I can name of the top.
Denmark has a population of just 5 million which is just over that of Scotland thus they have a system which is teeny compared to the rest of the UK. Any system which let's cold blooded killer out at all is failing society imo.
-
I just wonder if in Denmark the judicial system is mamaged better in that they do punish and rehabilitate sucessfully? I can't say I've heard of many instances of 'mass' crime in Denmark or someone leaving jail and then committing another mass crime. We've had Peter Tobin, he's the only one I can name of the top.
Denmark has a population of just 5 million which is just over that of Scotland thus they have a system which is teeny compared to the rest of the UK. Any system which let's cold blooded killer out at all is failing society imo.
There is only one who received a 15 year sentence, who I think should have had a life sentence from the get-go (in fact I was furious he did not). He brutally murdered his girlfriend - a previous girlfriend "disappeared" and has never been found, and one prior to that died of an overdose, which all and one who knew him and her thought he administered to her. He is also under strong suspicion for a murder of an 18 year old girl, Stine Geisler, but there is no hard evidence. The only evidence against him was for the brutal murder of his last girlfriend.
HOWEVER, his sentence has since been converted to a life sentence, and I feel GOOD about that. So in my view the system works here - mostly. If he ever gets out, he will be a very old man at the time.
Another case I have to mention is about a woman, where I think the system was too lenient. She was a DOCTOR, and a pediatrician no less. She had an affair with a fellow doctor, a married man and father of two little boys. He ended the relationship. She befriended the wife, went to visit when she knew her ex-lover was not at home, then killed the wife with a morphium syringe, set the house on fire with the mother dead and the two boys asleep. She blocked all doors to the house, but the oldest boy made it out in spite of that and was found strongly burnt on the lawn. He lived for a month after that, poor little fella.
!
She got a life sentence, BUT now, after serving 15 years of her sentence, she was put in an open prison as a preparation to be set free - and now she IS free.
A nasty little detail about that case: while in prison she met another murderer. Over several months he had tortured his three-year-old little stepson and finally beaten him to death.
The pediatrician and the child torturer are now married and live not too far from where I live. It is NASTY - none of the two should be out! But heck, they can "enjoy" each other then, no?
-
If you were 100% sure that Bamber was guilty ( as most of us are) would you consider his case to be on a par with the exceptions that you have highlighted here ie would you feel that a life sentance was fair?
I just wonder if in Denmark the judicial system is mamaged better in that they do punish and rehabilitate sucessfully? I can't say I've heard of many instances of 'mass' crime in Denmark or someone leaving jail and then committing another mass crime. We've had Peter Tobin, he's the only one I can name of the top.
Denmark has a population of just 5 million which is just over that of Scotland thus they have a system which is teeny compared to the rest of the UK. Any system which let's cold blooded killer out at all is failing society imo.
There is only one who received a 15 year sentence, who I think should have had a life sentence from the get-go (in fact I was furious he did not). He brutally murdered his girlfriend - a previous girlfriend "disappeared" and has never been found, and one prior to that died of an overdose, which all and one who knew him and her thought he administered to her. He is also under strong suspicion for a murder of an 18 year old girl, Stine Geisler, but there is no hard evidence. The only evidence against him was for the brutal murder of his last girlfriend.
HOWEVER, his sentence has since been converted to a life sentence, and I feel GOOD about that. So in my view the system works here - mostly. If he ever gets out, he will be a very old man at the time.
Another case I have to mention is about a woman, where I think the system was too lenient. She was a DOCTOR, and a pediatrician no less. She had an affair with a fellow doctor, a married man and father of two little boys. He ended the relationship. She befriended the wife, went to visit when she knew her ex-lover was not at home, then killed the wife with a morphium syringe, set the house on fire with the mother dead and the two boys asleep. She blocked all doors to the house, but the oldest boy made it out in spite of that and was found strongly burnt on the lawn. He lived for a month after that, poor little fella.
!
She got a life sentence, BUT now, after serving 15 years of her sentence, she was put in an open prison as a preparation to be set free - and now she IS free.
A nasty little detail about that case: while in prison she met another murderer. Over several months he had tortured his three-year-old little stepson and finally beaten him to death.
The pediatrician and the child torturer are now married and live not too far from where I live. It is NASTY - none of the two should be out! But heck, they can "enjoy" each other then, no?
-
Thank god we are not Denmark then. I would not like to live in a society where someone who has massacred his whole family in cold blood, including his two little nephews, is walking around after 17 years. As for your bit about not knowing whether he did it, he was convicted by a jury, has had two appeals dismissed and is about to have a judicial review thrown out too. I dont think there is much doubt that he did it.
If Jeremy lived here (Denmark), I think he would have been out of prison ten to fourteen years ago. The maximum sentence is sixteen years. UNLESS you are given a life sentence because of extreme dangerousness, mental sickness or straight out psychopathy.
In average those "lifers" do 17 years. After 12 years, the minister of justice reviews the case and decides whether the convict should be eligible for parole. If that is not granted, the case will be reviewed once a year.
So, as you can see, it is much, much more lenient here, though some (a handful) actually serve a full life sentence.
That fact of course influences my stance. I think Jeremy has done enough time - if he is not deemed too dangerous to let out. To be honest, I just don't know. I don't think he will pose a danger, I am not sure he committed those murders in the first place, but I don't know.
Despite the deficiencies of our judicial system, Bamber's case has been thoroughly reviewed as Frank points out on a number of occasions and his conviction still stands. His only real defence ploy that the murders were committed by Sheila Caffell does not stand up to any serious, logical analysis . He has never admitted his guilt . He has demonstrated his vindictiveness towards relatives and other witnesses over the years through ill conceived civil action, letters and never allowing them the comfort of closure . If you read his latest blog you will see that he spends time keeping fit, lifting weights etc. He is a mendacious individual who has conveniently re engineered his perception of his late family and tries tp present a cosy spun image of himself, somewhat at odds with the Jeremy Bamber who stole from his own family, was apparently involved in other crimes of dishonesty and drug dealing etc. This is a strong, fit man in his early fifties . Some of his relatives are scared of the outcome if he is ever released and IMO justifiably until he is so weakened by the march of time or they themseves have passed on for this risk to have been mitigated. I think that it would be crazy to release him .
-
If you were 100% sure that Bamber was guilty ( as most of us are) would you consider his case to be on a par with the exceptions that you have highlighted here ie would you feel that a life sentance was fair? I just wonder if in Denmark the judicial system is mamaged better in that they do punish and rehabilitate sucessfully? I can't say I've heard of many instances of 'mass' crime in Denmark or someone leaving jail and then committing another mass crime. We've had Peter Tobin, he's the only one I can name of the top.
Denmark has a population of just 5 million which is just over that of Scotland thus they have a system which is teeny compared to the rest of the UK. Any system which let's cold blooded killer out at all is failing society imo.
There is only one who received a 15 year sentence, who I think should have had a life sentence from the get-go (in fact I was furious he did not). He brutally murdered his girlfriend - a previous girlfriend "disappeared" and has never been found, and one prior to that died of an overdose, which all and one who knew him and her thought he administered to her. He is also under strong suspicion for a murder of an 18 year old girl, Stine Geisler, but there is no hard evidence. The only evidence against him was for the brutal murder of his last girlfriend.
HOWEVER, his sentence has since been converted to a life sentence, and I feel GOOD about that. So in my view the system works here - mostly. If he ever gets out, he will be a very old man at the time.
Another case I have to mention is about a woman, where I think the system was too lenient. She was a DOCTOR, and a pediatrician no less. She had an affair with a fellow doctor, a married man and father of two little boys. He ended the relationship. She befriended the wife, went to visit when she knew her ex-lover was not at home, then killed the wife with a morphium syringe, set the house on fire with the mother dead and the two boys asleep. She blocked all doors to the house, but the oldest boy made it out in spite of that and was found strongly burnt on the lawn. He lived for a month after that, poor little fella.
!
She got a life sentence, BUT now, after serving 15 years of her sentence, she was put in an open prison as a preparation to be set free - and now she IS free.
A nasty little detail about that case: while in prison she met another murderer. Over several months he had tortured his three-year-old little stepson and finally beaten him to death.
The pediatrician and the child torturer are now married and live not too far from where I live. It is NASTY - none of the two should be out! But heck, they can "enjoy" each other then, no?
It is hard for me to answer, since I am not sure. Too many doubts.
-
It's been said before that if Bamber had just 'fessed up years ago he would probably be free by now. I'm not so sure. Maybe if he had only killed Sheila and his parents, but it's the involvement in the premeditated killing of two young boys that makes me doubt he ever had a chance of being released. Would he still be a danger to society were he to be released? I honestly don't think so, remember he has a very high public profile, something Peter Tobin didn't when he was released. His motive for murder was financial so it is unlikely he would have the motive to kill again. He simply would not have the opportunity as too many people would be watching him anyway.
A thought occurred to me recently. What if Bamber's famous polygraph test was correct? Let's say for example he had hired a hitman so he didn't actually do the murders himself, and he didn't pay the hitman in full as he never got the chance before he was arrested? By his warped logic he would have been telling the truth and have passed the test. However, I don't think the lone hitman story is likely. It was important to have no signs of forced entry or exit from the premises so I don't think Bamber could have relied on the hitman to successfully gain entry by the toilet window not having done this before, nor would the hitman have had the opportunity to test it out on a busy working farm.
And if the Bamber forum want to say Julie Mugford is a proven liar because she said Matthew McDonald was the hitman and his alibi proved that he was not, how about you take on board the possibility that she said McDonald because this was the story given by Jeremy? Saying something that was not true because you have been told this by someone else doesn't make you a liar. The only proven lie from Mugford is that she claims to have gone to the bank to confess to cheque fraud unprompted by police, yet the bank manager confirms Stan Jones was there when she visited. Bamber on the other hand has many more grounds to be labelled a proven liar.
-
Another case I have to mention is about a woman, where I think the system was too lenient. She was a DOCTOR, and a paediatrician no less. She had an affair with a fellow doctor, a married man and father of two little boys. He ended the relationship. She befriended the wife, went to visit when she knew her ex-lover was not at home, then killed the wife with a morphia syringe, set the house on fire with the mother dead and the two boys asleep. She blocked all doors to the house, but the oldest boy made it out in spite of that and was found strongly burnt on the lawn. He lived for a month after that, poor little fella.
!
She got a life sentence, BUT now, after serving 15 years of her sentence, she was put in an open prison as a preparation to be set free - and now she IS free.
A nasty little detail about that case: while in prison she met another murderer. Over several months he had tortured his three-year-old little stepson and finally beaten him to death.
The paediatrician and the child torturer are now married and live not too far from where I live. It is NASTY - none of the two should be out! But heck, they can "enjoy" each other then, no?
That is disgusting abs, no wonder you are angry. That works out at 5 years per life lost which is appalling. It wasn't as if she accidentally set fire to the house and accidentally barricaded the exits. People like that should be incarcerated until they die in prison or be given the option of hanging or a lethal injection. Was the story of their release published in the newspapers for all to see including their whereabouts?
-
I strongly believe that his full life term should revert back to the original 30 year min. tarrif. When he then gets to 30 years he would have the opertunity of parole where as now he has no chance. Therefore if he's on a 30 year tariff he has something to lose by not confessing,whereas at the moment he has nothing to lose,if you get my drift?
-
I strongly believe that his full life term should revert back to the original 30 year min. tarrif. When he then gets to 30 years he would have the opertunity of parole where as now he has no chance. Therefore if he's on a 30 year tariff he has something to lose by not confessing,whereas at the moment he has nothing to lose,if you get my drift?
Certainly a good suggestion Tony but as you say it would depend on him admitting his guilt at some stage and giving up those who assisted him. By assisted I mean either had prior knowledge or provided material assistance.
-
Another case I have to mention is about a woman, where I think the system was too lenient. She was a DOCTOR, and a paediatrician no less. She had an affair with a fellow doctor, a married man and father of two little boys. He ended the relationship. She befriended the wife, went to visit when she knew her ex-lover was not at home, then killed the wife with a morphia syringe, set the house on fire with the mother dead and the two boys asleep. She blocked all doors to the house, but the oldest boy made it out in spite of that and was found strongly burnt on the lawn. He lived for a month after that, poor little fella.
!
She got a life sentence, BUT now, after serving 15 years of her sentence, she was put in an open prison as a preparation to be set free - and now she IS free.
A nasty little detail about that case: while in prison she met another murderer. Over several months he had tortured his three-year-old little stepson and finally beaten him to death.
The paediatrician and the child torturer are now married and live not too far from where I live. It is NASTY - none of the two should be out! But heck, they can "enjoy" each other then, no?
That is disgusting abs, no wonder you are angry. That works out at 5 years per life lost which is appalling. It wasn't as if she accidentally set fire to the house and accidentally barricaded the exits. People like that should be incarcerated until they die in prison or be given the option of hanging or a lethal injection. Was the story of their release published in the newspapers for all to see including their whereabouts?
It has been covered a little bit. She had the ambition to become a sexton and work in a church (again, !), I don´t know whether she succeeded. I looked a little bit more into where they are since I wrote the post about her. They moved to a different part of Denmark - guess too many people recognized especially her and it got unpleasant to live there. So at least they are not quasi neighbours of mine anymore.
The weird thing is that she had the same apartment from before she went to prison - she must have some money to have been able to keep that for so many years.
-
The hitman theory is a distinct possibility and could explain why Bamber passed the lie detector as he would have believed in his own warped way that he was innocent. However, as he was such a good shot Im sure he wouldnt have gone for a hitman as the risk of him being grassed up would have been too high and he would have been confident that he could do a better job himself ( without having to pay the hitman). Its not as if he had any qualms about murdering his family in cold blood . As for the Julie Mugford hitman evidence. you're obviously right - she only reported what Bamber had told her..
tha he is It's been said before that if Bamber had just 'fessed up years ago he would probably be free by now. I'm not so sure. Maybe if he had only killed Sheila and his parents, but it's the involvement in the premeditated killing of two young boys that makes me doubt he ever had a chance of being released. Would he still be a danger to society were he to be released? I honestly don't think so, remember he has a very high public profile, something Peter Tobin didn't when he was released. His motive for murder was financial so it is unlikely he would have the motive to kill again. He simply would not have the opportunity as too many people would be watching him anyway.
A thought occurred to me recently. What if Bamber's famous polygraph test was correct? Let's say for example he had hired a hitman so he didn't actually do the murders himself, and he didn't pay the hitman in full as he never got the chance before he was arrested? By his warped logic he would have been telling the truth and have passed the test. However, I don't think the lone hitman story is likely. It was important to have no signs of forced entry or exit from the premises so I don't think Bamber could have relied on the hitman to successfully gain entry by the toilet window not having done this before, nor would the hitman have had the opportunity to test it out on a busy working farm.
And if the Bamber forum want to say Julie Mugford is a proven liar because she said Matthew McDonald was the hitman and his alibi proved that he was not, how about you take on board the possibility that she said McDonald because this was the story given by Jeremy? Saying something that was not true because you have been told this by someone else doesn't make you a liar. The only proven lie from Mugford is that she claims to have gone to the bank to confess to cheque fraud unprompted by police, yet the bank manager confirms Stan Jones was there when she visited. Bamber on the other hand has many more grounds to be labelled a proven liar.
-
Also I wouldnt worry too much about what they say on the other forum. Honestly I have never come across such purile garbage as that site churns out. They get drip fed nonsense by Tesko and then develop his theories for weeks on end after. How sad can you be. The best example is this idea that Tesko is holding back information/documents which will blow the case apart. Posters on that site generally believe this and write excitedly about how Bamber cannot fail to be released once Mike divulges the stuff that's in his garage. Obviously they totally fail to explain why he wouldnt have released it to the CCRC during the years that it was considering the case. Its like some Marple murder mystery - next they will be suggesting the policeman did it!
It's been said before that if Bamber had just 'fessed up years ago he would probably be free by now. I'm not so sure. Maybe if he had only killed Sheila and his parents, but it's the involvement in the premeditated killing of two young boys that makes me doubt he ever had a chance of being released. Would he still be a danger to society were he to be released? I honestly don't think so, remember he has a very high public profile, something Peter Tobin didn't when he was released. His motive for murder was financial so it is unlikely he would have the motive to kill again. He simply would not have the opportunity as too many people would be watching him anyway.
A thought occurred to me recently. What if Bamber's famous polygraph test was correct? Let's say for example he had hired a hitman so he didn't actually do the murders himself, and he didn't pay the hitman in full as he never got the chance before he was arrested? By his warped logic he would have been telling the truth and have passed the test. However, I don't think the lone hitman story is likely. It was important to have no signs of forced entry or exit from the premises so I don't think Bamber could have relied on the hitman to successfully gain entry by the toilet window not having done this before, nor would the hitman have had the opportunity to test it out on a busy working farm.
And if the Bamber forum want to say Julie Mugford is a proven liar because she said Matthew McDonald was the hitman and his alibi proved that he was not, how about you take on board the possibility that she said McDonald because this was the story given by Jeremy? Saying something that was not true because you have been told this by someone else doesn't make you a liar. The only proven lie from Mugford is that she claims to have gone to the bank to confess to cheque fraud unprompted by police, yet the bank manager confirms Stan Jones was there when she visited. Bamber on the other hand has many more grounds to be labelled a proven liar.
-
Not sure I get you there. He wouldnt have to involve anyone else if he admitted his guilt. As it is, he may not have had very much assistance, if any.
I strongly believe that his full life term should revert back to the original 30 year min. tarrif. When he then gets to 30 years he would have the opertunity of parole where as now he has no chance. Therefore if he's on a 30 year tariff he has something to lose by not confessing,whereas at the moment he has nothing to lose,if you get my drift?
Certainly a good suggestion Tony but as you say it would depend on him admitting his guilt at some stage and giving up those who assisted him. By assisted I mean either had prior knowledge or provided material assistance.
-
I think as John seems to do, JB had assistance, although i'd also agree he could of easily of done it on his own.
me,i cant see him getting any further appeal-wise. difficult to put yourself in his shoes,but if it were me,i'd put all my efforts into a reistatement of the original min. term, fess up and perhaps get some sun on my back when i'm in my 70's. Otherwise he's going out in a box...
-
I think as John seems to do, JB had assistance, although i'd also agree he could of easily of done it on his own.
me,i cant see him getting any further appeal-wise. difficult to put yourself in his shoes,but if it were me,i'd put all my efforts into a reinstatement of the original min. term, fess up and perhaps get some sun on my back when i'm in my 70's. Otherwise he's going out in a box...
Evening Tony.
The more I have looked at the people who were involved with Jeremy and there are several, the more I believe at least some of them knew what he was up to. I am not talking about Julie here, these are male individuals. One of them even boasted to his friends that he had taken part and was able to describe some of the scene.
That aside, I am quite confident the at least one individual provided material assistance to Jeremy in the murder of his family.
-
I think as John seems to do, JB had assistance, although i'd also agree he could of easily of done it on his own.
me,i cant see him getting any further appeal-wise. difficult to put yourself in his shoes,but if it were me,i'd put all my efforts into a reinstatement of the original min. term, fess up and perhaps get some sun on my back when i'm in my 70's. Otherwise he's going out in a box...
Evening Tony.
The more I have looked at the people who were involved with Jeremy and there are several, the more I believe at least some of them knew what he was up to. I am not talking about Julie here, these are male individuals. One of them even boasted to his friends that he had taken part and was able to describe some of the scene.
That aside, I am quite confident the at least one individual provided material assistance to Jeremy in the murder of his family.
I don´t think you will answer, but I´ll ask anyway. Who - and how did you learn about this?
P.S. I have said this before, but the only way I personally can see Jeremy having pulled those murders off would have been with an accomplice. For that reason, I am of course very curious about this.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
I think as John seems to do, JB had assistance, although i'd also agree he could of easily of done it on his own.
me,i cant see him getting any further appeal-wise. difficult to put yourself in his shoes,but if it were me,i'd put all my efforts into a reinstatement of the original min. term, fess up and perhaps get some sun on my back when i'm in my 70's. Otherwise he's going out in a box...
Evening Tony.
The more I have looked at the people who were involved with Jeremy and there are several, the more I believe at least some of them knew what he was up to. I am not talking about Julie here, these are male individuals. One of them even boasted to his friends that he had taken part and was able to describe some of the scene.
That aside, I am quite confident the at least one individual provided material assistance to Jeremy in the murder of his family.
I don´t think you will answer, but I´ll ask anyway. Who - and how did you learn about this?
P.S. I have said this before, but the only way I personally can see Jeremy having pulled those murders off would have been with an accomplice. For that reason, I am of course very curious about this.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
He could very well have managed it alone and most probably did but there is evidence of others involvement in the crime. My own personal belief is that he did have help but not necessarily in the house that morning.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
He could very well have managed it alone and most probably did but there is evidence of others involvement in the crime. My own personal belief is that he did have help but not necessarily in the house that morning.
What do you mean by material assistance John...., transport from and to Bourtree Cottage in the middle of the night... lessons in how to kill efficiently in as little time as possible?
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
He could very well have managed it alone and most probably did but there is evidence of others involvement in the crime. My own personal belief is that he did have help but not necessarily in the house that morning.
What do you mean by material assistance John...., transport from and to Bourtree Cottage in the middle of the night... lessons in how to kill efficiently in as little time as possible?
Funny you should mention that? I have always found the fact that a certain two fellows had strong alibis for the night prior to the murders. One even was in another country. Very contrived and very convenient don't you think?
-
Has anyone looked into 'Gav' ... Grahme's SBS mate who won the DSO? He showed himself willing to attack people because his mate Grahme had been treated like a pillock on a forum! That shows a propensity for easy violence.and the SBS are highly trained Special Forces therefore expert killers. Also Grahame lives in the area of WHF so I imagine Gav probably lived close by.
This obviously isn't insulting anyone on the Blue forum as neither Gav or Grahame are not members there anymore!
?>)()<
-
On the blue forum one member posted that they would be "gutted" if there turned out to be concrete proof of Bamber's guilt coming to light. "Gutted"? "Gutted" that he had spent 27 years in prison for a good reason? I think I speak for all of us that if proper unambiguous evidence of his innocence was discovered none of us here who currently think he is guilty would be "gutted" that we were wrong. What I would feel would be more important would be that an innocent man should go free from jail and that justice would have been served. That would be more important to me than to be smug about the fact I had been right all along. That's not to say I feel that it is likely that concrete proof of his evidence will emerge to overturn his conviction, though I must admit to a very tiny doubt over his guilt (we can none of us be 100% sure of this if we weren't actually there to witness what happened). Though I think John put it best when he said if Bamber is not guilty he is either the stupidest or unluckiest man who ever lived.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
For me it is mainly about overpowering three adults; the boys were, as it seems, "easy" enough, and SORRY to use that phrase, but they were asleep (thank God), and posed no "danger" to the killer. Still, it would all have taken some time - and made some noise.
I am thinking about the different overall feel and look about Sheila in death - her parents were in a bad shape, bruised and bloody. I don´t understand the peacefulness about Sheila, I don´t understand that she was so very clean and unbruised (except for a gauged wound on her stomach), I don´t get where Sheila was while her sons and parents were being killed.
I feel it would have been difficult for one man to control Sheila while killing the rest of the family. I don´t see any traces of her having cried - that is strange (in any case).
And before anyone points it out, it is odd too, if you think that Sheila was the killer that she was unbruised and so clean.
Something is missing. It would have been managable for two persons, but one? I cannot see it.
-
Those are some very good points, Abs. Sheila doesn't look at all like someone who has beaten a strong 6 ft tall man senseless and gone on a gun rampage, which is part of the reason why she couldn't have done it and why Jeremy must have been somehow involved. However, assuming Sheila was the last to die how was she kept calm while the rest were being murdered (particularly her children?). She wasn't drugged which would have been the obvious method as the postmortem revealed no traces of anything that could have incapacitated her.
-
Those are some very good points, Abs. Sheila doesn't look at all like someone who has beaten a strong 6 ft tall man senseless and gone on a gun rampage, which is part of the reason why she couldn't have done it and why Jeremy must have been somehow involved. However, assuming Sheila was the last to die how was she kept calm while the rest were being murdered (particularly her children?). She wasn't drugged which would have been the obvious method as the postmortem revealed no traces of anything that could have incapacitated her.
She could have been temporarily incapacitated with something like chloroform which in small quantities is undetectable. Someone else suggested that she had been locked in her bedroom or even the box room next door to the master bedroom but if that had happened I think she would have been in a bit of a state as she would have heard the shots.
-
I did wonder whether or not chloroform was detectable in the bloodstream. I would have guessed that it wasn't though I'm not a scientist. Chloroform or something similar would certainly have incapacitated her and stopped her getting in the way. Where would Jeremy have got it from though?
-
98 days until 10,000 days in the Bamber slammer! 10,000 days of justice! 8((()*/
-
Some excellent points as to whether Jeremy Bamber should ever be released and I agree with the suggestion that if he comes clean and admits to his crime and gives up those who helped him then the possibility of parole should be considered at some stage. If he doesn't I cannot see a time when he would ever be considered for release.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
For me it is mainly about overpowering three adults; the boys were, as it seems, "easy" enough, and SORRY to use that phrase, but they were asleep (thank God), and posed no "danger" to the killer. Still, it would all have taken some time - and made some noise.
I am thinking about the different overall feel and look about Sheila in death - her parents were in a bad shape, bruised and bloody. I don´t understand the peacefulness about Sheila, I don´t understand that she was so very clean and unbruised (except for a gauged wound on her stomach), I don´t get where Sheila was while her sons and parents were being killed.
I feel it would have been difficult for one man to control Sheila while killing the rest of the family. I don´t see any traces of her having cried - that is strange (in any case).
And before anyone points it out, it is odd too, if you think that Sheila was the killer that she was unbruised and so clean.
Something is missing. It would have been managable for two persons, but one? I cannot see it.
abs..... this incident took place in the middle of the night when the occupants were most likely asleep or dozing, and least of all expecting anybody entering into their bedroom to kill them.
As a victim of crime myself not long ago, I know what it's like to be suddenly awoken at 2 o'clock in the morning from a drowsy state.... you don't realise what is happening until its too late!!
The killing has all the hallmarks of an assassination... a pre-planned unexpected assault taking place within minutes.
I agree with you that the sleeping twins could have been the first in line, the assailant then reloading immediately in their bedroom (possibly with a pre-loaded magazine), before bursting into the parents' bedroom in a surprise attack, June being shot first whilst lying in bed, Nevill then getting up to stop the onslaught but by being shot & severely injured in the process, attempted to get out of the way by rushing downstairs to raise the alarm, or to find a weapon to retaliate with, or simply to survive..., closely followed by the killer.
If Sheila was in a Haloperidol-induced sedated state then it's possible that she was unaware of what was happening at all. In such a compliant condition, it would have been easier for the killer to coax or manipulate her.
What is more difficult to figure out is how & why she ended up at her parents' bedside.
Perhaps if she was awake & alert, she may have been the last to become aware of the commotion outside her bedroom on the stairs or in the kitchen, got up, saw her mother lying in the doorway, then went to check on the twins, heard her brother return upstairs and tried to hide in the box-room between the twins' and parents' bedrooms, or after passing through that room, attempted to conceal herself by crouching/kneeling at Nevill's side of the bed, where she was then discovered and shot. It's also possible that she fainted when she was confronted there, and thus put up no resistance at all. Everything was happening so fast and unexpectedly that she was in shock and didn't get the chance to cry!
As such there doesn't have to be an accomplice..., unless he played a minor role such as a co-driver from Goldhanger/Bourtree cottage to WHF and back, as disposer of evidence, eg. clothes, gloves, etc. or less likely, as tutor in combat/killing techniques.
If you are right in your belief that there was another active participant... then I'm afraid Jeremy Bamber has only himself to blame for spending nearly three decades behind bars without coming clean and admitting to it, and letting his partner-in-crime get away with it.
But in my opinion it's more acceptable in his own mind (and safer in terms of prisoner retaliation) for him to blame Sheila, when he alone was the culprit.
For me a paragraph in Blood Relations stands out, in which about a week before the trial the defence team were discussing the case along with a psychiatrist, who expressed his opinion that Jeremy Bamber displayed classic psychopathic traits, in that the awfulness of what he had done had been pushed to the back of his mind, dropped off and forgotten as if it didn't exist at all.
**********************************************
[I don't think Sheila had a gauged (gouged?) wound on her stomach, did she?]
-
Great post, Myster.
-
Why an accomplice? He knew the house; he knew the guns; he was evil enough - why couldnt he have managed it alone? I still think that having an accomplice would have made it much riskier proposition for him .
For me it is mainly about overpowering three adults; the boys were, as it seems, "easy" enough, and SORRY to use that phrase, but they were asleep (thank God), and posed no "danger" to the killer. Still, it would all have taken some time - and made some noise.
I am thinking about the different overall feel and look about Sheila in death - her parents were in a bad shape, bruised and bloody. I don´t understand the peacefulness about Sheila, I don´t understand that she was so very clean and unbruised (except for a gauged wound on her stomach), I don´t get where Sheila was while her sons and parents were being killed.
I feel it would have been difficult for one man to control Sheila while killing the rest of the family. I don´t see any traces of her having cried - that is strange (in any case).
And before anyone points it out, it is odd too, if you think that Sheila was the killer that she was unbruised and so clean.
Something is missing. It would have been managable for two persons, but one? I cannot see it.
abs..... this incident took place in the middle of the night when the occupants were most likely asleep or dozing, and least of all expecting anybody entering into their bedroom to kill them.
As a victim of crime myself not long ago, I know what it's like to be suddenly awoken at 2 o'clock in the morning from a drowsy state.... you don't realise what is happening until its too late!!
The killing has all the hallmarks of an assassination... a pre-planned unexpected assault taking place within minutes.
I agree with you that the sleeping twins could have been the first in line, the assailant then reloading immediately in their bedroom (possibly with a pre-loaded magazine), before bursting into the parents' bedroom in a surprise attack, June being shot first whilst lying in bed, Nevill then getting up to stop the onslaught but by being shot & severely injured in the process, attempted to get out of the way by rushing downstairs to raise the alarm, or to find a weapon to retaliate with, or simply to survive..., closely followed by the killer.
If Sheila was in a Haloperidol-induced sedated state then it's possible that she was unaware of what was happening at all. In such a compliant condition, it would have been easier for the killer to coax or manipulate her.
What is more difficult to figure out is how & why she ended up at her parents' bedside.
Perhaps if she was awake & alert, she may have been the last to become aware of the commotion outside her bedroom on the stairs or in the kitchen, got up, saw her mother lying in the doorway, then went to check on the twins, heard her brother return upstairs and tried to hide in the box-room between the twins' and parents' bedrooms, or after passing through that room, attempted to conceal herself by crouching/kneeling at Nevill's side of the bed, where she was then discovered and shot. It's also possible that she fainted when she was confronted there, and thus put up no resistance at all. Everything was happening so fast and unexpectedly that she was in shock and didn't get the chance to cry!
As such there doesn't have to be an accomplice..., unless he played a minor role such as a co-driver from Goldhanger/Bourtree cottage to WHF and back, as disposer of evidence, eg. clothes, gloves, etc. or less likely, as tutor in combat/killing techniques.
If you are right in your belief that there was another active participant... then I'm afraid Jeremy Bamber has only himself to blame for spending nearly three decades behind bars without coming clean and admitting to it, and letting his partner-in-crime get away with it.
But in my opinion it's more acceptable in his own mind (and safer in terms of prisoner retaliation) for him to blame Sheila, when he alone was the culprit.
For me a paragraph in Blood Relations stands out, in which about a week before the trial the defence team were discussing the case along with a psychiatrist, who expressed his opinion that Jeremy Bamber displayed classic psychopathic traits, in that the awfulness of what he had done had been pushed to the back of his mind, dropped off and forgotten as if it didn't exist at all.
**********************************************
[I don't think Sheila had a gauged (gouged?) wound on her stomach, did she?]
Sheila had a slight graze wound on her stomach, covered by a small dressing.
-
Sheila had a slight graze wound on her stomach, covered by a small dressing.
I see Shona... I took it that abs thought it occurred during the confrontation with the killer.
-
Great post, Myster.
Cheers Mat! 8((()*/
-
Great post, Myster.
Cheers Mat! 8((()*/
Yes, I second that...a brill post. I will respond to it later. 8@??)(
-
The question is should Jeremy Bamber ever be released?
I am not too sure about this question since it depends on several factors. I would agree that the question of his confessing would be a significant factor in him eventually getting parole at some time. As it stands I fail to see how the parole board could ever even begin to consider such an application.
Jeremy Bamber knows exactly what he has or has not done. He knows that the cards and indeed the odds are stacked against him. if he were a smart fellow he would concede defeat honourably and show remorse for what he has done. Failure to do so will see him doomed to die in prison and be buried anonymously in some porpers grave somewhere.
-
The question is should Jeremy Bamber ever be released?
I am not too sure about this question since it depends on several factors. I would agree that the question of his confessing would be a significant factor in him eventually getting parole at some time. As it stands I fail to see how the parole board could ever even begin to consider such an application.
Jeremy Bamber knows exactly what he has or has not done. He knows that the cards and indeed the odds are stacked against him. if he were a smart fellow he would concede defeat honourably and show remorse for what he has done. Failure to do so will see him doomed to die in prison and be buried anonymously in some porpers grave somewhere.
This has become a game for Jeremy Bamber and most people who follow the case can see it. Have you all noticed recently how the emphasis has again shifted to Sheila?? Yes, sister Sheila has yet again become Bambers scapegoat and may yet become his Nemesis and have the last laugh. Had Jeremy not implicated Sheila in the murders in the way he did there would not be available to us the mountain of evidence which points directly towards his good self. A mistake which has signed his fate.
-
If he'd committed one murder, yes, two at the same time, maybe, but five, premeditated. Surely you jest?
-
If he'd committed one murder, yes, two at the same time, maybe, but five, premeditated. Surely you jest?
Agreed. He should never get out, he won't - even if the ECHR case falls in his favour the British government will keep him behind bars for life, just using a different process than a 'whole life term'.
-
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3434772/Killer-Jeremy-Bambers-fury-at-judges.html
-
The question is should Jeremy Bamber ever be released?
I am not too sure about this question since it depends on several factors. I would agree that the question of his confessing would be a significant factor in him eventually getting parole at some time. As it stands I fail to see how the parole board could ever even begin to consider such an application.
Jeremy Bamber knows exactly what he has or has not done. He knows that the cards and indeed the odds are stacked against him. if he were a smart fellow he would concede defeat honourably and show remorse for what he has done. Failure to do so will see him doomed to die in prison and be buried anonymously in some porpers grave somewhere.
This has become a game for Jeremy Bamber and most people who follow the case can see it. Have you all noticed recently how the emphasis has again shifted to Sheila?? Yes, sister Sheila has yet again become Bambers scapegoat and may yet become his Nemesis and have the last laugh. Had Jeremy not implicated Sheila in the murders in the way he did there would not be available to us the mountain of evidence which points directly towards his good self. A mistake which has signed his fate.
Great post.
Remember not too long ago, there were rumblings from Bamber that he hadn't actually said "Sheila has the gun" But that "She has" or "He has" and his were written down correctly.
After years of it being "sheila has the gun!" An attempt was made to change it - why? Because forensically Sheila no way in hell had that gun so by making the either SHEILA OR JEREMY, Bamber sealed his fate with that fake phone call.
-
If he'd committed one murder, yes, two at the same time, maybe, but five, premeditated. Surely you jest?
not to mention the rather cowardly manner in which he murdered the 2 young boys
-
The question is should Jeremy Bamber ever be released?
I am not too sure about this question since it depends on several factors. I would agree that the question of his confessing would be a significant factor in him eventually getting parole at some time. As it stands I fail to see how the parole board could ever even begin to consider such an application.
Jeremy Bamber knows exactly what he has or has not done. He knows that the cards and indeed the odds are stacked against him. if he were a smart fellow he would concede defeat honourably and show remorse for what he has done. Failure to do so will see him doomed to die in prison and be buried anonymously in some porpers grave somewhere.
This has become a game for Jeremy Bamber and most people who follow the case can see it. Have you all noticed recently how the emphasis has again shifted to Sheila?? Yes, sister Sheila has yet again become Bambers scapegoat and may yet become his Nemesis and have the last laugh. Had Jeremy not implicated Sheila in the murders in the way he did there would not be available to us the mountain of evidence which points directly towards his good self. A mistake which has signed his fate.
Great post.
Remember not too long ago, there were rumblings from Bamber that he hadn't actually said "Sheila has the gun" But that "She has" or "He has" and his were written down correctly.
After years of it being "sheila has the gun!" An attempt was made to change it - why? Because forensically Sheila no way in hell had that gun so by making the either SHEILA OR JEREMY, Bamber sealed his fate with that fake phone call.
Jeremy was adamant at the time it was Sheila. He repeats this over an over to the police. It is only to Julie he talks of it being a "hitman." If we read JBs statement of 11th September 1985 it is only on on Page 27 after being told his sister was murdered that JB starts to move from "Sheila" to "She has." Even then after being given every opportunity to get his story right by Stan Jones he still drops back to "Sheila."
This has come up on "Blue" several times. In general they have moved from Sheila to a third party. The third party being variously "The Police" to "Special Branch" to various other members of the extended family or drug dealers in the area. In desperation they see this as a more neutral and acceptable position once it is accepted it could not possibly be Sheila. Only criminals argue the police did it, conspiracy nutters argue "Special Branch" or "MI5".
In short JB was given every opportunity to identify a third party but he adamantly sticks to "Sheila" in his interviews and the Trial. The issue of "She has" or "He has" is a later invention to broaden the appeal of the conspiracy story.
-
Here are my thoughts on the question about Bamber ever being released: No, not ever. I Am of the belief that he would still present a danger. Anyone who could shoot two sleeping children in the head, then massacre his parents and sister and try to use Sheila's illness to scapegoat her, will never be rehabilitated. To also have the audacity to keep on protesting his innocence is the hallmark of a manipulative phsycopath in my opinion. I am very glad that he has no chance of ever being released, as I believe that he may go after the Boutflours or Julie Mugford.
-
Here are my thoughts on the question about Bamber ever being released: No, not ever. I Am of the belief that he would still present a danger. Anyone who could shoot two sleeping children in the head, then massacre his parents and sister and try to use Sheila's illness to scapegoat her, will never be rehabilitated. To also have the audacity to keep on protesting his innocence is the hallmark of a manipulative phsycopath in my opinion. I am very glad that he has no chance of ever being released, as I believe that he may go after the Boutflours or Julie Mugford.
Sensible post.
I agree completely that anyone protesting his innocence, and being able to convince others of it to such an extent they work for him - is hallmark of being extremely manipulative.
-
Here are my thoughts on the question about Bamber ever being released: No, not ever. I Am of the belief that he would still present a danger. Anyone who could shoot two sleeping children in the head, then massacre his parents and sister and try to use Sheila's illness to scapegoat her, will never be rehabilitated. To also have the audacity to keep on protesting his innocence is the hallmark of a manipulative phsycopath in my opinion. I am very glad that he has no chance of ever being released, as I believe that he may go after the Boutflours or Julie Mugford.
Sensible post.
I agree completely that anyone protesting his innocence, and being able to convince others of it to such an extent they work for him - is hallmark of being extremely manipulative.
Yes actualmat... Bamber was found guilty and appeals have been rejected. I am in no doubt whatsoever of his guilt in the murders. I just can't get over the fact that Bamber tried to sell topless photographs of his recently murdered sister. To me, this is so telling. I agree with what you say about him being extremely manipulative. That he continues to protest his innocence in the face of such overwhleming evidence to the contrary makes him even more of a monster in my opinion. If he had done the decent thing and held his hand up and shown some remorse, then perhaps the UK Public may have a little less contempt for him.
-
My own personal opinion is this; Bamber should never be released. Nor should he ever be considered for another appeal hearing and waste yet more taxpayers money on another one of Bamber's 'fads'
The hurt, pain and suffering that this poor excuse for a human being has caused other people is inculculable. In my view that debt can never be repaid, no matter how long he sits in a cell. What we can do is deprive this animal of his liberty and the clear and present threat he poses to anyone else. To those that say he now longer poses a risk, I say this; the only proficient indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour. Those who who say that he has 'done his time' have not felt the pain, grief and unimaginable horror of this callous individual deliberately and wilfully forced onto others. I cannot understand any argument that allows this child-murderer any chance of freedom while he is alive. The very thing he deliberately denied to his victims must to be denied to him. This is as close to the concept of justice befitting what he has done that we can ever hope for. Just to remind those that call for him to be released to remember this; little Daniel and Nicholas would be 34 years old today if they had lived. Probably fathers and husbands themselves. Sheila would be 54. Possibly a young grandmother doting over her grandchildren. A beautiful and caring woman, probably still tinting her hair to hold back the march of time. Nevil and June would have been 89 in their frail dotage, loving and giving as ever and probably still fussing over the boys and grandchildren. Then there is the added factor of the sheer damage done to the fabric of the wider family. The Eatons and Boutflours and numerous others will probably never be the same, trusting and open people ever again. The deep psychological scars will remain with them for the rest of their lives.
In short, if not for the psychopathic monster that robbed them of their lives so brutally, they would have every chance of still being with us. For the lives that he stole and for the unborn that he robbed of their prospective lives and for the horror he forced onto decent, hardworking and caring people. For the lies and the shameless slandering of the relatives and the breathtaking arrogance in refusing to accept an iota of responsibility for what he has undoubtedly done For the devious, deliberate and callous misleading of supportive and well-meaning people; I say he must never, ever see the light of day and enjoy a life that he so callously denied others.
-
We can rest assured that Bamber wont be getting released, ever. He will end his days in prison.
I watched a case on the crime channel last ight, Anthony Arkwright, he killed 4 people including his own Grandfather. His crimes were horrific. He was sentenced to life at trial, then his crimes were reviewed it was then decided that he should serve a whole life tarriff, and rightly so. Just like JB.
-
I am a firm believer in mercy even for mass murderers so if he confesses he should be given the opportunity for parole at some stage.
-
My own personal opinion is this; Bamber should never be released. Nor should he ever be considered for another appeal hearing and waste yet more taxpayers money on another one of Bamber's 'fads'
The hurt, pain and suffering that this poor excuse for a human being has caused other people is inculculable. In my view that debt can never be repaid, no matter how long he sits in a cell. What we can do is deprive this animal of his liberty and the clear and present threat he poses to anyone else. To those that say he now longer poses a risk, I say this; the only proficient indicator of future behaviour is past behaviour. Those who who say that he has 'done his time' have not felt the pain, grief and unimaginable horror of this callous individual deliberately and wilfully forced onto others. I cannot understand any argument that allows this child-murderer any chance of freedom while he is alive. The very thing he deliberately denied to his victims must to be denied to him. This is as close to the concept of justice befitting what he has done that we can ever hope for. Just to remind those that call for him to be released to remember this; little Daniel and Nicholas would be 34 years old today if they had lived. Probably fathers and husbands themselves. Sheila would be 54. Possibly a young grandmother doting over her grandchildren. A beautiful and caring woman, probably still tinting her hair to hold back the march of time. Nevil and June would have been 89 in their frail dotage, loving and giving as ever and probably still fussing over the boys and grandchildren. Then there is the added factor of the sheer damage done to the fabric of the wider family. The Eatons and Boutflours and numerous others will probably never be the same, trusting and open people ever again. The deep psychological scars will remain with them for the rest of their lives.
In short, if not for the psychopathic monster that robbed them of their lives so brutally, they would have every chance of still being with us. For the lives that he stole and for the unborn that he robbed of their prospective lives and for the horror he forced onto decent, hardworking and caring people. For the lies and the shameless slandering of the relatives and the breathtaking arrogance in refusing to accept an iota of responsibility for what he has undoubtedly done For the devious, deliberate and callous misleading of supportive and well-meaning people; I say he must never, ever see the light of day and enjoy a life that he so callously denied others.
Starryian, that is an excellent post and I agree with all that you have said. The extended family have of course also suffered terribly due to Bamber's actions, as you say. I just keep thinking of all the "what ifs"... how things could have been for the victims had Bamber's greed not got in the way.
-
I am a firm believer in mercy even for mass murderers so if he confesses he should be given the opportunity for parole at some stage.
I respect your viewpoint John, although diametrically opposed to my own. In your opinion, do you think that Bamber would no longer be a danger if released? I just have this horrible picture of him going after the Boutflours an Julie Mugford.
-
We can rest assured that Bamber wont be getting released, ever. He will end his days in prison.
I watched a case on the crime channel last ight, Anthony Arkwright, he killed 4 people including his own Grandfather. His crimes were horrific. He was sentenced to life at trial, then his crimes were reviewed it was then decided that he should serve a whole life tarriff, and rightly so. Just like JB.
Hello Andrea, a book I am reading has a chapter on Arkwright and I just read it earlier. Apparently he committed the murders because he wanted to be more famous than the Yorkshire Ripper. Absolutely shocking case, and so glad that like Bamber he will never see the outside of a prison wall ever again.
-
I am a firm believer in mercy even for mass murderers so if he confesses he should be given the opportunity for parole at some stage.
I respect your viewpoint John, although diametrically opposed to my own. In your opinion, do you think that Bamber would no longer be a danger if released? I just have this horrible picture of him going after the Boutflours an Julie Mugford.
Yes, I agree but the authorities would have to be satisfied that he was beyond a danger to anyone.
-
I am a firm believer in mercy even for mass murderers so if he confesses he should be given the opportunity for parole at some stage.
I respect your viewpoint John, although diametrically opposed to my own. In your opinion, do you think that Bamber would no longer be a danger if released? I just have this horrible picture of him going after the Boutflours an Julie Mugford.
Yes, I agree but the authorities would have to be satisfied that he was beyond a danger to anyone.
True. I wouldn't like to be on a parole board. Fair do's, many parolees do go on to lead productive lives but there have been mistakes made in the past, with awful consequences. A tough job, trying to come to a decision.
-
May I intercede in this discussion. The family of the victims will have had some say in relation to the way in which Mr Bamber's imprisonment is managed. I believe he was refused a category downgrade because of those very reasons, ie he is still seen as a danger to the extended family.
I don't see him being released unless by prerogative of the Home Secretary at some time in the future and then when he is a very old man and beyond any significant risk to any person within the family.
-
May I intercede in this discussion. The family of the victims will have had some say in relation to the way in which Mr Bamber's imprisonment is managed. I believe he was refused a category downgrade because of those very reasons, ie he is still seen as a danger to the extended family.
I don't see him being released unless by prerogative of the Home Secretary at some time in the future and then when he is a very old man and beyond any significant risk to any person within the family.
Thank you Mr Justice K, info much appreciated.
-
May I intercede in this discussion. The family of the victims will have had some say in relation to the way in which Mr Bamber's imprisonment is managed. I believe he was refused a category downgrade because of those very reasons, ie he is still seen as a danger to the extended family.
I don't see him being released unless by prerogative of the Home Secretary at some time in the future and then when he is a very old man and beyond any significant risk to any person within the family.
I understand he made threats against the family when his various civil actions failed. For anyone who doesn't know he was forced to dispose of his shares in the Osea Caravan Park to pay the family's legal fees. This left the family in a position to take up the shares which meant that they now retain and enjoy overall control of the Park.
Jeremy Bamber is consequently and effectively penniless following these failed civil actions.
-
hmm... thats the last thing someone in his position should be doing if he ever wants to see freedom again. If I recall he also sent nasty letters to the family, possibly that is what you were referring to?? 8)--))
-
On top of the threats we also have Tesco driving up and down Pages Lane and posting the videos on Youtube and boasting about looking through their windows. Combine this with the endless threats and abuse from the Bamber supporters (all three of them) and you have a sustained campaign of terror conducted for almost 30 years against the various families.
Personally I would never release him. Dispose of the ashes secretly otherwise the Bamberettes will have a "Jimmy Saville style" headstone for him.
-
I was never convinced of his guilt
-
I was never convinced of his guilt
Please introduce yourself in the new members section Redblossom.
-
Admin, sorry, I never even saw the thread, all done.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
Teskos senseless rambleings wouldnt make any difference wether Bamber is quilty or not
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
Teskos senseless rambleings wouldnt make any difference wether Bamber is quilty or not
He doesn't help. He's changed his story so many times, and introduced such utter bullshit, that no one knows what to think. But he is yet to explain why Sheila received a severe trauma to her throat, but got up and ran upstairs, with no blood pouring down her front. And no swallowed blood. And no choked blood on her face, chin, neck.
Epic fail.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
Teskos senseless rambleings wouldnt make any difference wether Bamber is quilty or not
He doesn't help. He's changed his story so many times, and introduced such utter bullshit, that no one knows what to think. But he is yet to explain why Sheila received a severe trauma to her throat, but got up and ran upstairs, with no blood pouring down her front. And no swallowed blood. And no choked blood on her face, chin, neck.
Epic fail.
And this poor, crazy, wobbly girl had the wherewithal to shoot the boys cleanly, shoot June, bully Ralph into a chair, run back upstairs, shoot June between the eyes, then lie down on the floor, and find a bible. And ritually cleanse, and shoot herself. And need another bullet. Oh, ffs.
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
Teskos senseless rambleings wouldnt make any difference wether Bamber is quilty or not
He doesn't help. He's changed his story so many times, and introduced such utter bullshit, that no one knows what to think. But he is yet to explain why Sheila received a severe trauma to her throat, but got up and ran upstairs, with no blood pouring down her front. And no swallowed blood. And no choked blood on her face, chin, neck.
Epic fail.
And this poor, crazy, wobbly girl had the wherewithal to shoot the boys cleanly, shoot June, bully Ralph into a chair, run back upstairs, shoot June between the eyes, then lie down on the floor, and find a bible. And ritually cleanse, and shoot herself. And need another bullet. Oh, ffs.
Shorty. You don't know where Keith Bennet is. Or Maddie. You just want to be a hero. What a sad little f..k you are. 8(8-))
-
Nice posts Shona and Milly. Don't get me wrong, I am still saying Bamber must do 20 plus more years so he will be well into his 70's before release and that's if he admits his crimes now and behaves like a saint until that time.
We know as does Jeremy Bamber that the minute he admits to his crimes that his support will evaporate. Even Tesko wouldn't dare support a mass murderer publicly. The other issue of course is Bamber"s safety. If he came clean he would end like Ian Huntly and be more or less segregated for his own personal security...an awful existence.
Teskos senseless rambleings wouldnt make any difference wether Bamber is quilty or not
He doesn't help. He's changed his story so many times, and introduced such utter bullshit, that no one knows what to think. But he is yet to explain why Sheila received a severe trauma to her throat, but got up and ran upstairs, with no blood pouring down her front. And no swallowed blood. And no choked blood on her face, chin, neck.
Epic fail.
And this poor, crazy, wobbly girl had the wherewithal to shoot the boys cleanly, shoot June, bully Ralph into a chair, run back upstairs, shoot June between the eyes, then lie down on the floor, and find a bible. And ritually cleanse, and shoot herself. And need another bullet. Oh, ffs.
Dont you just hate it when that happens? You finish all the housework, tidy up, shower, make yourself pretty, read your bible, put the silencer away, lie down to shoot yourself a second time and then you find you've run out of bullets. >@@(*&)
-
Wasn't it rather fortuitous that she had the exact number of bullets?
-
Wasn't it rather fortuitous that she had the exact number of bullets?
That has always struck me as a bit odd. Sheila's "Woman's Intuition" I suppose.
I remember something odd during the questioning of JB. Questions about the number of bullets in the house. Something like there were 35 left in a pack of 50 but 25 had been fired so where did the spares come from?
JB didn't have an answer for this. But the obvious explanation must be that either there were some spare rounds lying around OR (and it is a really big OR to me), the assassin must have brought his own spares, now as the magazine holds ten rounds then does that mean that the assassin had a spare magazine which was never found?
That would solve a lot of the reloading problems that would occur, less running up and down stairs with your pockets full of bullets. >@@(*&)
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
If what you suggest is the case then Bamber MUST have known exactly which rifle he was going to use in order to bring the necessary amount and calibre of ammunition. This would be the rifle he deliberately left in the bathroom in order for it to be within easy reach when he first gained entry to the house via the fanlight on the toilet window.
However, I believe that the fight in the kitchen came about because Bamber ran out of ammunition at a vital time. His plan was almost scuppered by the unexpected resistance that Nevil put up when he realised Jeremy had no bullets in the gun. Unfortuntely Nevil was serverely injured due to the initial onslaught in the master bedroom by Bamber, and was unable to wrench the weapon from Bamber's grip. This is where Bamber proceeded to turn the rifle around and batter Nevil senseless with the stock end - using it as a club. Once Nevil was unconscious Bamber walked over to the kitchen cabinet where their lay the spare box of ammunition. He reloaded and then callously finished his father off. He could well have brought his own ammunition from Bourtree Cottage with him to the murder scene and used it. I do find it somewhat difficult to believe that Sheila shot herself with the last bullet in the gun. That it just too much of a coincidence for it to be plausible. Isnt it more likely that the killer used his own ammunition when the magazine was found to be empty? He simply added another to the empty rifle, becuase he knew that's all he'd need. So your idea certainly makes a lot of sense Lookout. It is an added dimension and one I havent come across previously.
Thanks for the post Outlook 8()-000(. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
Thanks for the post Lookout. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
Outlook not Lookout. I am half her age. 8)><(
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
Thanks for the post Lookout. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
Outlook not Lookout. I am half her age. 8)><(
I think Logout is very, very old, like Gladys. She once went on a romantic date with Piltdown Man, they shared a bucket of cod's roe then she beat him at arm wrestling. 8((()*/
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
Thanks for the post Lookout. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
Outlook not Lookout. I am half her age. 8)><(
Sincere apologies Outlook. I have changed said offending article to make amends 8(8-))
I have a case of word up mixed syndrome. Erm ....sorry, I mean mixed-up word syndrome. 8()(((@#
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
Thanks for the post Lookout. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
Outlook not Lookout. I am half her age. 8)><(
Sincere apologies Outlook. I have changed said offending article to make amends 8(8-))
I have a case of word up mixed syndrome. Erm ....sorry, I mean mixed-up word syndrome. 8()(((@#
No problem, I chose Outlook as an Anagram of Lookout purely to be irritating. Obviously it worked. ?>)()<
-
A very pertinent point Outlook,
I have always wondered about that exact point myself. How did Bamber fire all those bullets, reload at least twice and keeping 5 people inside the house without raising the alarm?
Thanks for the post Lookout. Great thinking! 8((()*/ 8@??)(
Outlook not Lookout. I am half her age. 8)><(
Sincere apologies Outlook. I have changed said offending article to make amends 8(8-))
I have a case of word up mixed syndrome. Erm ....sorry, I mean mixed-up word syndrome. 8()(((@#
No problem, I chose Outlook as an Anagram of Lookout purely to be irritating. Obviously it worked. ?>)()<
And I got my head bit off for it! Haha.
I didn't put two and two together and realise you were an anagram.
Lookout is very snappy, and not often pleasant to me, but I was taught to respect my elders and Patti assures me Lookout is a nice person off the board.
-
I know who Patti is but not Lookout but I always found her "unrealistic."
You don't need to respect me as I suspect I am not your elder.
I did not mean to bite. It is easy mistake to make. I thought I was being quite clever at the time.
All the best. 8((()*/
-
Should Jeremy Bamber ever be released?
There seems to be some rule whereby people like him don't get released until they admit their guilt. This could be a bit of a problem if some of them weren't guilty, which likely, some of them weren't. So I think this rule is wrong, if in fact it exists at all. Although I suspect it might.
So, yep, I think he should be released eventually.
From what I have read here, it seems to me as though the whole family were cracked, although I would be reluctant to blame his parents for him killing them and the rest of the family.
No one is born evil, but life does bad things to some, while others hack it. And I hope that I am not an entirely judgemental person.
-
I really cannot agree with you on this one Eleanor. Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of the cold blooded murder of 4 members of his own family - two of them were young children. Since his conviction in 1986, this man has repeatedly threatened, manipulated and lied to people. I belive that this man presents a danger to the surviving relatives and witnesses and had made thinly-veiled threats towards them for the last 26 years. During an interview for her book on the case author Claire Powell repeatedly heard him say about cousin David Boutflour - "he'll pay for it'. There seemed to be a lot of people in Bamber's past that he has threatened that they will "pay for it"
Moreover, if you take the view that he is guilty - and there is no viable reason not to - then this man is a psychopathic, cunning and dangerous individual that will stop at nothing to achieve his ends. Unlike you I believe that this man was born evil. From his earliest days he displayed the arrogant, callous self-centredness that marked him as a vile bully at school. Having looked at Bamber's life one can only come to the conclusion that he never, ever undertook any act that helped anyone but himself. Nothing good can be said of him or his actions towards others. He went through most of his life hurting others and leaving a trail of misery to those that he wanted something from - including his own family. He mistreated them with breathtaking and heartless callousness. He bullied his own mother and sister unmercifully, treated his adoptive father with utter distain and thought the twin boys were destined to become mentally ill and were unfit to live. He honestly believed that by killing his family he was "doing everyone a favour".
For the lives he brutally ended, the lives that this warped and callous ingrate deliberately destroyed, for the pain and suffering that he has caused so many others and the clear and present danger he still represents to those that are still alive, I firmly believe that he should remain behind bars permanently The law has a bounden duty to protect the innocent and not allow the guilty the very freedom that he readily denied to others. This is not justice. I strongly believe that this man should never, ever see the light of day again.
-
I have to admit, Ian, that I don't feel that strongly about releasing him, only perhaps that everyone should have a little hope. But then anything I can say would be trite. Put it down to left over vestiges of when I believed he was innocent.
I doubt I've ever met a truly evil person, but I did have dealings with a sociopath at one time, and that wasn't very funny, although it took me some time to realise.. I didn't have The Internet in those day, otherwise I might have cottoned on a bit sooner.
-
I have to admit, Ian, that I don't feel that strongly about releasing him, only perhaps that everyone should have a little hope. But then anything I can say would be trite. Put it down to left over vestiges of when I believed he was innocent.
I doubt I've ever met a truly evil person, but I did have dealings with a sociopath at one time, and that wasn't very funny, although it took me some time to realise.. I didn't have The Internet in those day, otherwise I might have cottoned on a bit sooner.
Thanks for your thoughts Eleanor,
Yes I totally understand. I also had some dealings with a psychopath - a one time female boss of mine. I learned a great deal about truly evil, manipulative, controlling people such as her. Luckily, I came away pretty much unscathed although many others sadly could not say the same thing. It led me to thinking about all the other victims of these people. There must be literally thousands upon thousands, most of whom probably did not know they were the victim of such people. I believe that these people contribute to a disproportionate amount of crime to their actual numbers and cause untold misery and suffering to many, many people. I also believe that education here is the key. The the very thing that allows a Psychopaths/sociopaths to be so successful is stealth. People truly do not know they are being used, victimised or earmarked by a psychopath until it's too late. Most people - including myself - would probably not be able to identify one if they met one in the street tomorrow. I have it on good authority that, if you scratch just below the surface there are clue which can be a giveaway. For example a psychopath is extremely superficial. They have just a passing knowledge about many topics and can appear to the casual observer to be highly intelligent and knowledgeable about lots of different things. However, if they are questioned in-depth about it, they will very quickly change the subject or walk away. They use their surface knowledge to impress and trick people into trusting or liking them.
They also have a highly inflated opinion of their own importance. Many people will dismiss this as being a little 'bigheaded' or even supremely confident. This may be true in many cases but it could also be a clue that you are dealing with a psychopath. In their own mind they are never wrong. This is why they have little problem breaking the law. Laws to them are made by the feeble-minded and weak. In fact any moral values are made by weak-willed, gullible people. It very well might have been a psychopath that coined the term 'laws are made to be broken'
They have no moral compass of any kind. They have absolutely no remorse, conscience or empathy and they pour scorn on those that do. They see ordinary people as 'suckers' ready to be taken advantage of. Of course not all psychopaths go on to murder someone. Their are psychopaths in the workplace, many of whom aspire to top positions within a company and will often leave a trail of deceipt and destruction in their wake. They are to be found in every walk of life, usually with the same result.
In short, these monsters are despicable individuals that ruin and/or destroy innocent people lives.
-
StarryIan-5, love, 5!
-
I didn't escape quite so unscathed, Ian. Although I did escape eventually. But more by the fact that he dumped me because I was no longer prepared to fund his life style, due to the fact that I could no longer afford to.
Oh, what shame. He ended the relationship, and not me. But that is just wounded pride. I never got to kick him in the goollies. I never had any closure for me.
He is dead now, but I can't say that this fact is much consolation. I don't actually believe in an avenging God, and I don't think I want to.
-
I really cannot agree with you on this one Eleanor. Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of the cold blooded murder of 4 members of his own family - two of them were young children. Since his conviction in 1986, this man has repeatedly threatened, manipulated and lied to people. I belive that this man presents a danger to the surviving relatives and witnesses and had made thinly-veiled threats towards them for the last 26 years. During an interview for her book on the case author Claire Powell repeatedly heard him say about cousin David Boutflour - "he'll pay for it'. There seemed to be a lot of people in Bamber's past that he has threatened that they will "pay for it"
Moreover, if you take the view that he is guilty - and there is no viable reason not to - then this man is a psychopathic, cunning and dangerous individual that will stop at nothing to achieve his ends. Unlike you I believe that this man was born evil. From his earliest days he displayed the arrogant, callous self-centredness that marked him as a vile bully at school. Having looked at Bamber's life one can only come to the conclusion that he never, ever undertook any act that helped anyone but himself. Nothing good can be said of him or his actions towards others. He went through most of his life hurting others and leaving a trail of misery to those that he wanted something from - including his own family. He mistreated them with breathtaking and heartless callousness. He bullied his own mother and sister unmercifully, treated his adoptive father with utter distain and thought the twin boys were destined to become mentally ill and were unfit to live. He honestly believed that by killing his family he was "doing everyone a favour".
For the lives he brutally ended, the lives that this warped and callous ingrate deliberately destroyed, for the pain and suffering that he has caused so many others and the clear and present danger he still represents to those that are still alive, I firmly believe that he should remain behind bars permanently The law has a bounden duty to protect the innocent and not allow the guilty the very freedom that he readily denied to others. This is not justice. I strongly believe that this man should never, ever see the light of day again.
While i agree with you starryian i must say that i wonder how silly it would be for Bamber to exact any revenge if he were to be release... If he had any sense he'd stay well clear of any of the family
-
A bit of a Catch 22. If he wants people to believe that he is innocent then he dare not do anything. Or else he will damn himself.
Not that I care all that much about him personally. It's more academic really. Plotting revenge is often more satisfying than actually doing it, at least for most sane people.
-
I really cannot agree with you on this one Eleanor. Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of the cold blooded murder of 4 members of his own family - two of them were young children. Since his conviction in 1986, this man has repeatedly threatened, manipulated and lied to people. I belive that this man presents a danger to the surviving relatives and witnesses and had made thinly-veiled threats towards them for the last 26 years. During an interview for her book on the case author Claire Powell repeatedly heard him say about cousin David Boutflour - "he'll pay for it'. There seemed to be a lot of people in Bamber's past that he has threatened that they will "pay for it"
Moreover, if you take the view that he is guilty - and there is no viable reason not to - then this man is a psychopathic, cunning and dangerous individual that will stop at nothing to achieve his ends. Unlike you I believe that this man was born evil. From his earliest days he displayed the arrogant, callous self-centredness that marked him as a vile bully at school. Having looked at Bamber's life one can only come to the conclusion that he never, ever undertook any act that helped anyone but himself. Nothing good can be said of him or his actions towards others. He went through most of his life hurting others and leaving a trail of misery to those that he wanted something from - including his own family. He mistreated them with breathtaking and heartless callousness. He bullied his own mother and sister unmercifully, treated his adoptive father with utter distain and thought the twin boys were destined to become mentally ill and were unfit to live. He honestly believed that by killing his family he was "doing everyone a favour".
For the lives he brutally ended, the lives that this warped and callous ingrate deliberately destroyed, for the pain and suffering that he has caused so many others and the clear and present danger he still represents to those that are still alive, I firmly believe that he should remain behind bars permanently The law has a bounden duty to protect the innocent and not allow the guilty the very freedom that he readily denied to others. This is not justice. I strongly believe that this man should never, ever see the light of day again.
While i agree with you starryian i must say that i wonder how silly it would be for Bamber to exact any revenge if he were to be release... If he had any sense he'd stay well clear of any of the family
Ordinarily I would wholeheartedly agree with you Iggy,
But Jeremy Bamber is anything but ordinary. The murders themselves were - at least from a logical standpoint -incredibly stupid. Bamber had often told anyone who would listen how much he hated his family. His own father became deeply suspicious of him, he was roundly loathed by his relatives for his arrogant sense of self-importance. He burgled the family caravan park - with a witness, and behaved so callously after the murders that he practically invited suspicion at every turn. People often cite that he 'nearly got away with it' This is only part of the story. He nearly got away with it because of something that he simply could not have predicted - the appalling shoddy manner in which the police investigated the crime. The crime scene was compromised, evidence was lost and conclusions were hastily jumped to. It was not so much Bamber's cunning but police ineptitude that almost let him slip through the net. The evidence, if handled properly and with skill could have exposed Bamber for what he was - a psychopathic murderer. A cowardly, inept, arrogant greedy wastrel would have been apprehended sooner that what he was.
I have no doubt that this arrogant ingrate would think that he could wreak his vengence if he were ever to be released. It would be no more stupid and unfathomable than his firm belief that he could brutally murder 5 people, be the lone survivor who inherits everything and get clean away with it.
-
A bit of a Catch 22. If he wants people to believe that he is innocent then he dare not do anything. Or else he will damn himself.
Not that I care all that much about him personally. It's more academic really. Plotting revenge is often more satisfying than actually doing it, at least for most sane people.
I don't find it a Catch 22 at all Eleanor. Bamber has been proven to be guilty at trial.That is a fact in the eyes of the law. Bamber has to challenge that through the Court of Appeal if he wants to change that fact in the eyes of the law. He has had a myriad of opportunities to challenge the guilty verdict and no doubt he will continue to do so however futile that effort will surely be!
Having challenged his conviction and failed it is in my opinion right and proper that the law treat Bamber as guilty beyond any doubt. There can be no wiggle room just in case he may have been a victim of a Miscarriage Of Justice; that is something for the COA/CCRC to address and they have done so in detail.
Innocent until proven guilty then guilty until proven innocent!
-
A bit of a Catch 22. If he wants people to believe that he is innocent then he dare not do anything. Or else he will damn himself.
Not that I care all that much about him personally. It's more academic really. Plotting revenge is often more satisfying than actually doing it, at least for most sane people.
I don't find it a Catch 22 at all Eleanor. Bamber has been proven to be guilty at trial.That is a fact in the eyes of the law. Bamber has to challenge that through the Court of Appeal if he wants to change that fact in the eyes of the law. He has had a myriad of opportunities to challenge the guilty verdict and no doubt he will continue to do so however futile that effort will surely be!
Having challenged his conviction and failed it is in my opinion right and proper that the law treat Bamber as guilty beyond any doubt. There can be no wiggle room just in case he may have been a victim of a Miscarriage Of Justice; that is something for the COA/CCRC to address and they have done so in detail.
Innocent until proven guilty then guilty until proven innocent!
I meant the possibility of him extracting revenge if they ever let him out. He is hardly likely to get away with that. Or do you think he is that stupid?
I don't really understand psychopaths, but then who does? Although I did assume that they were a bit more clever than he turned out to be. In the end he was the instrument of his own destruction.
But then the whole family were a bit weird, in my opinion.
Could they have exacerbated an underlying condition in him, do you think?
Not that this would have been any excuse for killing them, of course.
-
I don't think the Bamber family was particularly dysfunctional in the scheme of things. Neville was a pillar of society, a JP and an ex RAF fighterpilot. June and Sheila certainly had their problems true but both were eminently decent people!,
-
Perhaps he minded being abandoned by his birth mother. I knew someone who was abandoned, and he never got over it. He used it as an excuse for being a really nasty person. Although he was given a good life by adoptive parents.
-
Perhaps he minded being abandoned by his birth mother. I knew someone who was abandoned, and he never got over it. He used it as an excuse for being a really nasty person. Although he was given a good life by adoptive parents.
i dont think Jeremy's condition stemmed from a sense of abandonment.... his conceit is more indicative of a spoilt brat
-
Perhaps he minded being abandoned by his birth mother. I knew someone who was abandoned, and he never got over it. He used it as an excuse for being a really nasty person. Although he was given a good life by adoptive parents.
i dont think Jeremy's condition stemmed from a sense of abandonment.... his conceit is more indicative of a spoilt brat
if anything i think Sheila showed more effects of abandonment
-
A bit of a Catch 22. If he wants people to believe that he is innocent then he dare not do anything. Or else he will damn himself.
Not that I care all that much about him personally. It's more academic really. Plotting revenge is often more satisfying than actually doing it, at least for most sane people.
If by 'catch22' you were referring to the fact that Bamber would be damned if he admitted to the crime and damned when he doesnt admit.
If he were to ever admit fully to guilt although it may never lead to his release it would certianly pave the way for helping his cause. the truth is he's a twisted person and im sure that prison system does right in keeping him locked up
-
A bit of a Catch 22. If he wants people to believe that he is innocent then he dare not do anything. Or else he will damn himself.
Not that I care all that much about him personally. It's more academic really. Plotting revenge is often more satisfying than actually doing it, at least for most sane people.
If by 'catch22' you were referring to the fact that Bamber would be damned if he admitted to the crime and damned when he doesnt admit.
If he were to ever admit fully to guilt although it may never lead to his release it would certianly pave the way for helping his cause. the truth is he's a twisted person and im sure that prison system does right in keeping him locked up
No, I meant that if they let him out and he then takes revenge he will prove that he is indeed twisted, and capable of acts of violence.
-
Eleanor, Bamber wasnt abandoned, he was put up for adoption, he went to a good family who did the best they could for him. But their best was not good enough for him, he was a greedy spoilt brat, who, with the natural course of time would have been a well off man. His greed and desire for money got the better of him.
-
Eleanor, Bamber wasnt abandoned, he was put up for adoption, he went to a good family who did the best they could for him. But their best was not good enough for him, he was a greedy spoilt brat, who, with the natural course of time would have been a well off man. His greed and desire for money got the better of him.
I'm not disputing that. Just trying to understand why he should be like this. And therefor if there is a possibility that he could be released at some time.
-
Understanding why he killed his family!
Greed, pure and simple. He will never be released, whole life tarriff.
-
Never mind. Forget it.
-
Never mind, forget it!! Wtf. Explain yourself then.
-
Never mind, forget it!! Wtf. Explain yourself then.
You are a trifle intimidating I am afraid. So I won't bother to explain any further than I have already done.
-
Im intimidating! Far from it, ask anyone on here.
I didnt like the tone of your post either! I just asked you to explain, thats all.
-
Eleanor, Bamber wasnt abandoned, he was put up for adoption, he went to a good family who did the best they could for him. But their best was not good enough for him, he was a greedy spoilt brat, who, with the natural course of time would have been a well off man. His greed and desire for money got the better of him.
I'm not disputing that. Just trying to understand why he should be like this. And therefor if there is a possibility that he could be released at some time.
There is no way Bamber will ever be released. Never,ever, no way.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
No John, I don't. I don't even think that by admitting his guilt, he will be released.
His protestations over the years have done him no favours. They have merely compounded most people's belief, that he is a lying, devious, manipulative little shit.
P.S. never had Tesko down as a Rihanna fan!
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
she never confessed fully , she mantained to her dying day that the musrders were by Brady solely and she was always somewhere else ... either she was in another room or looking out of a window or waiting for him in the car , she was a lying bitch and never ever fully came clean about what went on
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
And the continual bile and criticism aimed at Colin, whose loss was unimaginable, is reprehensible. Very representative of the few remaining Bamber supporters.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
No John, I don't. I don't even think that by admitting his guilt, he will be released.
His protestations over the years have done him no favours. They have merely compounded most people's belief, that he is a lying, devious, manipulative little shit.
P.S. never had Tesko down as a Rihanna fan!
that'd be the one bit of taste the Tesko has. his support of Bamber is extreme tasteless
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
Hindley f..ked up her chance of release way back in 1973
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
Hindley f..ked up her chance of release way back in 1973
Was there a specific event in '73, to which you refer Iggy?
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
No John, I don't. I don't even think that by admitting his guilt, he will be released.
His protestations over the years have done him no favours. They have merely compounded most people's belief, that he is a lying, devious, manipulative little shit.
P.S. never had Tesko down as a Rihanna fan!
that'd be the one bit of taste the Tesko has. his support of Bamber is extreme tasteless
As are his claims that he knows where Madeleine's body is buried, and he's trained his stepson's dog to find Keith Bennett. And Sheila wrote a message in menstrual blood, her body was used for porn.....ugh. Not a single credible bone in that short, little body. Bamber has the supporters that he deserves.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
Hindley f..ked up her chance of release way back in 1973
Was there a specific event in '73, to which you refer Iggy?
not one actual event but there were changes she made , she returned to catholicism , broke all ties with Brady , tried to culture another image of herself to the public and started studying .
Question remains as to why she didnt at that point say they had killed 2 more children.... it wasnt until 1987. She couldnt deny knowledge of the fact she was present at the abduction of Pauline Reade but never said anything
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
Hindley f..ked up her chance of release way back in 1973
Was there a specific event in '73, to which you refer Iggy?
not one actual event but there were changes she made , she returned to catholicism , broke all ties with Brady , tried to culture another image of herself to the public and started studying .
Question remains as to why she didnt at that point say they had killed 2 more children.... it wasnt until 1987. She couldnt deny knowledge of the fact she was present at the abduction of Pauline Reade but never said anything
She did try a massive turn-around, didn't she?
When Bamber supporters state that he never showed any signs of violence before the murders, it ALWAYS reminds me of Hindley. Up until she went on her cold-hearted killing spree, she was a quiet girl who loved dogs and cared for her Nan. If the proclivity is there, however latent, it's there.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
He might do a Hindley, get to the age of 60, and finally confess.
Yes Shona, he might do, but it didn't do her much good did it! There was never any suggestion that she would be released, post confession.
You're right, it didn't get her out, thank God. I just think it was the last card she had to play.
Hindley f..ked up her chance of release way back in 1973
Was there a specific event in '73, to which you refer Iggy?
not one actual event but there were changes she made , she returned to catholicism , broke all ties with Brady , tried to culture another image of herself to the public and started studying .
Question remains as to why she didnt at that point say they had killed 2 more children.... it wasnt until 1987. She couldnt deny knowledge of the fact she was present at the abduction of Pauline Reade but never said anything
She did try a massive turn-around, didn't she?
When Bamber supporters state that he never showed any signs of violence before the murders, it ALWAYS reminds me of Hindley. Up until she went on her cold-hearted killing spree, she was a quiet girl who loved dogs and cared for her Nan. If the proclivity is there, however latent, it's there.
Agreed, imagine if there had been signs of violence in his youth-they would then argue that was merely youthful high jinks which he got over, and had no relation to his later life (like Simon Hall's supporters do). Little details like Julie saying he said he had been strangling rats to try to build up courage are very interesting. I can't imagine Julie could have made that bit up.
-
Never is a very long time Sika?
Do you not think he might get parole in another 30 years?
No John, I don't. I don't even think that by admitting his guilt, he will be released.
His protestations over the years have done him no favours. They have merely compounded most people's belief, that he is a lying, devious, manipulative little shit.
P.S. never had Tesko down as a Rihanna fan!
that'd be the one bit of taste the Tesko has. his support of Bamber is extreme tasteless
As are his claims that he knows where Madeleine's body is buried, and he's trained his stepson's dog to find Keith Bennett. And Sheila wrote a message in menstrual blood, her body was used for porn.....ugh. Not a single credible bone in that short, little body. Bamber has the supporters that he deserves.
Well said Shona,
Tesko is hardened criminal used to a life of constant lying and denial, even when it is pointed out to him and he is challenged, he carries on lying. This is because lying to him is second nature. He has gone beyond the point of no return years ago. I notice he is extremely poor at analysing himself or his own actions. He lives in a world of constant self-denial, of blaming others for his own ineptitude, shortcomings and lies. It is always someone else fault, never his. He is the type of person that would rob someone's home and then the next day go around to the same house, ring the doorbell, and ask the owner if he has just been robbed.
The man is an appalling hypocrite, one of the worst I have ever encountered. He swear's blind that everything he says is the truth (and he knows full well it is not) and in the same sentence has no qualms about accusing others of telling lies. This is the way hardened criminals behave. In their utter stupidity they will blame the law for arresting them and often hold life-long vendetta's against the police and rail against the judicial system because they hate it. They hate it because they were caught and punished for their wrongdoing. It is here that their logic is faulty. In never seems to dawn on them that they have been fairly caught. Their own ego cannot accept the fact, so they turn it into hatred to salve their own ego. Tesko is just such a person.
-
Tesko is just a no mark. A total waste of oxygen and benefits. His existence is as pointless as Bamber's ; talk about taking your gay fantasies to the extreme!
-
i dont think it would be safe to ever release jeremy bamber as he has made upteen threats towards the remaining family.isnt that why he is being kept in a higher security regime than he would otherwise have been at full sutton just in case he absconds.
-
I agree Milly,
He is and will remain a danger to others. However, the reason he is in a top maximum security prison like Full Sutton is not because he might abscond (there is no danger of that in such a high-profile case) , it is because of the appalling nature of his crimes. Let us remember that this waste of oxygen murdered in cold blood, two five year old defenseless boys, a man and two women. All of whom were members of his immediate family. People who trusted him, loved him and gave him everything he ever desired. They gave him a home, a family, a job, a house of his own, a car, a private education, virtually everything a young person could ever possibly want. How did he repay them? He repaid them by sneaking into their home in the dead of night, when they were at their most vulnerable and brutally murdering them one-by-one. All because he wanted their money. He wanted what they had worked so hard for. He believed that this money was his and their lives were worthless and forfeit.
This inhuman monster is totally beneath contempt. He lacks the very qualities that make us human and deserves to be treated accordingly.This despicable animal will be caged until the day he dies.
Those who believe in justice in this life, he is getting his every single day; every time he manages to peer out of his window in a 10 X 8 cell and see's free people going about their daily lives. Those who believe in devine retribution - the fires are being stoked and cutlasses are being sharpened. Whatever your belief, this man is getting exactly what he deserves.
-
I agree Milly,
He is and will remain a danger to others. However, the reason he is in a top maximum security prison like Full Sutton is not because he might abscond (there is no danger of that in such a high-profile case) , it is because of the appalling nature of his crimes. Let us remember that this waste of oxygen murdered in cold blood, two five year old defenseless boys, a man and two women. All of whom were members of his immediate family. People who trusted him, loved him and gave him everything he ever desired. They gave him a home, a family, a job, a house of his own, a car, a private education, virtually everything a young person could ever possibly want. How did he repay them? He repaid them by sneaking into their home in the dead of night, when they were at their most vulnerable and brutally murdering them one-by-one. All because he wanted their money. He wanted what they had worked so hard for. He believed that this money was his and their lives were worthless and forfeit.
This inhuman monster is totally beneath contempt. He lacks the very qualities that make us human and deserves to be treated accordingly.This despicable animal will be caged until the day he dies.
Those who believe in justice in this life, he is getting his every single day; every time he manages to peer out of his window in a 10 X 8 cell and see's free people going about their daily lives. Those who believe in devine retribution - the fires are being stoked and cutlasses are being sharpened. Whatever your belief, this man is getting exactly what he deserves.
An excellent post, Ian. And only a truly callous and avaricious man would snigger and make lewd comments about his dead sister, and try to sell photos of her and her dead children to The Sun.
-
Wow Ian!!! Have you ever sat on a jury?
-
I agree Milly,
He is and will remain a danger to others. However, the reason he is in a top maximum security prison like Full Sutton is not because he might abscond (there is no danger of that in such a high-profile case) , it is because of the appalling nature of his crimes. Let us remember that this waste of oxygen murdered in cold blood, two five year old defenseless boys, a man and two women. All of whom were members of his immediate family. People who trusted him, loved him and gave him everything he ever desired. They gave him a home, a family, a job, a house of his own, a car, a private education, virtually everything a young person could ever possibly want. How did he repay them? He repaid them by sneaking into their home in the dead of night, when they were at their most vulnerable and brutally murdering them one-by-one. All because he wanted their money. He wanted what they had worked so hard for. He believed that this money was his and their lives were worthless and forfeit.
This inhuman monster is totally beneath contempt. He lacks the very qualities that make us human and deserves to be treated accordingly.This despicable animal will be caged until the day he dies.
Those who believe in justice in this life, he is getting his every single day; every time he manages to peer out of his window in a 10 X 8 cell and see's free people going about their daily lives. Those who believe in devine retribution - the fires are being stoked and cutlasses are being sharpened. Whatever your belief, this man is getting exactly what he deserves.
i thought he was supposed to be of reformed character. 8**8:/:
-
I agree Milly,
He is and will remain a danger to others. However, the reason he is in a top maximum security prison like Full Sutton is not because he might abscond (there is no danger of that in such a high-profile case) , it is because of the appalling nature of his crimes. Let us remember that this waste of oxygen murdered in cold blood, two five year old defenseless boys, a man and two women. All of whom were members of his immediate family. People who trusted him, loved him and gave him everything he ever desired. They gave him a home, a family, a job, a house of his own, a car, a private education, virtually everything a young person could ever possibly want. How did he repay them? He repaid them by sneaking into their home in the dead of night, when they were at their most vulnerable and brutally murdering them one-by-one. All because he wanted their money. He wanted what they had worked so hard for. He believed that this money was his and their lives were worthless and forfeit.
This inhuman monster is totally beneath contempt. He lacks the very qualities that make us human and deserves to be treated accordingly.This despicable animal will be caged until the day he dies.
Those who believe in justice in this life, he is getting his every single day; every time he manages to peer out of his window in a 10 X 8 cell and see's free people going about their daily lives. Those who believe in devine retribution - the fires are being stoked and cutlasses are being sharpened. Whatever your belief, this man is getting exactly what he deserves.
i thought he was supposed to be of reformed character. 8**8:/:
Spellcheck Milly..... you put reformed but you obviously meant deformed! This is Jeremy Bamber we are talking about and I for one (of many) concur with every word of Ian's last excellent post!
8@??)( 8@??)(
-
There is no such thing as Divine Retribution. Thank God. Or has anyone got any proof of this?
-
There is no such thing as Divine Retribution. Thank God. Or has anyone got any proof of this?
There is no proof there is and there is no proof there isn't - scientifically speaking at least, under these circumstances; it is best keep an open mind. 8(0(*
-
Wow Ian!!! Have you ever sat on a jury?
No I have never actually sat on a jury Matthew. But hope springs eternal 8(0(*
I think the closest I ever got was being made captain of the debating team at university for one term. 8()(((@#
-
I agree Milly,
He is and will remain a danger to others. However, the reason he is in a top maximum security prison like Full Sutton is not because he might abscond (there is no danger of that in such a high-profile case) , it is because of the appalling nature of his crimes. Let us remember that this waste of oxygen murdered in cold blood, two five year old defenseless boys, a man and two women. All of whom were members of his immediate family. People who trusted him, loved him and gave him everything he ever desired. They gave him a home, a family, a job, a house of his own, a car, a private education, virtually everything a young person could ever possibly want. How did he repay them? He repaid them by sneaking into their home in the dead of night, when they were at their most vulnerable and brutally murdering them one-by-one. All because he wanted their money. He wanted what they had worked so hard for. He believed that this money was his and their lives were worthless and forfeit.
This inhuman monster is totally beneath contempt. He lacks the very qualities that make us human and deserves to be treated accordingly.This despicable animal will be caged until the day he dies.
Those who believe in justice in this life, he is getting his every single day; every time he manages to peer out of his window in a 10 X 8 cell and see's free people going about their daily lives. Those who believe in devine retribution - the fires are being stoked and cutlasses are being sharpened. Whatever your belief, this man is getting exactly what he deserves.
i thought he was supposed to be of reformed character. 8**8:/:
Spellcheck Milly..... you put reformed but you obviously meant deformed! This is Jeremy Bamber we are talking about and I for one (of many) concur with every word of Ian's last excellent post!
8@??)( 8@??)(
Thanks Tim 8((()*/
-
Wow Ian!!! Have you ever sat on a jury?
No I have never actually sat on a jury Matthew. But hope springs eternal 8(0(*
I think the closest I ever got was being made captain of the debating team at university for one term. 8()(((@#
I have sat on a jury and it was one of the most tedious and frustrating two weeks of my life.
It was truely horrible experience.
-
There is no such thing as Divine Retribution. Thank God. Or has anyone got any proof of this?
There is no proof there is and there is no proof there isn't - scientifically speaking at least, under these circumstances; it is best keep an open mind. 8(0(*
I do not think there is a god or any divine retribution. If we do not get it in ourselves before they die then they got away with it, like Saville.
That is why I am competely content with dragging 95 year old Nazis to court.
-
Outlook, I understand your viewpoint many would agree and disagree. French philosopher Descartes argued that without divinity mankind loses it's purpose and with it, a sense of justice. The notion of divine retribution has been with us since antiquity.
Bamber has lost all his possible outlets for squirming out of his just punishment. It will come as no surprise that life imprisonment certainly has not taught him how to be contrite, remorseful, empathetic or even humble. The reason? He is a psychopath. Incapable of these basic human emotions. The kind of feelings that bond humanity together. A sense of 'doing the right thing' makes us feel good about ourselves and others who follow it. However, to a psychopath this makes no sense at all. Why should they do anything for anyone else if there is nothing in it for them personally? A reasonable question if looking at it flatly and logically, but we are human. We have a moral responsibility to each other. This is the language that the Bamber's of this world cannot understand. They are intensely self-centred, arrogant and callous, concerned only for themselves and view others purely for what they can get out of them. Such people in antiquity were called 'demons' who walked among us on earth 'sowing wickedness and iniquity' This was the birth of the 'angels and demons' stories. Later, they were deemed to be 'morally insane' and locked up in asylums. Later still, they were studied and conclusively labelled as psychopaths or sociopaths. A personailty disorder that made them anti-social and treat others as nothing more than objects to be used. The names may have changed, but not the meaning. Are we still dealing with demons of the past? In Bamber a man who willfully stood over the sleeping bodies of two innocent and defenseless children before he shot them repeatedly at point blank range in the head, just to enhance his own lifestyle, I believe we certainly are.