What would convince that Jeremy was guilty of 5 murders?

[Brietta]

To argue that Sheila did it, it is really amounting to say that Sheila was last to die.  So the Bamber argument does in a slight way put an order to the deaths.

Was that helpful to his supposed objective of gaining a fortune?  Or was Colin Caffell now a major shareholder as his kids would now be beneficiaries of the wills.

I don't think so; he killed the twins and whether he did so first or last ... he was the beneficiary

[APRIL]

To argue that Sheila did it, it is really amounting to say that Sheila was last to die.  So the Bamber argument does in a slight way put an order to the deaths.

Was that helpful to his supposed objective of gaining a fortune?  Or was Colin Caffell now a major shareholder as his kids would now be beneficiaries of the wills.

It goes without saying that a guilty Sheila would be the last to die, but I believe that, psychologically, an innocent Sheila would have had to be the last to die, and not just because he could then, conveniently place the rifle in a position which suggested it. I don't see how Colin would ever have been a beneficiary because the line of benefits to him had been severed.

[Robittybob1]

I don't think so; he killed the twins and whether he did so first or last ... he was the beneficiary

Not entirely according to his accountant.

[Robittybob1]

It goes without saying that a guilty Sheila would be the last to die, but I believe that, psychologically, an innocent Sheila would have had to be the last to die, and not just because he could then, conveniently place the rifle in a position which suggested it. I don't see how Colin would ever have been a beneficiary because the line of benefits to him had been severed.

I have seen a breakdown of this and if Colin's kids were the last to die he would be their next of kin.  There are paths that did give Colin the potential to inherit something of the estate.

[Caroline]

To argue that Sheila did it, it is really amounting to say that Sheila was last to die.  So the Bamber argument does in a slight way put an order to the deaths.

Was that helpful to his supposed objective of gaining a fortune?  Or was Colin Caffell now a major shareholder as his kids would now be beneficiaries of the wills.

Colin got nowt!

[steve_trousers]

Colin got nowt!

I’m pleased that he made a few bob from his books. After what he has been through, why not.

[Caroline]

What you say is valid, Mrswah -other than at family gatherings, I doubt there to have been any socializing- but it still remains that Ann would have had greater connection to them both, than did police.

Or indeed anyone here.

[Brietta]

I’m pleased that he made a few bob from his books. After what he has been through, why not.

That's a strange thing to say.

If my sons had been wiped off the face of the earth before they had the chance to have a life, I would have liked a means to mark their passing.

[steve_trousers]

That's a strange thing to say.

If my sons had wiped off the face of the earth before they had the chance to have a life, I would have liked a means to mark their passing.

Yes, he should have received some means, it would have been the right thing.

Several others were making money out of the tragedy. In my opinion Colin wrote it in a dignified, unsensational way reflecting on the aftermath and grieving process.

[Brietta]

Yes, he should have received some means, it would have been the right thing.

Several others were making money out of the tragedy. In my opinion Colin wrote it in a dignified, unsensational way reflecting on the aftermath and grieving process.

You misunderstand me I think.

Jeremy Bamber slaughtered the most precious persons in Colin Caffell's life, his two young sons.

You seem to be fixated on remuneration from his book.  I don't think that was a motivating factor for him in writing it.  I think he was far more interested in setting the record straight on the treatment Sheila Caffell had been given by the press.
The murder of his family was a truly life changing event for him and I don't think he needs implicit criticism for writing a book and being paid for it.

I agree with you when you say, "In my opinion Colin wrote it in a dignified, unsensational way reflecting on the aftermath and grieving process."

[steve_trousers]

You seem to be fixated on remuneration from his book.  I don't think that was a motivating factor for him in writing it.  I think he was far more interested in setting the record straight on the treatment Sheila Caffell had been given by the press.
The murder of his family was a truly life changing event for him and I don't think he needs implicit criticism for writing a book and being paid for it.

I understand and In hindsight I should have considered that before the mention of remuneration. No disrespect intended.