Question to members

[The General]

Exactly

Jeremy Bamber was the last person to see them alive inside the house, and the first person to see them all dead — so he knew EXACTLY where Nevill’s wallet was and how much it contained.

As Nevill lay dead in the kitchen, Jeremy went back upstairs to kill Sheila, then stepped over his dead mother and looked through Nevill’s wallet quickly counting the money with his evil filthy paws — probably stole £100 for his champagne the next day (hence why he said there was £400 - £500 in there: already blaming someone else of stealing some cash in case it got discovered), then cleared off home with that sickly upturned smirk on his gob.

What was the point in the acting to the contrary then?

[APRIL]

I made no such claim. I merely pointed out that Jeremy Bamber wasn't the only family member showing an interest in 'the spoils'. I assume Nevill bought or acquired June's engagement ring, so it had nothing to do with June's family.

Colin Caffell mentions Jeremy's feelings; he described his relatives as 'a load of f*****g magpies' nattering about his mother's jewellery and the farm. [In Search...page 64-5] According to Mr Cock in his w/s dated 16/09/85 Ann requested his presence at WHF on 10th, saying Jeremy had asked her to arrange it. [CAL page 222] I think that's unlikely, given his vews as expressed to Colin on the same weekend.

And you know this how? It is PERFECTLY probable that in families such as the Speakmans and Bambers, items such as jewellery were generational and had huge sentimental value. Jeremy would neither have known nor cared, other than it's monetary value which could have been added to his own coffers -perhaps you can find evidence of him presenting the proceeds of his sellings off to BC to set against the death duties it's claimed he was doing it for- and it's highly unlikely that Colin would have had the remotest idea of/interest in how jewellery became handed down through families. But even had this NOT been the case, and Nevill, as a young man just starting out on a career, hadn't been able to afford to buy June a spectacular piece, I see absolutely nothing wrong in her sister wanting a small and insignificant ring as a keepsake.

[puglove]

I made no such claim. I merely pointed out that Jeremy Bamber wasn't the only family member showing an interest in 'the spoils'. I assume Nevill bought or acquired June's engagement ring, so it had nothing to do with June's family.

Colin Caffell mentions Jeremy's feelings; he described his relatives as 'a load of f*****g magpies' nattering about his mother's jewellery and the farm. [In Search...page 64-5] According to Mr Cock in his w/s dated 16/09/85 Ann requested his presence at WHF on 10th, saying Jeremy had asked her to arrange it. [CAL page 222] I think that's unlikely, given his vews as expressed to Colin on the same weekend.

Bamber has always been motivated by greed, and still is. If you read through Daisy's posts on here you'll get an insight into his true character.

[G-Unit]

Bamber has always been motivated by greed, and still is. If you read through Daisy's posts on here you'll get an insight into his true character.

Quite possibly, but it seems the wider family were hardly uninterested. Didn't Barbara Wilson make some accusations about Peter Easton's behaviour?

[APRIL]

Quite possibly, but it seems the wider family were hardly uninterested. Didn't Barbara Wilson make some accusations about Peter Easton's behaviour?

Just because one family member is a murderer doesn't automatically make every other family member pure as driven snow.

[Angelo222]

Just because one family member is a murderer doesn't automatically make every other family member pure as driven snow.

Always keeping in mind of course that Jeremy Bamber had no blood links to anyone else in the family.

[APRIL]

Always keeping in mind of course that Jeremy Bamber had no blood links to anyone else in the family.

Indeed..................and Peter Eaton was only one of them by marriage.

[Caroline]

Quite possibly, but it seems the wider family were hardly uninterested. Didn't Barbara Wilson make some accusations about Peter Easton's behaviour?

How does that exonerate Bamber?

[Caroline]

It's a strange sense of values which can claim money as having equal worth to the incalculable sentimental value of a piece of family jewellery, whatever it's financial worth. It may be erroneous, but the story goes that Jeremy had requested that June was cremated wearing her jewellery. It's said that the undertaker returned it to Basil Cock. That being so, I can only hope that Pamela did, eventually get it as a memento of her sister.

I'm not sure that June's ring was returned but Sheila's was.

[G-Unit]

How does that exonerate Bamber?

I don't think I said it did.

[APRIL]

I don't think I said it did.

Then why the comparisons between Jeremy and his wider family?

[G-Unit]

Then why the comparisons between Jeremy and his wider family?

It needs to be taken into account imo.

[APRIL]

It needs to be taken into account imo.

Why? None of them were ever on trial for murder, and whilst they may not have been totally squeaky clean -who of us is?- Jeremy, it seems, was much less so, but he had a choice, which, whilst not being an acceptable one, would have left his family alive.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't think I said it did.

Then what exactly are you saying?  Is it another of the many “just because”s to add to the long list of Jeremy’s cold and calculating behaviours that you are seeking to excuse away? 

[Angelo222]

Then what exactly are you saying?  Is it another of the many “just because”s to add to the long list of Jeremy’s cold and calculating behaviours that you are seeking to excuse away?

Bamber's crime is off the scale.  To effectively execute two children as they slept in bed deserves the noose imo and that is why he can never be released.