Jeremy Bamber’s Proven Lies

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Yes, my mistake, It's a ling time since I read the statement. See - no disgrace to admit you made a mistake or were wrong. No need for defensiveness or 'whatever's' 

It doesn't say who took the statement but it does state that signatures were witnessed - however, there are no signatures and it was obtained from Helen at home.

Not that it matters now, but out of curiosity where did this statement by Helen pop up?

It just seems so strange, especially as no-one seems to know who it was witnessed by, and the defence didn’t use it.

It’s surprising the defence didn’t use it — there must have been a very good reason for that 🤔

[clockend]

Not that it matters now, but out of curiosity where did this statement by Helen pop up?

It just seems so strange, especially as no-one seems to know who it was witnessed by, and the defence didn’t use it.

It’s surprising the defence didn’t use it — there must have been a very good reason for that 🤔

Hi I spy, just recieved Carol ANN Lee booK WHF,
As i am new to case i quickly looked at the References and on page 369 it espouses that
at 15 years old Helen Grimster was the youngest witness to take the stand and she
recounted her conversation with Sheila which she had at WHF in 1985

[Caroline]

Hi I spy, just recieved Carol ANN Lee booK WHF,
As i am new to case i quickly looked at the References and on page 369 it espouses that
at 15 years old Helen Grimster was the youngest witness to take the stand and she
recounted her conversation with Sheila which she had at WHF in 1985

Thanks for that, I didn't know she was a witness, even after 8 years, there are still things to learn. I still take that statement with a pinch of salt, 13 year olds don't use words like 'contemplate' and it was obvious that the questioner was trying to given the impression that Sheila was smoking a joint.

[G-Unit]

I'm sure you do, you'll ignore the fact that the wallet was the first thing Bamber went looking for and that he knew where it should be and how much was inside. You'll ignore and try an divert attention elsewhere. It's all been done before by other 'fence sitters' and supporters. The list is on the blue forum - I don't have a number.

I found out why Ann and her father 'almost felt guilty'. It was because her father 'had checked the wallet and Uncle Nevill's trouser pockets on Saturday for Mr Cock'. [Ann Eaton's statement to SY 14/05/91]

So was Jeremy right? Was there four or five hundred pounds in it?

[Caroline]

I found out why Ann and her father 'almost felt guilty'. It was because her father 'had checked the wallet and Uncle Nevill's trouser pockets on Saturday for Mr Cock'. [Ann Eaton's statement to SY 14/05/91]

So was Jeremy right? Was there four or five hundred pounds in it?

Of course he was right, he must have counted it to collect later - is that the first thing you would go looking for if your family were murdered? And how did h know it was missing?

[G-Unit]

Of course he was right, he must have counted it to collect later - is that the first thing you would go looking for if your family were murdered? And how did h know it was missing?

Ann never said if he was right or not, so how do you know? If he was right it should have been listed as cash in hand by Mr Cock, and it wasn't. Ann herself asked Jeremy on 8th August if her mother could have June's engagement ring. It seems he wasn't the only one with posessions on his mind.
[Ann Eaton statement 14/08/91 page 30]

[Caroline]

Ann never said if he was right or not, so how do you know? If he was right it should have been listed as cash in hand by Mr Cock, and it wasn't. Ann herself asked Jeremy on 8th August if her mother could have June's engagement ring. It seems he wasn't the only one with posessions on his mind.
[Ann Eaton statement 14/08/91 page 30]

I have read AE's statement thanks - she never said it was wrong either. There is a big difference in scavenging for ready cash and wanting to keep a piece of jewellery. So how did he know where to look for the wallet and how did he know it was missing? He didn't bother to look any further - he knew it was missing from the off!

[G-Unit]

I have read AE's statement thanks - she never said it was wrong either. There is a big difference in scavenging for ready cash and wanting to keep a piece of jewellery. So how did he know where to look for the wallet and how did he know it was missing? He didn't bother to look any further - he knew it was missing from the off!

I don't know and neither do you, but you seem determined, just like his cousin was, to use it against him. Perhaps it suddenly dawned on him that stuff was disappearing.

[Caroline]

I don't know and neither do you, but you seem determined, just like his cousin was, to use it against him. Perhaps it suddenly dawned on him that stuff was disappearing.

Eh? It was the FIRST time he's been back to the farm and things were disappearing because the executor asked for them to be removed. Too bloody right I will hold it against him - scrounging for cash would be the last thing on my mind if my family were murdered - unless I murdered them.  I asked him about the wallet, he avoided answering - but you keep making excuses for him.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Hi I spy, just recieved Carol ANN Lee booK WHF,
As i am new to case i quickly looked at the References and on page 369 it espouses that
at 15 years old Helen Grimster was the youngest witness to take the stand and she
recounted her conversation with Sheila which she had at WHF in 1985

Gosh, you’ve got through the book quickly...

There’s contradictions about whether Helen took the stand — some sources say she did, whilst Jeremy Bamber’s team say she didn’t...but JB’s campaign team do lie, so you can’t believe anything they say

Whatever, whether Helen did take the stand or not, the defence didn’t get from her what they set out to achieve, did they?

I don’t believe for a second that Sheila was smoking cannabis inside the house: she’d have been terrified to. In fact, Nevill had found some of the cannabis Jeremy bought in Amsterdam long before he killed them all, and had kept it in his safe with a note.

Helen never said Sheila was smoking cannabis; she said she was chain-smoking cigarettes. Nor did Sheila say she was suicidal.

The defence would have inferred that, obviously...that’s their job — to get criminals off the hook by casting doubts in the jury’s minds. But because the evidence against Jeremy Bamber was so, so, so overwhelming it was clear he was guilty from the outset.

Incidentally, it’s very telling that the only witnesses Jeremy had to say his relationship with Nevill seemed OK were mere acquaintances who barely knew them...

Jeremy didn’t have ONE person testify on his behalf or give a character reference for him. Not ONE of his few associates who were close to him and knew him well agreed to testify for him. Brett Collins, Sue Ford, Michael Deckers, Rodney Brown, Virginia Grieves  — they all refused to help him....

Speaks volumes....




[attachment deleted by admin]

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Ann never said if he was right or not, so how do you know? If he was right it should have been listed as cash in hand by Mr Cock, and it wasn't. Ann herself asked Jeremy on 8th August if her mother could have June's engagement ring. It seems he wasn't the only one with posessions on his mind.
[Ann Eaton statement 14/08/91 page 30]

Why SHOULD have Ann told Jeremy what was inside Nevill’s wallet? Maybe, unlike him (the proven THIEF) she didn’t look? Maybe she just handed it over to Basil Cock?

And it’s perfectly natural to want a sentimental item belonging to your mother’s sister so it could stay in the family and go to her closest relative. Especially if it was expensive in value: why wouldn’t you? It’s a family treasure worth a lot both in money and sentiment.

Why would Ann Eaton, June’s niece want to watch as evil Jeremy started grabbing all the beloved possessions like a vulture and selling them off to strangers, just so he could squander the cash by pissing it up the wall?

He was a useless, sponging layabout — and everyone knew that BEFORE he murdered all his family.

He even sold the beautiful portrait of Beatrice that was painted when she was a little girl: and he makes out he “loved” his family?!

Makes me laugh how he posts this rubbish up about how much he adored his mum, yet treated her like dirt when she was alive; taunted her; insulted her; upset her by cycling round her then pulling up sharply; telling her to put her hand in his pocket where he had live rats that she had a fear of; deliberately chopping off all the budding daffodil/tulip heads she’d lovingly planted in the front....mocking her; ridiculing her; stealing from her...and telling everyone he knew how much he despised her.

[APRIL]

I don't know and neither do you, but you seem determined, just like his cousin was, to use it against him. Perhaps it suddenly dawned on him that stuff was disappearing.

Rather as you appear to have determined to become the self appointed saviour of his reputation. I wonder if you'd be adopting the same stance had your family have been the victims and you were denied a sentimental keepsake? I'm going to suggest that the only things which were "disappearing" were those requested by BC, and had Jeremy been working with him, he'd have known this.

[G-Unit]

Gosh, you’ve got through the book quickly...

There’s contradictions about whether Helen took the stand — some sources say she did, whilst Jeremy Bamber’s team say she didn’t...but JB’s campaign team do lie, so you can’t believe anything they say

Whatever, whether Helen did take the stand or not, the defence didn’t get from her what they set out to achieve, did they?

I don’t believe for a second that Sheila was smoking cannabis inside the house: she’d have been terrified to. In fact, Nevill had found some of the cannabis Jeremy bought in Amsterdam long before he killed them all, and had kept it in his safe with a note.

Helen never said Sheila was smoking cannabis; she said she was chain-smoking cigarettes. Nor did Sheila say she was suicidal.

The defence would have inferred that, obviously...that’s their job — to get criminals off the hook by casting doubts in the jury’s minds. But because the evidence against Jeremy Bamber was so, so, so overwhelming it was clear he was guilty from the outset.

Incidentally, it’s very telling that the only witnesses Jeremy had to say his relationship with Nevill seemed OK were mere acquaintances who barely knew them...

Jeremy didn’t have ONE person testify on his behalf or give a character reference for him. Not ONE of his few associates who were close to him and knew him well agreed to testify for him. Brett Collins, Sue Ford, Michael Deckers, Rodney Brown, Virginia Grieves  — they all refused to help him....

Speaks volumes....

The cannabis in the safe wasn't bought by Jeremy Bamber in Amsterdam.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

The cannabis in the safe wasn't bought by Jeremy Bamber in Amsterdam.

And you’d know that would you?🤔

[APRIL]

And you’d know that would you?🤔

You need to check, but my understanding is that it belonged to Nevill's nephew, Anthony Pargeter, who'd had a bit of a drug problem.