Sheila’s Foot — Proof She Was Dragged At The Point of Death?

[ISpyWithMyEye]

I can't be bothered to look at this in detail tbh Ispy, the prosecution alleged that he must have opened fire on Nevill and June while they were asleep and that's good enough for me. It's up to JB supporters to come up with an alternative where SC and NB are up and about before the shooting starts.

The idea that SC comes in, starts shooting June, misses NB who then runs down to make a quick phone call to JB before coming back up to get shot and run back down again is just plain silly but equally silly is the notion that SC & NB are downstairs, SC with the gun "going crazy" but yet to shoot anyone and NB decides to call JB.

It all comes back to JBs claim that his father called.

Then you add in the fact that there wasn't a speck of evidence on Sheila, the blood in the silencer and JMs evidence and come to the conclusion that 2 jury members needed their bumps felt.

You’re right, CS

The evidence against Jeremy Bamber is overwhelming, which ever door he crept in....😖

[Holly Goodhead]

You’re right, CS

The evidence against Jeremy Bamber is overwhelming, which ever door he crept in....😖

It isn't it comes down to the blood/silencer evidenced by the fact the CCRC referred the case to CoA on the back of this.  If the other 'evidence' was strong the CCRC would have fallen back on this and the case wouldn't have been referred.

[Common sense]

It isn't it comes down to the blood/silencer evidenced by the fact the CCRC referred the case to CoA on the back of this.  If the other 'evidence' was strong the CCRC would have fallen back on this and the case wouldn't have been referred.

That's not how the CoA works.

Take the Barry George case for example; the speck of gunpowder may have been impressive to the jury and it may not but the fact is they weren't told of possible contamination which might have had a bearing on their decision and the conviction was quashed on that basis.

There still remained strong circumstantial evidence enough to try him twice more.

Didn't Arlidge say to the jury you could throw the silencer out of the window and still convict Bamber?

I do however agree that the blood/silencer evidence is key and significantly undermining it would lead to a retrial,  but I just can't see it being done.   

[Caroline]

It isn't it comes down to the blood/silencer evidenced by the fact the CCRC referred the case to CoA on the back of this.  If the other 'evidence' was strong the CCRC would have fallen back on this and the case wouldn't have been referred.

He had his chance on the silencer.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

It isn't it comes down to the blood/silencer evidenced by the fact the CCRC referred the case to CoA on the back of this.  If the other 'evidence' was strong the CCRC would have fallen back on this and the case wouldn't have been referred.

And that was all slung out of court in less than an hour

The evidence didn’t rely solely on the evidence of the silencer — as damning as it was to Jeremy Bamber — it relied on stacks and stacks of other evidence too, which was overwhelming.

The judge even said to the jury they could make a decision on Julie Mugford’s evidence alone....

Appeal slung out.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

That's not how the CoA works.

Take the Barry George case for example; the speck of gunpowder may have been impressive to the jury and it may not but the fact is they weren't told of possible contamination which might have had a bearing on their decision and the conviction was quashed on that basis.

There still remained strong circumstantial evidence enough to try him twice more.

Didn't Arlidge say to the jury you could throw the silencer out of the window and still convict Bamber?

I do however agree that the blood/silencer evidence is key and significantly undermining it would lead to a retrial,  but I just can't see it being done.

Yes, CS — Aldridge did indeed say JB could be found guilty due to all the other overwhelming evidence

And the fact he’s lost every appeal since then simply proves he murdered his family

The courts would never do a retrial: besides being impossible due to witnesses being dead and 35 years having gone by, if they COULD do a retrial he’d get found guilty again as even more evidence has come to light that he’s the killer. There was some evidence the prosecution didn’t show the court in 1986, so they’d never spend hundreds of thousands on another trial simply to get the same result: GUILTY.

On top of that, all his contradictory letters he’s written over the last 35 years ties him up in knots.

As far as the CPS are concerned JB is just a pest and no longer significant. He’s guilty and they’ve thrown away the key.

[Common sense]

Yes, CS — Aldridge did indeed say JB could be found guilty due to all the other overwhelming evidence

And the fact he’s lost every appeal since then simply proves he murdered his family

The courts would never do a retrial: besides being impossible due to witnesses being dead and 35 years having gone by, if they COULD do a retrial he’d get found guilty again as even more evidence has come to light that he’s the killer. There was some evidence the prosecution didn’t show the court in 1986, so they’d never spend hundreds of thousands on another trial simply to get the same result: GUILTY.

On top of that, all his contradictory letters he’s written over the last 35 years ties him up in knots.

As far as the CPS are concerned JB is just a pest and no longer significant. He’s guilty and they’ve thrown away the key.

I couldn't agree more Ispy.

If there is a remote chance of the verdict being quashed it would be on a technicality only.There is no proving his innocence.

Despite the years served, this would I believe lead to a retrial as public safety is an issue. Convicted sex offenders still face a retrial even if they successfully appeal after serving their sentence for instance, they can't be sent back to prison but other public safety issues need to be decided such as the sex offender register and MAPPA.

I'm sure Bamber's lawyers would try to argue an abuse of process due to dead witnesses but like you say, there would remain more than enough evidence to convict him again and he himself has contributed to that. They could produce his own website and copious letters as evidence against him.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

I couldn't agree more Ispy.

If there is a remote chance of the verdict being quashed it would be on a technicality only.There is no proving his innocence.

Despite the years served, this would I believe lead to a retrial as public safety is an issue. Convicted sex offenders still face a retrial even if they successfully appeal after serving their sentence for instance, they can't be sent back to prison but other public safety issues need to be decided such as the sex offender register and MAPPA.

I'm sure Bamber's lawyers would try to argue an abuse of process due to dead witnesses but like you say, there would remain more than enough evidence to convict him again and he himself has contributed to that. They could produce his own website and copious letters as evidence against him.

Yes, CS, but he doesn’t have any alleged technicalities that could deem his conviction unsafe.  All of the technicalities he claims to find are so insignificant.

He claims things as such:

~Police were in conversation with someone in the WH farm. Yes they were: with him. And police records show that.

~ Police saw movement inside the house: yes, it was a trick of the moonlight, shadows & breeze

~ A 999 call was made at 6am from the house: no, that was the police listening into the open line

~ Nevill called police at 03:35: no, the control room officer paraphrased what Jeremy said

And so it goes on...petty complaints that have been disproven in the past, and won’t be heard again.


Even if he did have a solid technicality he could prove was unjust, that doesn’t negate all the overwhelming evidence that was presented to the court in 1986. His lies, slip ups, contradictions in his police statements, Julie’s solid testimony, her friends statements saying he called Julie at approximately 3am, the fact he had a motive, he’d read the wills/home contents insurance, proof he broke into WHF, his behaviour immediately after the funeral, his lavish spending, holidays,  him trying to sell Sheila’s personal photographs for £20k, the different masks he wears depending on who he’s writing to i.e. Colin etc, and that’s without the fact Sheila could not have killed anyone with that gun, let alone herself. And more...much more...

So even IF he could prove a mistake was made by a typo or whatever petty nonsense he spouts, he’d still be kept in prison for life, because the evidence against him is dynamite. Especially when they brought up things they’d not thought of, such as Sheila’s stomach contents only being partially digested meaning she was dead much earlier than 3am. He’d try and say she had a quick snack, but he wouldn’t be able to prove that; no-one would believe she did due to her medication and tiredness and the fact she’d eaten a full dinner at 9pm, plus all the documents in the archives which would prove what her stomach actually contained. And the silencer, they’ve since proved it was a trillion to one it was Sheila’s blood deep inside on the eighth baffle.

This will die a slow death and he will be forgotten again soon, but he’ll still control of his CT for a while as it’s the only thing he’s got to keep him occupied. Even that will break up and cease eventually, he’ll be 70 in 10 years and time whizzes by...no-one will give him a thought then, or even remember his name.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Holly is convinced a reconstruction and further analysis of the blood in the silencer will free JB. 

[Common sense]

Yes, CS, but he doesn’t have any alleged technicalities that could deem his conviction unsafe.  All of the technicalities he claims to find are so insignificant.

He claims things as such:

~Police were in conversation with someone in the WH farm. Yes they were: with him. And police records show that.

~ Police saw movement inside the house: yes, it was a trick of the moonlight, shadows & breeze

~ A 999 call was made at 6am from the house: no, that was the police listening into the open line

~ Nevill called police at 03:35: no, the control room officer paraphrased what Jeremy said

And so it goes on...petty complaints that have been disproven in the past, and won’t be heard again.


Even if he did have a solid technicality he could prove was unjust, that doesn’t negate all the overwhelming evidence that was presented to the court in 1986. His lies, slip ups, contradictions in his police statements, Julie’s solid testimony, her friends statements saying he called Julie at approximately 3am, the fact he had a motive, he’d read the wills/home contents insurance, proof he broke into WHF, his behaviour immediately after the funeral, his lavish spending, holidays,  him trying to sell Sheila’s personal photographs for £20k, the different masks he wears depending on who he’s writing to i.e. Colin etc, and that’s without the fact Sheila could not have killed anyone with that gun, let alone herself. And more...much more...

So even IF he could prove a mistake was made by a typo or whatever petty nonsense he spouts, he’d still be kept in prison for life, because the evidence against him is dynamite. Especially when they brought up things they’d not thought of, such as Sheila’s stomach contents only being partially digested meaning she was dead much earlier than 3am. He’d try and say she had a quick snack, but he wouldn’t be able to prove that; no-one would believe she did due to her medication and tiredness and the fact she’d eaten a full dinner at 9pm, plus all the documents in the archives which would prove what her stomach actually contained. And the silencer, they’ve since proved it was a trillion to one it was Sheila’s blood deep inside on the eighth baffle.

This will die a slow death and he will be forgotten again soon, but he’ll still control of his CT for a while as it’s the only thing he’s got to keep him occupied. Even that will break up and cease eventually, he’ll be 70 in 10 years and time whizzes by...no-one will give him a thought then, or even remember his name.

Those aren't technicalities Ispy, those are mad conspiracy fantasies conjured from a bit of sloppy paperwork!

Unfortunately, I don't think he will let himself be forgotten and as one of the most infamous cold blooded crimes of the last century, there will always be interest in the case and a few gullible types he can exploit.

*The "in conversation" conspiracy comes from an ambiguous single line written by a radio operator on the communications log. They were either in conversation with JB inside the farm (possibly "barn" but misheard) at 5.25 or it was an attempt to speak to anyone inside via the loudhailer. The next line in the log at 5.29 reads "Challenge to persons inside the house met with no response" - but the CT never mention the 5.29 entry!

[Caroline]

Holly is convinced a reconstruction and further analysis of the blood in the silencer will free JB.

It won't.

[Common sense]

Holly is convinced a reconstruction and further analysis of the blood in the silencer will free JB.

I think that ship sailed in 1985 and was sunk in 2002.

As for reconstructions, I don't think there is an actor capable of making NBs supposed call to JB remotely believable, unless maybe Laurence Olivier is resurrected and I suspect he would turn the part down after reading the script. 

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Holly is convinced a reconstruction and further analysis of the blood in the silencer will free JB.

She must have been indoctrinated by Bamber — and he did a good job considering she spend almost 24/7 insisting he’s innocent — and that’s despite her apparently not having heard from him for two years 😳

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Those aren't technicalities Ispy, those are mad conspiracy fantasies conjured from a bit of sloppy paperwork!

Unfortunately, I don't think he will let himself be forgotten and as one of the most infamous cold blooded crimes of the last century, there will always be interest in the case and a few gullible types he can exploit.

*The "in conversation" conspiracy comes from an ambiguous single line written by a radio operator on the communications log. They were either in conversation with JB inside the farm (possibly "barn" but misheard) at 5.25 or it was an attempt to speak to anyone inside via the loudhailer. The next line in the log at 5.29 reads "Challenge to persons inside the house met with no response" - but the CT never mention the 5.29 entry!

Well, the CT would omit that part, wouldn’t they? Cherry pickers....

I don’t know why they do because anyone can find it on Google — they just make themselves look deceptive


So what actually are the technicalities he’s complaining about? 

[ISpyWithMyEye]

I think that ship sailed in 1985 and was sunk in 2002.

As for reconstructions, I don't think there is an actor capable of making NBs supposed call to JB remotely believable, unless maybe Laurence Olivier is resurrected and I suspect he would turn the part down after reading the script.

I know it’s not a laughing matter in any shape or form, but for Holly to believe a reconstruction could take place 

So how does she propose to have Nevill making the call?

Flicking through a telephone directory humming to himself (when no directory was in the kitchen, nor reading glasses) pouring a G&T while waiting for Chelmsford Police to reply....

Or standing with blood all over his face, gurgling as he couldn’t breathe properly?