The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?

[Nicholas]

Didn’t Mike Tesko introduce ‘four moderators’ ?

2010
Bambers letter to Mike Tesko re 2 sound moderators https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=210.0

There’s mention of Aunt Agatha and Facebook too - that was around the time her and I communicated

Aunt Agatha recently stated

Please, do not spread misinformation Nicholas.

He was told, and supposedly proven at court, that the silencer was used.   He had no evidence, proof or paperwork at that time to suggest otherwise.


I'd have to look through my paperwork to find this out and that something I'm not prepared to do.
However, it was years later.... Mike Tesco would be a more valuable source than I regarding that.

Bamber’s 2010 letter to Mike Tesco says that AA (The letter refers to her Christian name which I won’t post here) wanted him to put information on her Facebook page - the one she says she ‘closed’ (below)

Bamber’s 4th July 2010 letter to Mike states,

 ‘********** wanted you to put some stuff on her Facebook site. I hope that you don’t go too overboard - smiley face - and if you stick to the 38 page statement of claim we’ll be quids in. As we put up other issues we can deal with them.
I was thinking about the action report instructing DS Davidson to fingerprint the sound moderator dated 13th Sept 1985. But did they ever do so.

This is around the same time Bamber discarded Aunt Agatha

I had to go to the police and reported it. Arrests where not made at the time.  I decided to remove myself completely and closed any social media links I had.  I was not prepared to battle this out amongst obsessive Bamberettes.

Aunt Agatha claims above to have ‘closed any social media links I had’ but this is misleading as she communicated with me via a Facebook account using a pseudonym - think the pseudonym was Parker something or something Parker?

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin
When I fist wrote to Jeremy at the tail end of 2010 I already believed that he was innocent, although I probably wasn’t exactly sure why.  I knew the basic facts of course, I had followed it in the media from day one.  You could say I had grown up with the case.   Over the last four years I have done as much in depth research as I can and I now spout with confidence (and I do often!) why I know Jeremy did not and could not have killed his family. I have spent probably 100’s of hours reading all the information that is available to me and I know the following to be true or point to Jeremy’s innocence, in no particular order and certainly not exhaustive:

•   No forensics link Jeremy to the murders.

•   There was more than one sound moderator, exhibit labels were manipulated and four moderators were passed off to the jury as one and recent forensics have revealed that the silencer wasn’t even used in the murders.
http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru


Didn’t Mike Tesko introduce ‘four moderators’ ?

What is Trudi Benjamin playing at?

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin

•   There was more than one sound moderator, exhibit labels were manipulated and four moderators were passed off to the jury as one and recent forensics have revealed that the silencer wasn’t even used in the murders.[/i]
http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru

Here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7240.0.html

David posted the following nonsense claim

"The circumstances and evidence to undermine the sound moderator seem overwhelming."

Did he followup with anything accurate or intelligent?  Of course not.

He starts out saying "Boutflour is alleged to find the sound moderator on the 10th of August. This is handed into the lab on the 13th by DI Cook. Multiple copies of the submissions have been made and altered."
 
He implies that there is something wrong with multiple copies of the submission being drafted when in fact it was required to be submitted in triplicate so they had to hand write 3 copies of the Holab form.  He claims it was altered though all that happened is on one of the 3 forms Cook made a clerical error. Cook labeled the moderator lab item 22 and wrote that on the first 2 copies.  He screwed up and wrote lab item 23 on the third form.  To COLP he admitted he screwed up the third copy and that there was only 1 moderator.  If there were two moderators being submitted all three forms would contain both lab item 22 and lab item 23 not either or.  All 3 copies were supposed to be identical he simply screwed up on one.   

So far David's claims don't undermine a damn thing except in his imagination.

He next states that "It is then alleged in a document typed in November 1985 that on that day human blood was discovered inside the moderator.  If so why did this initial discovery of human blood on the 13th not trigger an arrest for Jeremy? If the accounts written in retrospect are correct then they had the smoking gun evidence within a matter of days?"

First of all police weren't told about the findings until the 14th.  Second all police were told was that there was red paint on the knurled portion and human blood on the outside and inside the moderator.  The lab didn't know whose blood it was at that point.  It was not until further testing was done that they determined it was Sheila's blood, that it got there by drawback and that experts who did such work explained the significance of such results to police.  That happened in September.  When was Jeremy arrested- in September after such evidence was available.

David suggests the only records are from November completely ignoring the contemporaneous lab examination records and instead lies trying to pretend that the only paperwork that exists is from November. He is as pathetic as mike. There not only is contemporaneous lab examination records but COLP stated there was documentary proof the police were notified of the results on August 14.  This is corroborated by the police going to WHF on August 14 to take paint samples.
 
Next he writes:

"DI Cook in the COLP  investigations then explains the lack of paperwork
As I intended carrying out the examination myself using their facilities then the items would never I leave my possession and therefore proof of continuity using those forms Was not required, as they were only intended for submission to the Huntingdon Laboratory. The continuity of these exhibits was solely my responsibility."

This is an honest and accurate explanation of why continuity forms when he brought the moderator to be fingerprinted were not required.  There were plenty of other documents simply no continuity sheets showing the moderator taken to Sandridge.  On page 26 (Bates Stamp 190) of his COLP interview Cook notes he entered the moderator on the evidence room reception sheets on August 13.  Thus there were in fact records of it being in police custody in the evidence room August 13 after it returning for the lab.  He didn't fill out continuity sheets to show he took it to Sandridge because he did all the work and had it in his possession.  Continuity sheets are for when it leaves his possession.  He did in fact fill out continuity sheets to convey it to the lab and also filled out HOLAB forms to the lab, the lab acknowledged receipt sending one of those Holab forms singed received back to HQ and alos they did fill out the examination record.  Page 28 (Bates Stamp 192) specifically discusses the continuity sheets that exist showing it conveyed to the lab on August 13.

That no continuity sheets were filled out to take it to Sandridge but only documents showing it going to the lab is is not proof of anything wrong except in David's imagination.  The same page mentions there was also a continuity sheet and Holab forms showing it was conveyed to the lab on August 30 by courier Wolton.

But next comes the real whopper:

"On the 29th of August 1985 DI Cook unscrews the silencer and takes out the baffle plates, he takes the photograph below."

This is a big fat lie.  Cook didn't unscrew anything the photo was taken after the lab examined it. Mike hand wrote the date on the photocopy himself made up that it was taken apart by Cook and that cook photographed it after taking it apart himself.  David is either as gullible as they come or knows this is complete nonsense but doesn't care. 

Since mike made up the claims that renders this babble total nonsense:

"The significance of this is that DI Cook never reports finding any blood. The Crown claims that a considerable amount of blood and blood flakes is sprayed from baffle plates 1 to 6. If we are to believe the silencers authenticity we now must believe DI Cook just happened to miss seeing all this blood." 

Cook didn't take it apart and never claimed he took it apart so why would Cook write that he saw blood after he took it apart?  David suggests Cook stated he took it apart but failed to mention finding any blood though he never claimed such and the assertion he took it apart is complete fiction.

Next this:

"In the transcripts of the recorded COLP interview DS Davidson who was involved in handling the evidence forms claims he has never seen a silencer and was never aware any relatives found silencer"

Davidson ACTUALLY said he wasn't aware that they found the silencer until much later.  He didn't say that he was hearing from COLP for the first time that the family found the moderator. 

David then says Davidson was unaware that Cook handled the moderator:

"Also in transcripts of the recorded COLP interview with DS Davidson he claims to have no idea of DI Cook having a sound moderator"

He uses this to try to pretend that Davidson was caught in a lie:

"only to say at a much later stage of the interview that DI Cook did tell him about the sound moderator. Its seem DS Davidson has either been caught out or has used information told to him in the earlier stages of the interview to cover his mistakes."

The truth is that Davidson wasn't involved with handling the moderator so didn't have much knowledge about it.  All he knew is that Cook was taking care of the moderator and learned well later the family had found it.  Given his lack of involvement it is understandable why 6 years later he would not remember much about it. He never knew much to begin with and 6 years has passed.  Al Davidson told COLP is that he didn't find out about the moderator until much later and didn't find out the family had found it until much later. He never suggested he never heard of a moderator till COLP told him.

Next he posts this: "Then in September a second sound moderator is found - according to this police log"

The log doesn't say a second moderator was found. Boutflour told them about the moderator he found in August that he had the Eatons turn in. They picked up the scope and bullets that day but not the shotgun shells so he complained about them not taking everything.  He recounted how he had found everything including the moderator.  That call resulted in them appreciating for the first time who found the moderator and the scope etc.  As a result they subsequently reclassified the items to the DB prefix.

Next he posts this: "PC Whiddon's statement further corroborates a second sound moderator is found. "

Whiddon didn't say anything about 2 moderators he said there was a single moderator. He discussed how he renumbered various items in statements to make the references match up to the actual exhibits.

The moderator SBJ/1 was reclassified DB/1 and later DRB/1
AE/1 the scope was reclassified DB/2 and later DRB/2
AE/2 the bullets and abu ammo carrier was reclassified DB/3 and later DRB/3
 
David is so inept he is claiming AE/1 and AE/2 are moderators.  The exact quote he posts form Whiddon features Whiddon saying that Ann Eaton referred to the scope in her statement as AE/1 but it's actual designation was DRB/1 so he changed her statement to reflect that. 

Next David writes: "Superintendent Mckay in the COLP interview with DS Davidson. Also mentions a second silencer"  Mckay asks Davidson if he was aware of a second moderator and Davidson said no.  Mckay didn't say there was a second moderator he asked a question simply.  He asked because at one point Davidson wrote on a form item 23 but other times it said item 22.  COLP found the genesis of this.  The form Cook screwed up is the one Davidson copied off of when he filled out a form in September. So he copied Cook's error referring to it as item 23.  COLP found no evidence at all of more than one moderator collected in 1985.

So all of David's crap fell apart totally under scrutiny.

Next david jumps to the crap that the CCRC rejected because it has no scientific basis in fact:

"Dr Fowler a US medical expert who has investigated three thousand gunshot homicides examines the evidence and concludes the silencer was not attached when Shelia's contact wounds to the neck were inflicted. (also confirmed by two peer reviewers) to this day Dr Fowler's conclusions remain unchallenged"

The claim that Fowler's claims remain unchallenged is complete nonsense.  Fowler claimed that HE THINKS Vanezis observed a muzzle imprint around the nonfatal wound but failed to appreciate that is what it was.  Vanezis disagrees so right there is a challenge to Fowler's claims.  Experts found by the CCRC also challenged Fowler's claims.  The photos do not show any muzzle imprints.  Vanezis said he observed a bullet abrasion and dirt ring. Fowler said he thinks it was not a bullet abrasion but rather a muzzle imprint.  He has no way to establish his opinion is accurate and Vanezis was wrong.  So the courts correctly view his claims as unsubstantiated as does any rational person which safely leave David out.

Next david turns to the Sutherst BS:

"The CCRC hired Mr Laws who claimed Peter Sutherst evidence on the scratch marks are inconclusive enabling them to continue the assertion that the silencer was attached.  Onto the subject of the scratch marks, Not only does Peter Sutherst conclude that there are no scratches present on the original crime scene.  DS Davidson seems to remember there being red paint on barrel end of the weapon with no silencer  :o  He is then interupted and the subject is quickly changed."

Sutherst's claims were rejected because even by his own admission his tests were not scientifically valid.  He admitted he lacked the ability to blow up photos sufficiently unless he had the negatives.  Blowing up a copy of a photo and then further blowing up that copy of a copy and so on is not scientifically valid.

As for Davidson, he said he was eavesdropping when Cook was talking to Elliott about red paint on a weapon.  Since at the time he didn't know there was a moderator he assumed they were talking about paint directly on a rifle barrel.  He knew the murder weapon had no paint on it because he saw the rifle- he was the one who logged it in at WHF so he assumed it was some other rifle found downstairs.  David ignores all this and pretends he said it was on the murder weapon directly.

Ever single claim by David has fallen apart under scrutiny they all are BS claims made by mike with were refuted a dozen times on blue by me alone who know how many times total by everyone who has posted on blue.

[Nicholas]

Bamber’s 2010 letter to Mike Tesco says that AA (The letter refers to her Christian name which I won’t post here) wanted him to put information on her Facebook page - the one she says she ‘closed’ (below)

Bamber’s 4th July 2010 letter to Mike states,

 ‘********** wanted you to put some stuff on her Facebook site. I hope that you don’t go too overboard - smiley face - and if you stick to the 38 page statement of claim we’ll be quids in. As we put up other issues we can deal with them.
I was thinking about the action report instructing DS Davidson to fingerprint the sound moderator dated 13th Sept 1985. But did they ever do so.

This is around the same time Bamber discarded Aunt Agatha

Aunt Agatha claims above to have ‘closed any social media links I had’ but this is misleading as she communicated with me via a Facebook account using a pseudonym - think the pseudonym was Parker something or something Parker?

Re Aunt Agatha

You stated on the blue forum here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358356.html#msg358356

“I've said this so many times on here.....I remember the early days - before the revelations.
I'm certain he had absolutely no idea of what exactly happened that night.

The lies we had been fed by the police did not make sense.....nothing fitted into place.
Together we went over and over the same things, hoping that one of us could  (as there was only two of us then), might pick up on something we'd overlooked previously.

I was there when the new revelations came about also - he would phone me upon reading the new evidence .... We would then try to piece that new information together and then he would find further information and again we would try to form anther picture of what happened.

That picture changed many times as more information was being revealed.

During Bamber’s 18 years with Aunt Agatha it appears his innocence fraud lay dormant

In the beginning we had absolutely no idea what happened that evening... We were given the pieces of the jigsaw and we always questioned it but it was stated at court that the silencer was used.  FACT!

Over the years information and paperwork that Jeremy had not seen before the trial came to light... Based on this new information he would try again to get the pieces of the jigsaw to fit together.

Bamber’s innocence fraud began to gain traction from around 2010

[Nicholas]

Bamber’s 2010 letter to Mike Tesco says that AA (The letter refers to her Christian name which I won’t post here) wanted him to put information on her Facebook page - the one she says she ‘closed’ (below)

Bamber’s 4th July 2010 letter to Mike states,

 ‘********** wanted you to put some stuff on her Facebook site. I hope that you don’t go too overboard - smiley face - and if you stick to the 38 page statement of claim we’ll be quids in. As we put up other issues we can deal with them.
I was thinking about the action report instructing DS Davidson to fingerprint the sound moderator dated 13th Sept 1985. But did they ever do so.

This is around the same time Bamber discarded Aunt Agatha

From the same letter - page 3 (https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=210.0)

Bamber claims,

“It’s the documents that don’t exist that prove this case just as much those docs that do exist - I’ve got a long letter explaining all this that I will circulate this week”

[Caroline]

From the same letter - page 3 (https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=210.0)

Bamber claims,

“It’s the documents that don’t exist that prove this case just as much those docs that do exist - I’ve got a long letter explaining all this that I will circulate this week”

If ever there was a  definition of  'bollox' that's it!

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin
When I fist wrote to Jeremy at the tail end of 2010 I already believed that he was innocent, although I probably wasn’t exactly sure why.  I knew the basic facts of course, I had followed it in the media from day one.  You could say I had grown up with the case.   Over the last four years I have done as much in depth research as I can and I now spout with confidence (and I do often!) why I know Jeremy did not and could not have killed his family. I have spent probably 100’s of hours reading all the information that is available to me and I know the following to be true or point to Jeremy’s innocence, in no particular order and certainly not exhaustive:

•   No forensics link Jeremy to the murders.

•   There was more than one sound moderator, exhibit labels were manipulated and four moderators were passed off to the jury as one and recent forensics have revealed that the silencer wasn’t even used in the murders.
http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru


Didn’t Mike Tesko introduce ‘four moderators’ ?[/i]

Think Mike Tesko published an email he’d sent to Essex police making false claims about four moderators

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin
When I fist wrote to Jeremy at the tail end of 2010 I already believed that he was innocent, although I probably wasn’t exactly sure why.  I knew the basic facts of course, I had followed it in the media from day one.  You could say I had grown up with the case.   Over the last four years I have done as much in depth research as I can and I now spout with confidence (and I do often!) why I know Jeremy did not and could not have killed his family. I have spent probably 100’s of hours reading all the information that is available to me and I know the following to be true or point to Jeremy’s innocence, in no particular order and certainly not exhaustive:

 

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin

“Julie Mugford was a bitter jealous jilted woman, who would have been charged with drug offences, cheque book fraud and burglary.  Instead she got the ultimate revenge on Jeremy and gained £25K from the NOTW and immunity from prosecution.  Not hard to see why she lied.

http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru

JM wasn’t ‘a bitter jealous jilted women’ as Trudi Benjamin has publicly claimed. She was another of Bamber’s victims whom he gaslighted at every given opportunity. Bamber’s gaslighting of JM increased after he’d murdered his family and attempted to blame his innocent sister.

Does Trudi Benjamin know how much Anji Greaves was paid for her story in the Sun newspaper?

It was reported publicly (1986) that during committal proceedings in October 1985, counsel had stated Bamber had exerted a ‘powerful influence’ over his former girlfriend.

Evening Times Article - Tuesday 28 October 1986




To read full article click here

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin is a bare faced liar when she makes claim,

“I hate injustice.  I hate it with a passion”

She states here http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru

‘It still doesn’t explain why I campaign for Jeremy, so I believe he is innocent but I’m often asked why dedicate so much of my time and energy for someone I have no connection to and have never met.  Well that is simple I hate injustice.  I hate it with a passion.


She blocked me on Twitter not long after I joined. Why would she do that?

Seems Trudi Benjamin doesn’t understand the meaning of the word injustice

If she genuinely hated injustice as she claims she would have recognised long ago the injustice suffered by JM at the hands of Bamber


The Scientific Signs You Are In a Relationship with a Psychopath - Dec 2018

“Despite this type of personality disorder being well established and researched, there is some controversy around exactly how it should be diagnosed. However, researchers do agree that psychopathy involves persistent [ censored word]ocial behaviour, impaired empathy and remorse, boldness, emotional resiliency, meanness, impulsivity and extremely egotistical traits.

Psychopaths also have certain positive traits, however, such as paying attention to detail, being good at reading people and engaging in conversation with ease. Their ability to be precise and creative means psychopaths can be successful professionals.

Romantic problems
The first trait that might become apparent when dating a psychopath is pathological lying. Psychopaths are likely to repeatedly attempt to deceive their partners and will lie about anything under any circumstances in order to conceal their behaviour and achieve their goals – whatever they may be.

Unfortunately, it can be difficult to catch a psychopath lying as they often strategically plan deceitful stories. They often also tend to have a superficial charm that may have got their partner addicted in the first place – this could make their other half doubt their suspicions.

Their perception of self worth is typically extremely high. Even if you are a successful, confident professional, you are likely to feel worthless in comparison. And if you don’t, a psychopath partner may set out to crush your self esteem in order to have more control over you. Research shows that psychopaths often use a technique called gas lighting in order to achieve this – gradually eroding a “victim’s” confidence and sense of reality by confusing, misdirecting, deceiving and persuading them – leading to extreme self doubt.

The reason psychopaths are good at manipulating is that they typically study people’s behaviour and skilfully use it to control them. If you are in a relationship with a psychopath and manage to resist their manipulation, they will often throw a toddler’s tantrum full of frustration, anger, nagging or repetitive conversations – and of course the pity puppy eyes as a final attempt – to make you feel sorry for them and give in to their wishes.

The lack of guilt or remorse is particularly hard to deal with. But don’t expect it to change – research suggests the brains of psychopaths are wired in this way. A recent brain scanning study of psychopaths in prison showed that the higher levels of psychopathy people had, the more likely they were to cheat – and not feel bad about it. This was associated with reduced activity of the anterior cingulate cortex, which is thought to play a role in morality, impulse control and emotion among other things. Other studies have discovered that psychopaths have structural and functional differences in several brain areas, including the prefrontal cortex, which plays a crucial role in personality development and planning.

It is clearly also exhausting to be in a relationship with someone who struggles to feel empathy. However, some studies have indicated that psychopaths may actually have the ability to feel empathy – both on an intellectual and emotional level – but can choose to disregard it, as if they have an emotional off switch. Similarly, it seems psychopaths are often aware of the wrongfulness in their negative behaviour, but act in that way in any case due to their lack of self control.

Romantic partners of psychopaths will therefore soon realise it is hard work to keep up with their partners’ continuous need for stimulation and unrealistic long-term goals. Their lack of self control can also get partners in trouble. For example, a psychopath may be rude to their partner’s colleagues or embarrass them at a party.

Psychopaths also tend to show traits of sociopathy and narcissism, and both traits have been been correlated with infidelity. A recent study that examined how psychopathic traits play out in romantic relationships also found that manipulation to gain sex may be a common approach.

While many of these traits are off-putting, men and women seem to struggle with different things when living with a psychopathic partner. Women are more likely to resent their partner’s behaviour and gradually end the relationship, while men are more likely to experience an increased fear of rejection due to their partner’s impulsive behaviour.

Dealing with rejection
People who find the strength to get unhooked from a romantic relationship with a psychopath may find that their other half actually feels sorry – but that’s most likely to be because they are no longer able to own, control and use them anymore.

And if you dump a psychopath and later try to get them back you are unlikely to be successful. Their lack of empathy means that they will take no responsibility for what went wrong in the relationship and offer to change going forward. Instead, they will most likely blame the outcome on you or anyone else but themselves. This attitude comes from their belief that, if you are feeling hurt, then it is your responsibility and your problem – in other words, you let this happen to you.

However, if their next romantic partner is not as challenging, interesting and fruitful as they hoped for, they might come right back to you full of deceitful apologies and new-found meaning in your relationship – along with promises of love. That is because psychopaths tend to live a parasitic lifestyle, feeding off others and taking more than they give. That means they may want to have your friends, resources and even your financial status back as their own.

https://neurosciencenews.com/psychopath-npd-abuse-relationship-120187/

[Nicholas]

Trudi Benjamin is a bare faced liar when she makes claim,

“I hate injustice.  I hate it with a passion”

She states here http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru

‘It still doesn’t explain why I campaign for Jeremy, so I believe he is innocent but I’m often asked why dedicate so much of my time and energy for someone I have no connection to and have never met.  Well that is simple I hate injustice.  I hate it with a passion.


She blocked me on Twitter not long after I joined. Why would she do that?

Seems Trudi Benjamin doesn’t understand the meaning of the word injustice

If she genuinely hated injustice as she claims she would have recognised long ago the injustice suffered by JM at the hands of Bamber

Re: Tonight or never!

CAL'S reference to Julie Mugford's w/s, 18 November 1985:

‘You sound pissed off,’ she said. Jeremy told her, ‘I’ve been thinking on the tractor and the crime will have to be tonight or never.’

Julie Mugford's reply to Rivlin at trial:

Rivlin turned to the telephone call from Jeremy at 10pm on 6 August, comparing her later description with her first witness statement. Julie responded defiantly: ‘I am not a liar. He said, “It’s tonight or never”, as simple as that. He told me, and I didn’t say it to the police initially because I was scared.’ Then she burst out: ‘Is that okay? Is it excusable for somebody to be scared?’ She began to cry violently and covered her face, mumbling, ‘I’m sorry, my lord.’

Lee, Carol Ann. The Murders at White House Farm: Jeremy Bamber and the killing of his family. The definitive investigation. Pan Macmillan

[Nicholas]

Who is Susannah ?

She claims here http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/susannah in her last paragraph

“A number of his friends have known him since before he went to prison showing that he is able to maintain lasting relationships with people on the outside.

Who’s she referring to?

[Nicholas]

Because they were either deluded or have become deluded

Trudi Benjamin appears to have been deluded to begin with

She publicly claimed here http://www.jeremybambertestimony.co.uk/tru

“When I fist wrote to Jeremy at the tail end of 2010 I already believed that he was innocent, although I probably wasn’t exactly sure why (sic)

Trudi Benjamin has been feeding into her delusions for 10 years

[Nicholas]

JM stated,

“In the cafe we started talking and I asked him what was going on in respect of our relationship. He said it had already been sold out.
I told him he was selfish and that I couldn’t let him get away with hurting people anymore. He said, ‘you mean I either confess; going to the police or I carry on the relationship with you’
He thought I was giving him an alternative.
We discussed our relationship further and basically he could have freedom and do what he wanted to do 

Suspect JM didn’t know at the time what Bamber’s comment ‘it had been sold out’ actually meant until it dawned on her he’d murdered his family

Source page 28 of JM’s handwritten witness statement

Julie Mugford witness statement page 28

[Nicholas]

Who’s the author of this ⬇️  https://jeremybamber.org/jeremy-bamber/ ?

Coping with the tragedies at White House Farm

Everyone copes with trauma in different ways. Jeremy had been kept away from the house when the Fire Arms Team were called in. He had been asked to stay in a police car on Pages Lane with officers who testified that he was distressed. He kept looking as though he was going to break down and they distracted him with talk of other things. PC Lay stated in his 1st of October statement:

“There were two or 3 occasions during the conversation that Jeremy appeared to be getting upset. On one of these occasions he said, “Oh God, I hope she hasn’t done anything stupid.” I didn’t ask him to elaborate on that remark as the man was getting distressed and so I steered the conversation to another subject.”

Lay goes on to say:

“The Witham Duty Sergeant came over to the car. He went to the nearside and opened the passenger door and said – I’m very sorry there’s no hope for any of them.” Or words to that effect. At that Jeremy burst into tears and the Sergeant tried to console him.”

Other officers detail in their statements that Jeremy was crying and was visibly upset and distressed. When the doctor arrived he gave him a sip of whiskey from a hip flask, which  made Jeremy sick. When they took Jeremy to his home, police insisted he eat something to stop him from retching. He had little food in the house and went to the fridge. The only thing he could find was bacon which he put into the microwave and then into two pieces of bread. He ate this with the encouragement of the police officers and so is the kernel of the myth of the jolly Jeremy Bamber sitting at this kitchen table eating a hearty cooked breakfast with police officers.

Many of Jeremy’s responses have been used against him, for example, the talk of buying a Porsche was used as evidence to demonstrate that he was already planning to spend his inheritance on a new sports car, but the truth was that Jeremy was referring to a buying a cheap replica Porsche kit. The case is littered with myths and circumstantial evidence. The facts are that there was no evidence against Jeremy Bamber; nothing connected him to the scene. In court the moderator was the only thing suggesting that Sheila had not shot herself. She could not have fired one shot leaving her blood in the moderator and then taken the moderator downstairs and put it in the gun cupboard and returning upstairs again where she was found. Even though this still did not connect Jeremy to the killings, the judge stated at court that because Jeremy said his father had made the call to him – it meant the killer had to be either Jeremy or Sheila and not a third party. It does beg the question as to why there has been so much emphasis placed on the precarious evidence of Mugford and her hit man story which was demonstrably disproved. So, with absolutely no evidence – why is he in prison?

Jeremy Bamber let Julie Mugford and his friends and relatives take over the running of almost every part of the aftermath of the tragedy.[1] Unable to cope with entering White House Farm without experiencing trauma and severe anxiety Jeremy continued to smoke cannabis heavily, Wasn’t Bamber already a heavy cannabis user whilst drinking alcohol and taking diazepam as prescribed by his doctor. [2]

The question must have turned over in his mind a million times: If I hadn’t left the gun out on the settle would this still have happened?Had he forgotten to take the magazine out or not? No, he was sure he had taken the magazine out. Had Sheila noticed that he had left the gun like this? He had blamed himself for his own mistakes, but then the farm was full of guns. A collection of seven weapons including rifles and shotguns were there, and he knew that Sheila could have picked up any one of those at any time.

The family solicitor was later interviewed by police and confirmed that he had advised Jeremy to find out the order of deaths[3] something which was later to be used against him by this relatives and the police. Later when the City of London Police investigated, Mr Wilson told them that Jeremy was very emotional on his visits to him and that he had advised Jeremy that he should be appointed sole director of the businesses.[4] A few days after the tragedy Jeremy had to face going into the farm, Ann Eaton took Jeremy around the house after she had been in to clean it and remove valuable items she wanted for herself and her family. She stated that he did not want to go into each room and she described Jeremy as “frightened, hesitant and petrified,” a normal reaction for someone having to face where the bodies of their family had been found. [5]

The family accountant had confirmed that Nevill’s bank account was overdrawn by almost £100,000; [6] all of the estate was tied up in assets. Nevill had borrowed this money to convert his estate in Guildford into five houses. Jeremy had the responsibility of running the farm at harvest time, coping with the funerals of his family, the shock, his grief and the prospect of having little money for funerals as well as paying staff wages. He was an inexperienced farmer at just 24 years old, and Basil Cock had advised that Jeremy appoint Peter Eaton as farm manager to help. Jeremy was also advised that death duties would be high and he would have to find ways of cutting down costs. At the time inheritance duties were 40% of all monies inherited over £200,000. The financial difficulty Jeremy faced was because he was to inherit both his parent’s estates at once. The accountant told him that he would owe around £80,000 in tax.

Brett Collins, Julie and Jeremy went out drinking together a frequently after the tragedy, Jeremy Bamber recently said in an interview with the Mirror Newspaper “I am certainly not alone in turning to alcohol in sorrow – nor in seeking the company of others who cared about me.”Brett tried to keep Jeremy’s spirits high with good humour and Jeremy even joined his friend, the twins father, Colin Caffell on the 9th of August where he, Jeremy, Julie, Brett and three others went for Chinese meal and then on to a concert as both Jeremy and Colin tried to put a brave face on their grief. [7]

Some weeks later after the tragedy Jeremy attended the farm. On the 23rd August he asked both Barbara Wilson and Jean Bouttell to clear out much of the clutter that filled up the rooms of White House Farm. This included a large collection of magazines in the kitchen under which Jean Bouttell found the spare telephone. She asked Jeremy what she should do with it he just remarked it was a spare.[8] There was much discussion over this telephone which was later a court exhibit.

Jeremy had cheated on Julie Mugford with her friend Lizzie prior to the tragedies and he had also felt that his time with Julie had come to an end, so he broke of their relationship. Her endless demanding behaviour must have become tiresome to him. He had offered to buy Julie a wine bar When did he offer her this ? in London and had given her money to help her as a student teacher. Jeremy wanted to be with another woman called Virginia whom he had known for some time. He turned to Virginia for comfort away from Julie’s violent tantrums and demands. Did Bamber tell the author of this piece this ?[9] Julie was becoming more and more difficult and resented Brett Collins being around and suspected that they were lovers.

Brett had said he was experienced in the sale of antiques and together with Jeremy they took some valuables to Sotheby’s for auction to raise funds to help with the impending death duties much to the horror of the relatives. During the period before he was charged with the murders Jeremy Bamber had twice headed overseas rejecting what had happened and feeling distressed at the constant press intrusion into his life.

After DCI Jones was removed as head of the investigation he worked under Supt Ainsley. DCI Jones had to arrest Jeremy Bamber for the first time at Moorshead Mansions.  Almost immediately after his arrest and still at the flat Jeremy had blurted out that he had possession of Marijuana and handed some over to Jones.  At interview he easily confessed to burgling the caravan park to prove a point by using a key kept inside the letter box.  He also confessed to cultivating marijuana in his back garden which he sold to friends.  For someone who owns up to crime so easily, it seems to me that if Jeremy Bamber had committed the killings he would not be able to stop himself from confessing.  Nevertheless, in 29 years there has never been any admission.

After his first arrest on the 8th of September, he was questioned for four days sometimes until 11pm at night. The interviews were not audio recorded but hand written each day. The first two days of questioning were done without Jeremy having a solicitor present. Police constantly pressed him on the positioning of the gun accusing him of telling some police officers that the rifle was on the table, but he was adamant the gun was on the settle.  DS Stan Jones asked him if he had or hadn’t fired the gun.  He was insistent that he had not fired the rifle.  They went over and over the telephone call from his father.  The records of these interviews span for hundreds of pages.  DS Jones told Jeremy that Julie had said that he had called her before calling the police which contradicted what both he and Julie had initially told police. The time of the call needed to be ‘fixed’ at a much earlier time for the prosecution to state that he called Julie first. This corresponds to PC West’s log having been recorded much earlier but he altered his testimony saying that he filled the log out wrong by ten minutes.

After days of questioning Jeremy gave in with confusion and said that maybe he did call Julie first.  This single discrepancy was used against Jeremy although it actually has no real bearing on the facts; whether he called Julie first or the police second the events still happened just as he had said.  Since the interview Jeremy has maintained that he called the police before he called Julie.  There are no other discrepancies in Jeremy’s accounts throughout his 29 years. This single issue was used to state that Jeremy had lied. Jeremy Bamber’s account has stood up to scrutiny over 29 years and is very robust by comparison with the testimony of Mugford, who had lied about their engagement, the end of their relationship, Jeremy’s relationship with Collins, MacDonald being the hit man, her involvement in drugs and crime independently of Jeremy and her pre-trial deal with the NOTW for 25k.

Through all of the witness accounts, many people have altered their accounts and statements contradicted each other. There is only one account which remains the same to this day and it is the account of Jeremy Bamber.  This is because it is the truth and the truth does not alter. Other witnesses (both Police Officers and relatives) have exaggerated and embellished their original accounts in the media and to different police enquiries.  Jeremy has coped with the strain of the continual questioning and by comparison with other miscarriages of justice his version of accounts has not altered; he has never confessed nor altered his account under duress.

After his first arrest and release without charge Jeremy was approached by the newspapers for his story.  Naively  he went to meet with one after his solicitor advised him against it.  Jeremy was tired of being vilified by the newspapers after his arrest and wanted to tell his story.  Jeremy said that Brett Collins also advised that he should go to meet with the journalist. The Sun journalist wasn’t interested in Jeremy’s account, and continually asked questions about Sheila Caffell and requested any modelling pictures which might have been pornographic.  Jeremy had told him that there were none and that there might have been some topless ones but Colin Caffell would have those.  The journalist ran the story reporting that the newspaper had been offered these pictures and they also went to the police. The newspaper never obtained pictures of Sheila, because they didn’t exist, further proof that Jeremy Bamber had not intended to sell any pictures to the newspaper.

Jeremy’s efforts to tell his story had gone disastrously wrong. Did his ‘efforts’ start with Kieron Saunders at the Sun This coupled with the burglary at the caravan park made the outlook very bleak.  Stories escalated about Jeremy’s relationship with Brett Collins and his trips abroad.  Acquaintances turned their backs on him and his often eccentric, foolish behaviour and socializing with homosexuals was amplified by local gossip.  His enjoyment of cannabis, later down classified to a class C drug and frequently used by the middle classes was also a major point of “criminality” used by the prosecution.  He was presented as having spent a lot of money on holidays but the reality was on his trip to Amsterdam he, Brett and Julie had shared the same room to economise.

After his arrest the trip to the South of France was glamorized but the fact was that Jeremy and Brett stayed in a caravan to keep the costs low.  Anything to escape the now intrusive and destructive glare of the media, Jeremy was an innocent man subjected to similar treatment as other people who are vilified in the press and subsequently released without charge.

Jeremy had continued smoking pot, taking prescribed sedatives[10] and alcohol to drown out the shock, pain and sorrow.  His arrest and high media profile prompted his new love Virginia to turn her back on him. Bamber was seeing Anji Greaves NOT Virginia Julie had contrived a convoluted story to the police, and his relatives had turned against him and by their own admission, were taking belongings from his family home without his permission.[11] Colin Caffell had become distant and had written to him saying that the relatives had insisted that Jeremy was duping him and was definitely guilty and Colin didn’t know what to believe now his beautiful twins were dead and Jeremy had been arrested and released without charge.[12]

Now Jeremy was in virtual exile in France with his friend Brett trying to support him in the only way he knew how, by leading him to drinking dens. After a short period under police surveillance the officers abandoned their suspect realizing that Jeremy was not going to do anything helpful to the prosecution’s case.[13] Jeremy found the pain was dampened by drinking until the small hours of the night and eventually both he and Brett caught food poisoning on their return journey to the UK by ferry. Jeremy was arrested and charged with murder at the port of Dover. On his arrival in a police vehichle on his last day of freedom, there were several women  waving to him and calling out his name. He smiled back as the cameras snapped him in a dazed, exhausted blur of a mask which veiled the pain he would carry for at least another 29 years.  This was a photograph often used over the years by the press to demonstrate that he was a shallow and arrogant young man.