"I'm not aware of any.
If there were glaring holes in the case Bamber's continued appeals would have succeeded by now."
Well the fact that you have not answered all my points and just the one's that you have answers to would seem to show there are glaring holes in the case?
What about Sheila's violent outbursts in the past? The fact she was used to shooting the rifle? Sheila's medical condition? The fact she was taking medication? Your claim that the Doctor didn't see her harming her father or children in his opinion, but that says nothing of what she would or could do to her mother? And maybe her psyche just exploded after an attack on her mother and she collapsed inwards? The fact that her fingerprints were on the rifle and her mothers bible? The fact the defence say it would be impossible for her to shoot herself with the slencer on the gun (which has been proved untrue). The fact that it has never been proved the silencer was actually used? The fact that the scenes of crime officer never found the silencer? The fact that the Boutflours broke into the farm and just so happened onto the silencer? That it was kept in their car along with blood stained underwear being contaminated. The fact that the police didn't collect it for 3 days. That it was handled carelessly by police wearing no gloves. That a grey hair on the silencer went missing? The fact that the blood has never been proved to be Sheila Caffells? The fact that no one can place Bamber in the house that night? The fact the housekeeper telephoned the farm and interupted an argument between June and Nevill with Sheila. The bungling Essex police force, contaminating evidence, clumsily disturbing the crime scene. Losing vital evidence, destroying evidence and not taking any notes on the case? The fact that Mugfords testimony was believed with no corroborating evidence? Or Essex police delving into her motives for making the claims? Or the fact she was not charged with perjury or perverting the course of justice by giving Bamber his original alibi?
Are these not glaring enough for you?
Jeremy Bamber
Re: Jeremy Bamber
You are absolutely correct here,
it seems very strange that both sides would agree and that it all comes down to its just Jeremy or Sheila. You claim erroneously that i think someone else was or could be involved. I'm not stating that, just that its strange that it was never ever looked into? I guess that it all hinges on the phonecall Bamber said he received, i.e if Nevill called him saying that Sheila was going crazy with a rifle, then what are the chances in all likelihood that someone broke into the farm at that precise moment and killed the family and tried to blame it on Sheila? Obviously not likely at all.
I guess it all comes down to that phone call? But there are other things in the police logs, two seperate entries claiming that officers were in contact with someone in White House Farm while they were outside. The first time with a man and then a second time with a woman? Who were these people that officers were speaking to? Was Nevill one of them? If not who was the male, as Jeremy Bamber was outside!
Could Nevill have called someone else other than Jeremy? David Boutflour broke into the house to find the silencer. How did he know how to break into the farm? Had he done it before? I'm not promoting any wild theories here, but does no one find that at all interesting?
The Boutflours and Ann Eaton are definitely despisable characters. Even is Bamber is completely Guilty, he is where he deserves to be and deserves everything thats happened to him. But the Boutflour and Eaton motives always seemed to be, not to find out what really happened that night, but to get their hands on the inheritence.
And again as both the defence and prosecution believe it only comes down to Jeremy or Sheila, everything rests on the phone call that Jeremy claimed he received. But if Jeremy is the killer and he set out on foot to commit the crime and then blame it on Sheila. Why did he concoct the call? Why didn't he wait for the housekeeper to go to the farm in the morning? Or arrive there himself, in which case even if officers started to not believe Sheila was responsible, he had an out of being able to point the finger at an outsider and not tie himself to the fact that its either him or Sheila?
And again the destroying of evidence is absolutely crucial. You haven't been able to and will never be able to say destroying evidence, even if the police claim it was at Bamber's insistence was the right thing to do. This could be the defining point of the case, especially with all the advances made in the intervening years. And i'm even talking about against Bamber. That destroyed evidence could even have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bamber was Guilty, never mind helping to show that he may not be!
it seems very strange that both sides would agree and that it all comes down to its just Jeremy or Sheila. You claim erroneously that i think someone else was or could be involved. I'm not stating that, just that its strange that it was never ever looked into? I guess that it all hinges on the phonecall Bamber said he received, i.e if Nevill called him saying that Sheila was going crazy with a rifle, then what are the chances in all likelihood that someone broke into the farm at that precise moment and killed the family and tried to blame it on Sheila? Obviously not likely at all.
I guess it all comes down to that phone call? But there are other things in the police logs, two seperate entries claiming that officers were in contact with someone in White House Farm while they were outside. The first time with a man and then a second time with a woman? Who were these people that officers were speaking to? Was Nevill one of them? If not who was the male, as Jeremy Bamber was outside!
Could Nevill have called someone else other than Jeremy? David Boutflour broke into the house to find the silencer. How did he know how to break into the farm? Had he done it before? I'm not promoting any wild theories here, but does no one find that at all interesting?
The Boutflours and Ann Eaton are definitely despisable characters. Even is Bamber is completely Guilty, he is where he deserves to be and deserves everything thats happened to him. But the Boutflour and Eaton motives always seemed to be, not to find out what really happened that night, but to get their hands on the inheritence.
And again as both the defence and prosecution believe it only comes down to Jeremy or Sheila, everything rests on the phone call that Jeremy claimed he received. But if Jeremy is the killer and he set out on foot to commit the crime and then blame it on Sheila. Why did he concoct the call? Why didn't he wait for the housekeeper to go to the farm in the morning? Or arrive there himself, in which case even if officers started to not believe Sheila was responsible, he had an out of being able to point the finger at an outsider and not tie himself to the fact that its either him or Sheila?
And again the destroying of evidence is absolutely crucial. You haven't been able to and will never be able to say destroying evidence, even if the police claim it was at Bamber's insistence was the right thing to do. This could be the defining point of the case, especially with all the advances made in the intervening years. And i'm even talking about against Bamber. That destroyed evidence could even have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bamber was Guilty, never mind helping to show that he may not be!
-
Kyle Richmond
- Posts: 417
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Why doesn't he take a lie detector test, there was a case a few weeks ago where a bloke was inside for murdering his wife but denied it and the body had not been found. he took the test inside, failed and then admitted doing it and the police managed to locate the body on farmland.
These posts are interesting but i just haven't got the time to go through all the recent exchanges.
These posts are interesting but i just haven't got the time to go through all the recent exchanges.
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Meatus: "Are these not glaring enough for you?"
No. Most of what you say is not factual and is very different to the evidence given in the case. For example, there was no evidence given in court that Sheila had ever used a gun, except by Jeremy Bamber of course. Sheila Caffell had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so. Nor were her fingerprints on the bible, as already explained to you twice already - how many times do you need to be told? Banging on about the sound moderator is largely a waste of time, because there is enough evidence to convict Jeremy Bamber even if the sound moderator hadn't ever been found. The judge in the original trial virtually ignored the sound moderator in his summing up to the jury, although some people seem to think its crucial evidence. Banging on about the inadequate nature of the police investigation is also a dead end, because everyone knows already that the police were very poor in their handling of the case, which is why Bamber nearly got away with it.
No. Most of what you say is not factual and is very different to the evidence given in the case. For example, there was no evidence given in court that Sheila had ever used a gun, except by Jeremy Bamber of course. Sheila Caffell had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so. Nor were her fingerprints on the bible, as already explained to you twice already - how many times do you need to be told? Banging on about the sound moderator is largely a waste of time, because there is enough evidence to convict Jeremy Bamber even if the sound moderator hadn't ever been found. The judge in the original trial virtually ignored the sound moderator in his summing up to the jury, although some people seem to think its crucial evidence. Banging on about the inadequate nature of the police investigation is also a dead end, because everyone knows already that the police were very poor in their handling of the case, which is why Bamber nearly got away with it.
UK Babe Channels - <http://www.babechannels.co.uk>
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Not sure whether he ever has taken a lie detector test, if he's ever been asked to or would want to.
Simple reason being they are inadmissable in court. So they are no help whatsoever. Other than perhaps changing perception. Plus the validity of them isn't certain, the outcome is only something like 96.2% accurate, it is seen by a lot of experts as positive of the truth, though it does have its detractors. And the results can be determined by enviroment and stress. And a practice of beating the machine.
So basically there is no point!
Simple reason being they are inadmissable in court. So they are no help whatsoever. Other than perhaps changing perception. Plus the validity of them isn't certain, the outcome is only something like 96.2% accurate, it is seen by a lot of experts as positive of the truth, though it does have its detractors. And the results can be determined by enviroment and stress. And a practice of beating the machine.
So basically there is no point!
Re: Jeremy Bamber
How do you know that Sheila had very poor co-ordination? Where has this ever been said? She had learned to load and use a rifle from a young age and had been hunting and shooting with a rifle before! Also i've never used a rifle before or loaded one, but i think i would have a good idea how to do so. But Sheila had the knowledge to do so, as others not just Bamber admitted she had used the weapon before. And how is what i say not factual. Where is there any shred of evidence that Bamber was ever in the house and carried out the killing?
The prosecution case rests on testimony of Julie Mugford - Jilted, Scorned, Ex Lover of the accused with a vendetta and a dodgy story that was proved to be a lie once and then changed? And a phone call the police said didn't happen? Hardly resounding evidence is it?
The prosecution case rests on testimony of Julie Mugford - Jilted, Scorned, Ex Lover of the accused with a vendetta and a dodgy story that was proved to be a lie once and then changed? And a phone call the police said didn't happen? Hardly resounding evidence is it?
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Meatus: "How do you know that Sheila had very poor co-ordination? Where has this ever been said?"
It was given in evidence at the original trial.
It was given in evidence at the original trial.
UK Babe Channels - <http://www.babechannels.co.uk>
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Meatus: "as others not just Bamber admitted she had used the weapon before."
Who are these mysterious others and why did they not give evidence in court?
Who are these mysterious others and why did they not give evidence in court?
UK Babe Channels - <http://www.babechannels.co.uk>
Re: Jeremy Bamber
Meatus: "The prosecution case rests on testimony of Julie Mugford - Jilted, Scorned, Ex Lover of the accused with a vendetta and a dodgy story that was proved to be a lie once and then changed? And a phone call the police said didn't happen?"
No, that's completely untrue.
The most important evidence in the case is the evidence that Sheila could not be the killer.
a) Although she was mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence given in court was that she would not have carried out the killings.
b) Apart from Jeremy Bamber himself, nobody had ever seen Sheila Caffell use a gun and she had no interest in them. Bamber claimed she had used guns before but the defence had no other witnesses to back him up.
c) Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so.
d) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the violent struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen. The defence agreed that a violent struggle had taken place, but couldn't adequately explain how the petite and frail Sheila could have been the victor in the fight.
e) Her hands and feet were noticeably clean. They were not blood stained or even showed any traces of blood and neither was there any sugar upon them, even though blood was on the kitchen floor and sugar had been spilt and scattered all over the kitchen floor.
f) Hand swabs from her body are crucial, as they do not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions.
g) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured as would surely be expected of somebody who had involved in a violent struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and wholly undamaged and were noticeably clean.
Jeremy Bamber and his lawyers have frequently stated their agreement with the prosecution view that the killer could only be either Jeremy Bamber or Sheila Caffell. The evidence given in court and detailed above shows that it was not Shelia Caffell. Even Jeremy Bamber admits that if the killer wasn't Sheila Caffell it must have been him.
No, that's completely untrue.
The most important evidence in the case is the evidence that Sheila could not be the killer.
a) Although she was mentally ill, there had been no indication of any deterioration in her mental health in the days before the killings. Neither had she expressed any recent suicidal thoughts and the expert evidence given in court was that she would not have carried out the killings.
b) Apart from Jeremy Bamber himself, nobody had ever seen Sheila Caffell use a gun and she had no interest in them. Bamber claimed she had used guns before but the defence had no other witnesses to back him up.
c) Sheila Caffell also had very poor co-ordination and would not have been capable of loading and operating the rifle nor would she have had the required knowledge to do so.
d) She would not have been able physically to have overcome her father (who was fit, strong and 6' 4" tall) during the violent struggle which undoubtedly took place before his death in the kitchen. The defence agreed that a violent struggle had taken place, but couldn't adequately explain how the petite and frail Sheila could have been the victor in the fight.
e) Her hands and feet were noticeably clean. They were not blood stained or even showed any traces of blood and neither was there any sugar upon them, even though blood was on the kitchen floor and sugar had been spilt and scattered all over the kitchen floor.
f) Hand swabs from her body are crucial, as they do not reveal the levels of lead to be expected in somebody who must have re-loaded the magazine of the gun on at least two occasions.
g) Her clothing was relatively clean and she was not injured as would surely be expected of somebody who had involved in a violent struggle. Her long fingernails were still intact and wholly undamaged and were noticeably clean.
Jeremy Bamber and his lawyers have frequently stated their agreement with the prosecution view that the killer could only be either Jeremy Bamber or Sheila Caffell. The evidence given in court and detailed above shows that it was not Shelia Caffell. Even Jeremy Bamber admits that if the killer wasn't Sheila Caffell it must have been him.
UK Babe Channels - <http://www.babechannels.co.uk>
Re: Jeremy Bamber
It is truly hard to see any possibility of Shelia Caffell being the killer.