egafd.com

"It is truly hard to see any possibility of Shelia Caffell being the killer."

Look at it this way.

Could a frail and unwell 7 stone woman have fought and overcome in a violent struggle a 6'4" fit and strong farmer - and not only have beat him in the fight but have done so without incurring the slightest bump or bruise in the violent struggle and without even breaking or cracking one of her prettily painted long red fingernails?

Common sense says no.

Meatus thinks yes it's possible. He argues that there is a doubt about Bamber's conviction, so he has to maintain the view that Sheila could be the killer, no matter how contrary to common sense that appears.

Alternatively, look at it this way.

Could Sheila Caffell have fired 25 bullets which involved directly handling them as the gun had to be reloaded at least twice and come up negative on all the forensic tests? Handling the bullets alone leaves lubricant on the fingers as bullets are always greased to reduce friction and tests on the ammunition for that gun shows reloading alone, even if the gun isn't fired, leaves a considerable amount of lead on the hands - which in her case wasn't present. So could she have reloaded at least twice and fired 25 shots and still test negative?

Common sense says no.

Meatus thinks yes it's possible. Again, because he argues that there's a doubt about Bamber's conviction, he has to maintain the view that Sheila could be the killer, no matter how contrary to common sense that appears.

Apologies to Meatus if I have misrepresented his views here, but as far as I know he still insists that Sheila could possibly have been the killer.

apparently he passed a lie detector test in prison amd experts who have met him have not been able to regard him as a pyschopath.
rhe web is full of sites about this including his own, there is even the investigating journalist bob woffinden? who at one time thought he was innocent then changed his mind but his version of the killings is so far fetched i wont go into details. the rifle had a 10 shot capacity so had to be loaded 3 times, but if bamber did it, why all the bother of inventing rhe call from neville, surely just slip away and let events unfold.

"but if bamber did it, why all the bother of inventing rhe call from neville, surely just slip away and let events unfold."


That's a very fair question, Kyle Richmond.

The answer is in 2 parts.

Firstly, if everyone in the farmhouse had been found dead and Bamber was therefore the sole surviving family member and stood to inherit the estate, then it's not hard to see who the police would have regarded as the chief suspect. It wouldn't have taken them long to come after Jeremy. The Sheila suicide idea would have been a non-starter, as all her relatives and friends would have said it was impossible. If Jeremy had tried to blame her it would have looked like a desperate effort to deflect attention from him.

In other words, Jeremy needed the suicide idea to be the POLICE'S OWN IDEA. By telephoning them and saying that according to his father his sister had gone beserk and was running around with a gun and was capable of anything he primed the police to think that anything could have happen in the farmhouse and her actions would be the explanation for it. He needed the police to think that if Sheila was found dead she must have shot herself, but only by leading them to think that was likely in the first place was it ever going to happen that way. Remember everyone that knew Sheila was going to be adamant that she couldn't possibly have done it, so he needed the police to think that Sheila had done it BEFORE they started speaking to anyone else.

I said the answer was in 2 parts. The second part is that Jeremy was seeking to give himself an alibi - an utterly crucial part of his plan. By telephoning the police from his own home and then arriving at the scene AFTER the police he managed to give himself an alibi of sorts. He could say to the police that I was at my own home (which he was) and I telephoned you from there (which he did) and I only arrived at the farmhouse after you got there (which was also true). He didn't want the police to find him at the crime scene - and in fact his telephone call to the police established that at the time of the call at least he wasn't at the crime scene.

The establishing of an alibi was such an important part of the plan that Jeremy had to do whatever it took to make sure the police arrived at the scene before he did. Telling the police that he feared his sister would commit atrocities and then driving over there at 27.5 mph sounds truly bizarre, but it was crucial to Jeremy that the police had to get there first and could therefore bear witness to the fact that Jeremy Bamber was not found at the crime scene and only arrived there after they did.

If you wondered why exactly Jeremy told the police that his sister had gone beserk, had a gun and was capable of anything, yet drove himself to the farmhouse at a mere 27.5 mph, well now you know.

Jeremy Bamber in his own words.

On his own website, Jeremy explains why - when fearing his sister would kill his family - he drove over to the family house at a speed of 27.5 mph.

"If I had been driving any faster I?d have been breaking the speed limit."

Thank you for the explanation Jeremy.

Check out 'Crimes That Shook Britain' programme on the Sky murder channels. The latest show said the police were unsure on Bamber's guilt, half thought he did it and the other half thought his sister murdered the family. The programme goes into depth on the mental state of the sister who was a danger to her children.

There are no Sky murder channels. There are 2 "criminal investigation" channels, which are Investigation Discovery and Crime and Investigation Network. The "Crimes That Shook Britain" series airs on the latter.

It's no secret that initially all but one of the senior police officers on the case took Bamber's word for it that his sister was the killer. DS Stan Jones who eventually was to lead the investigation regarded Bamber as the killer from the very start, as did the junior police officers who attended the scene. It's only when Julie Mugford came forward that a proper investigation of the crime was ever launched. The investigation which then took place led the police as a whole to believe that Bamber was the killer. By this time no police office argued for Bamber being innocent, as a careful examination of all the evidence convinced every police office on the case that Bamber had to be the killer, mainly because it appeared to be impossible that Sheila Caffell could have carried out the killings as Bamber alleged. DS Stan Jones even doubted whther she could have reloaded the gun with the long fingernails she had. There was also the question of the forensics. For example, when bullets are loaded into a gun they leave a greasy residue on the fingers. This grease is applied to the bullets during manufacture in order to prevent corrosion and reduce friction. Sheila tested negative as she also did for lead which would inevitably had been on her hands if she had reloaded the gun, which she would have had to have done at least twice.

It's not true that Sheila was regarded as a danger to her children. In fact it's wholly untrue. If she was a danger to them she wouldn't have been allowed near the children anyway. I believe this is pretty evident as a matter of simple common sense. Sheila's doctor was Dr Hugh Ferguson who said in evidence that "he did not feel she was someone who would actually be violent to her children". In cross-examination Dr Ferguson said he found it "difficult to conceptualise her harming her children" and that "he had always felt Sheila loved and cared for her children". The defence did not call any witnesses to counter this or to testify that Sheila was capable of harming her children, and presumably the defence understood the point very well anyway that if Sheila was felt to be a danger to her children they would have been taken away from her long before. Colin Caffell (her ex-husband) said that Sheila had never harmed the children or behaved violently towards them. The last person outside of the family to see Sheila alive was a witness called Sandra Elston who said "she appeared well and her only concern was about a poor haircut she had recently had".

in a sideline to this i read that the chief investigating police officer or one of them was killed some years ago when he fell of his ladder whilst doing some diy at home.

That was the officer in charge of the case DCI "Taff" Jones who believed Bamber to be innocent and was going to testify on behalf of Bamber's defence. He died the day before he was due to give his evidence by falling off the bottom step of a 3 step step-ladder!! Incredulously!!!

Though i think you would have to be a loon (much more of a loon than JamesW thinks i am) to believe it had anything to do with the case. And you would have to be a complete conspiracy theorist to believe that Essex Police or other dark forces had a hand in this in order to obtain a Guilty verdict on the Bamber case. (Which i am not!!!).

Meatus: "He died the day before he was due to give his evidence"

This statement by Meatus is wholly untrue.

Jeremy Bamber's trial was in October 1986. He was convicted on 28 October after a 19 day trial at Chelmsford Crown Court.

DCI Taff Jones died in May 1986. The funeral took place at Trinity Methodist Church, Chelmsford, on Monday 19 May.

Further to the effort made here by Meatus to make Julie Mugford's evidence seem as important as possible, here's what the judge said to the jury regarding Sheila Caffell:

"If you are sure that Sheila did not carry out the killings, it also follows that you must be sure the defendant did so, and equally, if you are not sure that Sheila did or did not carry out the killings, if you are either sure that she did, or are uncertain whether she did or not, then it follows that you have not been made sure that the defendant did so, and therefore he would be not guilty. So either way that issue ? that Sheila did not carry out the killings ? will lead you to a verdict in this case."