Jeremy Bamber - Is this the worst MoJ in British criminal history?

(258 Posts)
HoGo1 Wed 22-Jan-14 15:41:27

I watched a prog on C5 a few weeks ago re the above. I've also spent a fair bit of time researching the case (there's a mountain of docs on the 'Jeremy Bamber Forum') I have a feeling we will be hearing much more about this in the not too distant future wink Does anyone else think he might be innocent?

ohmymimi Wed 22-Jan-14 16:56:54

No.

feelinlucky Wed 22-Jan-14 16:57:58

I can't say why but absolutely no way!

ihatethecold Wed 22-Jan-14 17:00:39

No

wetaugust Wed 22-Jan-14 17:20:36

No

HoGo1 Wed 22-Jan-14 17:54:12

Oh that's interesting! Are you able to say why you're so sure? It seems to me that the 'evidence' he was convicted on is a bit flimsy to say the least.

TunipTheUnconquerable Wed 22-Jan-14 17:57:16

I have no idea, and I grew up in that area so I've followed the case fairly closely over the years. Very hard to say.

MooncupGoddess Wed 22-Jan-14 17:59:41

Didn't he appeal against the verdict recently, and lose the case?

TunipTheUnconquerable Wed 22-Jan-14 18:11:06

His application for another appeal was rejected, I think.

BMW6 Wed 22-Jan-14 19:35:24

I remember that programme, then saw another which pointed to his guilt and disproved the "innocent" theories.

TBH the only reliable source IMHO would be the original Court presented evidence.

There is soooo much made-up shite on the Internet. And a TV programme is commissioned to take an angle, so will be predjudiced from the start.

I remember the original trial evidence. He did it and framed his sister, Bambi. IMHO. He had a fair trial and appealed and lost. No-one "out there" is cleverer/has inside info, to believe otherwise is rather arrogant?

DoctorDonnaNoble Wed 22-Jan-14 19:37:44

Also live in the area. Love reading up on the Essex Murder Triangle. Don't think it's a miscarriage of justice. He regularly appeals. Gets nowhere.

TunipTheUnconquerable Wed 22-Jan-14 20:17:56

Essex Murder Triangle? shock

DoctorDonnaNoble Wed 22-Jan-14 20:26:13

Yup, an area of North Essex where there's been several murders over the years including Bamber and the Murder in the Red Barn. It's quite a rural area so it gets mythologised a little.

VoyageDeVerity Wed 22-Jan-14 20:30:02

Instinct tells me he's guilty and I have read a lot about this case over the years.

The idea that his sister went nuts with a gun and decided to shoot her babies doesn't cut it for me at all. sad but because she suffered from depression it seemed a natural conclusion for some. hmm

Mintyy Wed 22-Jan-14 20:31:52

I've read a lot about this case over the years and I think he's guilty based on everything I've read - not instinct!

Fairylea Wed 22-Jan-14 20:32:18

I'm not sure really. It's easy to buy into it all if you go by the website that obviously supports him but you have to remember that he's appealed so many times and got nowhere so that says a lot I guess.

TunipTheUnconquerable Wed 22-Jan-14 20:32:53

Oh, with Coggeshall in it? Lots of murders there for some reason.

PoshPaula Wed 22-Jan-14 20:32:59

I have read a great deal about this case and I believe him to be guilty.

Greythorne Wed 22-Jan-14 20:33:56

I think he's guilty

RevoltInParadise Wed 22-Jan-14 20:40:31

Oh dear this is the first time I have heard of the Essex murder triangle....eek!

nennypops Wed 22-Jan-14 22:32:49

I think he's guilty. If you concentrate your reading on what is on his website, it's not surprising that you'll start thinking he's innocent, because obviously he doesn't post the stuff that goes against him. But I think often even his supporters' stuff condemns him, because they really tie themselves up in knots trying unsuccessfully to find things that help him or explain away the damning evidence.

VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:36:21

I did read somewhere that a police officer had made a statement saying that while they were all outside watching the house with Bamber who'd met them there they could see someone moving around in the house.

There do seem to be some odd things which don't quite add up.

But my gut feeling is he's guilty.

TheFabulousIdiot Wed 22-Jan-14 22:37:54

I have spent a while 'researching the case' and think he is guilty. Who do you think did it OP?

GlassCastle Wed 22-Jan-14 22:41:00

I knew his Gf at the time.

I don't whether whether he is innocent or guilty. What I am suspicious of is a lack of transparency in the judicial process and vested interests in not allowing further evidence o testimony to be admitted or re-examined.

That makes me suspicious in itself.

VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:41:48
VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:42:43

Didnt he tell his gf he was going to hurt/kill his parents?

LondonMother Wed 22-Jan-14 22:43:16

When I was young we talked about 'reading up' or 'finding out' about things. 'Research' was reserved for work done by serious students, academics and scientists. It involved prolonged study and critical analysis. When did it start to be the norm to 'research' train times and paint colours? When did reading one book on a subject become 'research'?

VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:49:00
Amandine29 Wed 22-Jan-14 22:50:30

I am not in a position to judge his guilt (or innocence) but I agree that there are some seemingly interesting points that do seem to have been brushed under the carpet. However I am not naive enough to believe everything I read on the internet. It is interesting though.

VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:53:01

I hadn't realised he'd passed a lie detector test. So he's either guilty or a psychopath of some sort.

VivaLeBeaver Wed 22-Jan-14 22:53:20

Either innocent or a psychopath even.

Netguru Wed 22-Jan-14 22:57:27

I've dealt with this case through work.
I've read the original court transcripts and summing up.

Guilty guilty guilty.

TheFabulousIdiot Wed 22-Jan-14 23:02:39

reasons why it couldn't have been his sister not least the fact that she was shot twice which would be impossible if a murder suicide.

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 00:05:47

I haven't paid much attention to his website. I've been reading the 'Jeremy Bamber Forum'. I was amazed when I read the reports by the psychologist who treated the adoptive mother and adopted daughter for severe mental illness.

Also the witness statements of his extended adoptive family who it appears did not want a non-blood relative inheriting what had been in the blood family for generations. At the time of the murders '85 the estate was worth circa 436k.

I always thought he was guilty but I've read things over recent years that have made me have doubts. I couldn't say he's innocent but I think there is enough evidence for an appeal.

DoctorDonnaNoble Thu 23-Jan-14 05:10:16

Lie detectors aren't really very good though. It's why they're not accepted in UK courts. But yes a psychopath/sociopath or someone who just doesn't experience guilt in the same biological way would be able to pass a lie detector even if lying.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 05:24:30

Yes. I think quite possibly an MOJ.

Leaving all the other problems aside, a 'missing' police phone log sheet turned up a few years ago documenting a call from Bamber senior saying that his daughter had gone beserk with a gun.

That has to be highly suggestive at the very least.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 05:27:35

Voyage Sheila Caffell was a paranoid schizophrenic who had voiced some very disturbed delusions about her sons. Not just depressed.

DoctorDonnaNoble Thu 23-Jan-14 07:10:10

But...every attempt at appeal based on new evidence has failed. Obviously, if that changes I will change my mind, but on current evidence not a miscarriage of justice.

ExcuseTypos Thu 23-Jan-14 08:14:33

I've always thought he's guilty but I now have a couple of questions, after reading the Guardian piece Viva linked to.

"Last week, the Guardian was passed a letter, written by Sheila's ex-husband, Colin Caffell, to Nevill Bamber. In it, Caffell expresses deep concern about Sheila's mental state and asks his father-in law-to "try and convince Sheila that it would be better for her and the boys if they stayed with me most of the time". Ferguson says if Nevill had pleaded Caffell's case to Sheila, it could have had a "potentially catastrophic effect on her". As a result, he says, "she may have projected on to her father a concept of evil"."

Does this letter exist? If so why wasnt it presented in court? At the trial Bamber said his sister was distraught at the thought of losing her DC, but the prosecution said he was making that up.

And the discrepancy in the photos containing the "scratch" marks. Where those marks there on the night off the shootings, proving a struggle took place?

Mind you having written all that, I still think the forensic evidence shows that Shiela didn't kill her family.

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 08:17:03

I'm sure its been considered but could it have been someone else completely? Like a break in, or someone the family had pissed off??

The father rings Jeremy because he thought it was Sheila but he was wrong and it was a third party?? That's probably a bit far fetched isn't it?

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 08:18:44

Was there ever any forensic evidence to link Jeremy to it all?

I don't think there was?? I read that they reckoned he must have worn a wet suit and showered in it to wash all blood off. I suppose back then forensic techniques weren't as good but it seems odd that someone can murder so many people and there be no forensic proof.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 08:24:03

I think he is guilty.

People have passed lie detector tests and then DNA has later proven they have committed the crime. Lie detector test results are not admissible in court because they can be wrong.

LottieJenkins Thu 23-Jan-14 08:24:55

Re evidence. They found a hair on a silencer a while after the shooting which turned out to be Bambers. Also Sheila's feet were bare and clean. If she had been walking around the house her feet wouldn't have been clean. I read this book

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 08:28:19

When defence/appeal solicitors requested various pieces of evidence for up to date forensic examination, Essex Police explained that most artefacts from the crime scene had been destroyed.

Which is odd Police practice, particularly in a case where someone was serving a whole life tariff. It also means that we don't know what modern forensic science might have contributed. Lots of strange aspects to this case.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 08:31:10

The chain of custody for the silencer was laughable. Consider who "found" it.

Nobody here is citing the things i'd expect a believer in Jeremy Bamber's guilt to cite.

NearTheWindmill Thu 23-Jan-14 08:31:10

Well there are only six people who know for sure - five are dead and one will never admit the truth. A very close friend of mine did a stint at some secretarial/grooming college with the sister and thought she was completely bonkers and more than capable of killing although that of course is just an opinion. I don't think it helps that the family was exactly "rounded" when considering what actually happened

I suppose someone is convicted of murder when the likelihood is beyond reasonable doubt. I think pragmatically after so many appeals, the conviction has to be beyond reasonable doubt.

BOFtastic Thu 23-Jan-14 08:31:11

No, it certainly isn't.

Emma Bates is innocent though- that case is a heinous miscarriage of justice.

NearTheWindmill Thu 23-Jan-14 08:32:36

Lottie was the house filthy then. I can walk around my house and have clean feet; my grandparents owned a farm and I could walk around their house bare foot and my feet would have been clean.

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 08:38:04

They say that there was that much blood on the floor and broken glass whoever did it would have had tiny bits of glass and blood on their feet or soles of their shoes. But Sheila's feet were clean as were all her shoes and slippers.

ExcuseTypos Thu 23-Jan-14 08:38:15

Near- there would have been blood on her feet if she had killed 4 people.

And unless the whole house had been scrubbed with bleach, 2 mins before the shootings, her bare feet would have picked up 'dirt' as she would have been walking around the house.

Morgause Thu 23-Jan-14 08:39:52

Guilty and narcissistic.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 08:40:30

And being a paranoid szicophrenic does not mean you are more likely to kill than anyone else. You are more likely to kill yourself, but not other people. I think Jeremy has used prejudice against meantall illness to try and cast doubt on his own guilt.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 08:56:08

Schizophrenia varies so much of course.

I do think though that her beliefs about her mother and children being "the devil" and her history of violence would not have been so easily dropped from the narrative if she had been a man.

Or maybe it was more that the prejudices and stereotypes regarding mental illness that were current at the time caused her schizophrenia to be glossed over.

Just musing really but the ideas that a) she was 'just' suffering depression and b) her motherhood is the clinching argument in her innocence do seem to crop up a lot.

Feels like a case from much earlier than mid eighties, in many ways.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 08:58:23

There is absolutely no evidence against Sheila, and a lot of evidence that she is totally innocent.

JakeBullet Thu 23-Jan-14 09:05:01

Bollocks, he is guilty as hell. He boasted about it to his girlfriend, he has failed several lie detector tests (only publicising the one test he passed) and is a manipulative liar.

I knew him years ago and believe me he was quite capable if doing this.

Sheila Caffell was a good candidate for him to pin the blame on.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 09:14:05

Well that's a little bit sweeping grennie.

The police, the attending doctor who certified the deaths and the coroner all believed there was evidence pointing to Sheila Caffell being responsible and they were adamant it was a case of murder/suicide for some weeks.

Which shows what a confused picture it was.

Regardless of what the truth is, the evidence is anything but clearcut.

PoshPaula Thu 23-Jan-14 09:15:05

You knew him, jakebullet? That's interesting. What sort of character was he, at that time?

JakeBullet Thu 23-Jan-14 09:21:04

From a UK MofJ website

Readers should note: It was stated at Jeremy Bamber's trial that as a consequence of what occurred on the morning of the murders and following Jeremy Bamber's own evidence, an innocent Sheila renders Jeremy Bamber guilty by default. It does not mean that he carried out the murders alone however.

1. Uncontaminated hands and nightdress completely free of any gunfire residue or gun oil. In fact no contaminants of any sort indicated that Sheila never handled the rifle let alone fired it 25 times in quick succession and reloaded its magazine at least twice.

2. Uncontaminated feet. Sheila's feet were completely clean and free of blood or any other contaminants evidencing the fact that she had been in bed when the attack took place and thereafter only walked on carpet. She could never have been downstairs in the kitchen that morning.

3. Uncut feet. Nevill Bamber was brutally attacked in the kitchen after having been shot several times in the upstairs bedroom. During the assault in the kitchen a glass lampshade was smashed leaving glass fragments all over the floor. Had Sheila taken part in that attack the soles of her feet or the soles of her slippers would have been pock marked with glass fragments. Sheila's feet were unmarked as were the soles of her slippers.

4. Only one fingerprint on the rifle evidencing the fact that Sheila did not wield it or fire it. Had she shot herself twice as alleged by some her thumbprint would have been on the trigger since she would have to had pushed it. It wasn't.

5. It is almost certain that blood and DNA belonging to Sheila was found in the sound moderator. Group 'A' human blood matching Sheila was recovered from the sound moderator in 1985. Later, advances in forensic science methods led to the recovery of DNA from inside the sound moderator which returned 17 markers out of 20 as a match to Sheila which was substantially better than the maximum coincidence rate of thirteen. Sheila could not have shot herself with the sound moderator attached nor could she have returned it to the gun cupboard after shooting herself twice in the throat.

6. Sheila was in good spirits, looking forward to the future as a family again. Her doctor and her ex husband stated that she was not capable of hurting her father or her children.

7. Two gunshots to her neck. Hardly indicative of a suicide especially when the first one would have incapacitated her. It is also noticeable that the gun and magazine were empty when found. Was that another coincidence that Sheila just happened to use the last bullet and had no others on her person?

8. No marks or injuries following a fight. Sheila was tiny compared to the 6' 2" Nevill. She could not have fought with him without sustaining some sort of injury or damage to her clothing.

9. Sheila had traces of cannabis in her system rendering her calm and docile, not violent or murderous.

10. Sheila had run out of her procyclidine which counteracts the effects of her medication haloperidol. Without this she would have been very shaky and uncoordinated (as described by various witnesses) and would not have had the control needed to get off 25 shots without missing one never mind trying to reload an awkward magazine in between time.

11. Sheila was unfamiliar with the rifle or any firearm for that matter and would have been unable to make 25 target shots.

12. If Sheila had shot herself in the throat and had remained conscious, there would have been blood in her mouth and throat with resultant blood spatter everywhere as she struggled to breathe. Her fingers would have touched the burning wound and ended up covered in blood as would have her face and neck. The blood trails running from this wound would have been smudged yet it was not. There was no secondary blood staining to her face or neck when the police initially found her. The inside of her hands and her finger tips did not have any blood staining. Sheila therefore was not conscious after the first shot and most certainly did not fire the second one.

13. Sheila's body was found on the far side of the master bedroom away from everyone. Had she committed suicide as some allege it is more than likely that she would have done so beside her children and not remote from them.

14. Perfectly manicured nails and all intact and unbroken. If Sheila had used the rifle and loaded it at least once she would have ended up with some nail damage. There was none.

I agree with most....I think number 9 is a bit shaky however.

Wossname Thu 23-Jan-14 09:23:30

Did he actually confess to his girlfriend? Is this the same girlfriend someone upthread knows?

JakeBullet Thu 23-Jan-14 09:26:14

He kept saying that they needed doing away with.....then the morning after he said it was done.

My only amazement is that it then took her weeks to go to the police,

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 09:29:39

I do wonder if the OP is a friend of Jeremy's?

Amandine29 Thu 23-Jan-14 09:33:56

Wasn't there something about him having cheated on the girlfriend though? I'm not sure either way but I think his supporters claim she said that as revenge.

Damnautocorrect Thu 23-Jan-14 09:39:21

There's something that doesn't add up about this case but it's very difficult to wade your way through the articles and just read facts

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 09:43:28

The one thing that does seem to be generally agreed upon is that the police investigation was fumbled badly. Which has led to a lot of confusion around the facts, i think.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 09:49:58

Those who support Jeremy Bamber seem to seize on any tiny issue and twist it and hype it up. For example the fact that he passed 1 lie detector test is hyped up - and they ignore that he failed more than one.

I actually think his guilt is pretty obvious. And the fact that a number of appeals has failed, means that the courts seem to agree.

There are real miscarriages of justice out there. This isn't one of them.

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 09:53:42

One thing I will add is that somebody who kills whilst suffering acute psychosis isn't necessarily best placed to remove all forensic evidence from their person either in the commission of an act or afterwards.

However I will also say that 'Ashes to Ashes' style police behaviour (corruption and malfeasance) was rife in the 80's and forensics a very immature science.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 09:54:35

Grennie if you believe court verdicts are in themselves proof of guilt then you cannot possibly believe that there are MoJs out there.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 09:57:09

I don't believe court verdicts are automatically proof of guilt. I have read a lot about this case in the past, and once you look at the actual evidence, it is I think totally clear that he is guilty.

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 09:57:42

The traces of cannabis = calm and docile behaviour is irrelevant. I have experienced some very aggressive, even violent behaviour from patients with Cannabis in their systems. It doesn't have a universally pacifying effect. However some people with Schizophrenia do use it because they feel it calms them and mitigates their symptoms.

The Cannabis of the 80's was different- less of the psychoactive compounds that trigger hallucinatory and agitated behaviour although It could still cause some unpleasant negative feelings and thoughts.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 09:59:36

Well why say this then;

"I actually think his guilt is pretty obvious. And the fact that a number of appeals has failed, means that the courts seem to agree."

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:01:36

You're admirably evenhanded Glass particularly as you knew a protaganist.

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 10:02:32

The courts agree with my views. Exactly what I said.

And his case has had a lot of attention. And still the facts clearly point to his guilt

Nom - Are you a friend of Jeremy's?

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 10:02:51

Procyclidine mitigates extrapyramidal symptoms including rigidity and dystonia (unwanted body movements). Being without it can cause extreme restlessness and agitation too.

The antipsychotic regimes of the 80's were extremely unpleasant. Many people were very sedated and slowed up when fully medicated.

Stabilised Schizophrenia is not synonymous with murderous actions.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:03:07

Ooops hit send too soon. Was going to ask if you do have a private view?

Grennie Thu 23-Jan-14 10:04:48

Nom - Are you a friend of Jeremy's?

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 10:06:01

Thanks Nom.

I'm not a legal expert nor have I read extensive court documents. The whole case is very troubling I think because the process appears to be murky which makes it very hard to get at the 'truth' because it leaves so much open to reinterpretation.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:06:42

Ha not remotely Gren. Some of the illogicality and myth-making around this case really irritates me though.

Put it this way, If the right person was convicted it was despite the police investigation not because of it.

And to be clear I am not convinced of JB innocence, I just think it is possible.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:09:19

I don't think the facts do clearly point to his guilt. At best, it is much messier than that, and worst a dreadful injustice has been perpetrated by the Justice system.

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 10:09:29

A Narcissist or Antisocial personality type can be innocent.

A person with Schizophrenia can be innocent.

A lot of playing upon of MH stereotypes.

Now that troubles me.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:12:02

What is this weird thing on Mumsnet where posters are forever being accused of being friends of whoever?

I just happen to disagree that it's all neat and obvious.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:20:02

Well quite Glass and they are just two huge areas of concern around the whole debacle.

I think also that, as humans, we are very frightened by the idea that a crime might be insoluble. So in complicated cases, all sorts of neo-phrenology starts to creep in.

The psychology of the onlooker is also interesting.

HettiePetal Thu 23-Jan-14 10:21:37

FFS. So anyone who thinks he might be innocent must be one of his friends? How childish.

There are strange oddities that have yet to be explained, although I think on balance he's probably guilty.

GlassCastle Thu 23-Jan-14 10:25:43

Yes the pressure to convict (certainly back then) led to incidents with the chain of evidence and statement reliability which has resulted in innocent people being convicted and guilty people being found innocent.

Look at what happened to Colin Stagg.

Either way, bad behaviour or incompetence/corruption can cause doubt to hang around like a bad stench over whatever verdict comes in.

dawdling Thu 23-Jan-14 10:33:47

Quite agree Glass. It's a shame we don't have a mechanism that automatically triggers a full retrial when there is sufficient doubt about the original investigation.

I think a lot of people imagine that criminal appeals are full retrials too. Which confuses public perception.

AngelaDaviesHair Thu 23-Jan-14 10:46:30

I think he is guilty. Bottom line-Sheila could not have shot herself twice.

JakeBullet Thu 23-Jan-14 11:44:33

I dont think the OP is a friend of Jeremy. She is just a poster who has read about the case and raised concerns regarding a MoJ. Let's face it...they do happen.

From all I have read though I do not think it is the case here....no matter ow shoddy the police investigation.

AngelaDaviesHair Thu 23-Jan-14 11:46:10

I keep reading MoJ as 'Ministry of Justice' which is confusing me.

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 13:40:47

Miscarriage of Justice.

At the heart of the prosecution is a silencer that was found not by the police but by JB's extended adoptive family who it appears from witness statement disliked him for no other reason than he didn't for example join young farmers! I kid you not. The Bamber estate was worth circa 436k '85/'86 which JB would have inherited had he been acquitted. Instead it was carved up between the relatives.

The silencer supposedly containing evidence of blood and a grey hair then sat around on a cop's desk until it eventually found itself at forensic science services at Huntingdon, Cambs. By this time the grey hair had gone astray!

DNA testing was not available at the time. Instead blood group analysis was performed which is not exclusive to individuals. The analysis produced 4 readings which matched Sheila Caffells' blood group/type. It also matched Robert Boutflour's who had a hand in 'finding' the silencer. At least 10% of members on this website will share the same blood/group type as Sheila Caffell.

The QC, Geoffrey Rivlin, did not present to the jury the realistic possibility of contamination. When the judge summed up he misled the jury into thinking that the blood found in the silencer belonged exclusively to Sheila Caffell.

It stinks and imo there's no two ways it's the greatest MoJ in British criminal history!

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 13:45:39

I am afraid some of the posts on here are way off the mark eg that Sheila Caffell could not have shot herself twice. The pathologist clearly states that he could not confirm suicide or murder. Anyone interested you need to read up and draw your own conclusions. All I will say is:

MP's expenses
Fianancial crisis
Child sex abuse in church
Savile
Hillsborough
NoW hacking

The idea that the establishment are whiter than and competent is imo clearly wrong.

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 13:58:13

The silencer has always concerned me. It was some weeks until it was found and like previously stated it was found by relatives who didn't like him and had a motive for seeing him locked up.

Apparently they were determined to see him convicted from the day the bodies were found. Now whether that was just because they were convinced of his guilt and wanted to see justice or whether they wanted to inherit who knows?

The testament of his then girlfriend is damming - that he'd previously told her he was going to hire a hit man to kill them all. But why did she wait to tell the police this? Was she scared of him? Was she in shock? Or did she find out he'd been cheating on her and get revenge?

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 14:27:59

The ex girlfriend was also given immunity from her criminal past in exchange for her 'co-operation'. Had she not have 'co-operated' it would have put paid to her teaching career. Plus a 25k NoW deal if Bamber was convicted for her 'story'. Yeah it was a story alright.

The ITV docu on YouTube contains the ex-girlfriend, Julie Mugford, claiming she was not scared of him.

TheFabulousIdiot Thu 23-Jan-14 15:09:34

what do the people on the 'jeremy bamber forum' think? Are their opinions mixed?

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 15:40:40

The Jeremy Bamber forum is owned by a friend of JB's and tends to attract supporters but out of the regular posters there are a few dissidents. The UK Justice Forum is the arch rival to the Jeremy Bamber Forum so anyone interested, visit both and you will hear both sides of the story! I would recommend reading the witness statements and other documentary and photographic evidence in the archives and form your own opinions.

hackmum Thu 23-Jan-14 17:28:10

I followed the Bamber case from the start. I've always been very certain that he was guilty. There were numerous reasons why it seemed unlikely that his sister did it, not least of all, motive. As the article linked to by VivalaBeaver shows, the investigative journalist Bob Woffinden looked into the case and began with the belief that there had been a miscarriage of justice, and having spent a great deal of time on it, changed his mind because of the strength of the evidence against Bamber. That surely tells you something.

CalamityKate Thu 23-Jan-14 17:43:45

Just saw an article which had a picture of Sheila's foot and it's dirty and had cuts on it. Weren't her feet meant to be clean?

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 17:45:13

I do think if he was tried today he's be found not guilty.

My gut feeling is he did it but I've never seen enough evidence that if I was on the jury I'd be able to convict him. Am going to go and rread that justice forum though.

Reincarnatedpig Thu 23-Jan-14 17:46:15

I have arguments with DD over this case because she is convinced of his innocence and me of his guilt. You can argue it both ways. I remember at the time reading an article about the twins father - heartbreaking.

I read a book by Sean Jenkins who was convicted of murdering step daughter Billie and got off (I think) when the retrial jury couldn't agree. It did cast some doubt in my mind though I still find him obnoxious.

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 17:56:41

Motive imo relates to an adoption that went awry. It's necessary to have an understanding of adoption psychology, attachment disorders and adoption reunions.

Fact is at the start of Sheila Caffell's life she was effectively rejected numerous times, or at least felt a sense of abandonment, this is likely to have caused an attachment disorder. Her adoptive mother adopted her and then as a result of this decision suffered serious depression resulting in ECT and in-patient psychiatric care. This was in 1959 when Sheila Caffell was around 2 yoa. Only weeks before the murders Sheila Caffell was reunited with her birth mother.

The prosecution claim that Jeremy Bamber was motivated by hate and greed but there's absolutely no firm evidence for this at all.

Most understand hatred and greed; not many understand adoption psychology, attachment disorders and adoption reunions so of course its easy to blame Jeremy Bamber.

The fact that Bob Woffinden has looked into the case and arrived at the same conclusion as the establishment tells me nothing other than he might be incapable of divergent thinking! No offence to Bob Woffinden.

Surprisingly Andrew Hunter, a former right wing mp, has taken up Bamber's case and is due to release a book this year. An established crime writer is also due to release a book this year. I understand both believe him to be the victim of a MoJ. My feeling is that Bamber's case will become a global news story of epic proportion later this year and rightly so if he's innocent. He went to prison at the age of 24; earlier this month he was 53.

Rooners Thu 23-Jan-14 18:00:40

There's little point discussing it is there? Not many of us are partial to the evidence.

I have no idea at all. It's nothing to do with me anyway.

HoGo1 Thu 23-Jan-14 18:21:25

I haven't had access to anything that isn't in the public domain.

Yes of course its something to do with you and every citizen in the UK unless you don't care about innocent people spending years in prison for crimes they haven't committed!?

I have spent a lot of time researching the case so I don't expect others who haven't to have any strong views either way.

It's not a decision you can arrive at lightly as you do need to consider, well I did, that he has been found guilty in a court of law of killing 5 innocent people including two small boys while sleeping in bed.

Chivetalking Thu 23-Jan-14 18:27:36

I remember this happening and have followed this case for years but I can't come down on either side.

I do think there are discrepancies which haven't been fully addressed and it does worry me that the police culture at the time was all about getting the result and not being too fussy about evidence.

I also think it's a case that's unlikely to just go away.

VivaLeBeaver Thu 23-Jan-14 18:35:21

The sad thing is even if it is ever deemed a MoJ and he's freed then not only has he spent nearly all his adult life in prison but many people are always going to think he's done it.

Nancy66 Fri 24-Jan-14 13:52:47

I've always thought him guilty. Ditto Sion Jenkins who got off on appeal

HoGo1 Fri 24-Jan-14 14:51:06

I don't believe the public know a fraction of what there is to know about the case. For those who think he is guilty you should read the psychiatrist's reports about the adoptive mother and adopted daughter and that might cause you to at least ponder...

Anyone interested check out:

www.jeremybamberforum.co.uk

Then go to 'Archive Library'

Then 'Statements and Transcripts'

Then 'Dr Hugh Cameron Ferguson'

...

I read interesting article by ex detective who thought he was innocent and then did complete u turn after discovering the telephone system in the house had been arranged in away that meant Bamber did it.

Wish I could remember more!

Pendeen Fri 24-Jan-14 15:01:35

No.

Derek Bentley and others...

Article by Bob Woffiden in Daily Mail 15th May 2011 - apologies on phone so can't link. Google "I was wrong about Bambi Killer"

Vile crime

claig Fri 24-Jan-14 15:30:02

thanks Claig

claig Fri 24-Jan-14 15:36:24

grin

HoGo1 Fri 24-Jan-14 15:55:47

I can assure you no new evidence is contained in the article by Bob Woffinden.

Try this by Andrew Hunter from tory mp:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2456759/Jeremy-Bamber-Do-macabre-pictures-prove-innocent.html

claig Fri 24-Jan-14 16:19:05
hackmum Fri 24-Jan-14 18:56:22

I followed the Sion Jenkins case too and I could never make up my mind - it fascinated me that there were two hung juries on his appeal, because I could see the arguments on both sides. He never seemed like a very nice person (he faked his CV, as I recall) but that doesn't mean he was guilty of murder.

I've never really doubted Bamber's guilt though.

LottieJenkins Fri 24-Jan-14 19:24:42

My stepdaughter lived six houses down from the Jenkins house and I visited her a year after and had to walk past the house. I gave an involuntary shudder as I went past. As an aside I'm not related to SJ.

TheFabulousIdiot Fri 24-Jan-14 21:21:40

Have to say, I don't understand the whole silencer thing.. If it was found days after the murder then presumably it wasn't on the gun so that would mean Sheila could have shot herself (oe the gun wasn't too long)?

PoshPaula Fri 24-Jan-14 21:41:42

Is it because Jeremy Bamber was a good looking man that people still believe he might be innocent?

Yeah, yeah. I know. But is it?

HoGo1 Fri 24-Jan-14 22:06:12

WAS being the operative word!

I don't think many people would not be moved by such a shocking MoJ regardless of looks. In a democratic country we need to know that the justice system works.

One of my earlier posts explains the background re the silencer. As I said if anyone is interested check out www.jeremybamberforum.co.uk. You need to sign in to read the documents. This is likely to be a massive news story in the near future so I'm sure you will all be hearing a lot more wink

VivaLeBeaver Fri 24-Jan-14 22:15:27

There was bllod of Sheila's blood type inside the silencer.

Years after Bamber was found guilty this was retested using more modern techniques (not as up to date now) and it matched 17 points out of 20 against Sheila's blood so they say it's pretty certain its her blood.

She couldn't have shot herself, took the silencer off the gun and put it away, walked into another room and died.

LottieJenkins Fri 24-Jan-14 22:24:49

OP Why do you keep going on and on about it being news in the future??

flippinada Fri 24-Jan-14 22:25:03

No.

It's not really surprising that some people think he's innocent though. I think it must be a similar psychology/mindset to those sorts of people who fall in love with serial killers.

Chanatan Fri 24-Jan-14 22:34:53

I think she,s referring to a conspiracy theory on that forum,have a read of this thread

PoshPaula Fri 24-Jan-14 22:35:15

Yes flippinada you get my point! thank you. Women pursued Peter Sutcliffe in Broadmoor. There is an appeal - for some people, for some women - in these men who are convicted killers.

Chanatan Fri 24-Jan-14 22:35:35

And you dont need to log in or register to read the posts.

YourMotherChucksRocksInHull Fri 24-Jan-14 22:39:06

Not sure about the Jeremy Bamber one.

Very concerned about the possible links between Megan and Lin Russell and Levi Bellfield though.

TheFabulousIdiot Fri 24-Jan-14 23:02:09

Thanks viva, thatbexplainsit. So unless someone planted the blood or she was somehow wounded in the fight with her dad there's no other way her blood could have got there.

I've never known what to think about this case. Certainly the initial police investigation had what can politely be called serious flaws. But that's not the same thing as Bamber being innocent.

VivaLeBeaver Fri 24-Jan-14 23:13:47

The silencer wasn't found for weeks and was found by cousins/other relatives who could possibly have had a motive for putting Sheila's blood in the silencer? But where would they get the blood from? She was dead. Surely any blood on the floor, etc would have been dried up?

If she killed everyone else with a silencer on the gun and got some of her own blood in he silencer would she really have put the silencer in a cupboard before shooting herself? Yes, she'd have to take it off the gun but surely she'd just drop it on the floor!

TheFabulousIdiot Fri 24-Jan-14 23:16:50

I'm Not a scientist but I don't think it matters what the blood was like, so long as they can get a big enough sample.

TheFabulousIdiot Fri 24-Jan-14 23:18:43

And it could be that whenever or wherever the silencer was found, it may not have been used in the murders at all. Surely?

VivaLeBeaver Fri 24-Jan-14 23:30:14

But dried blood wouldn't have stuck to the inside of a tube/silencer. So it must have been fresh splatters that went in it

A silencer must have been used as both twins were asleep when shot. One was still sucking his thumb.

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 00:18:18

My reasons for thinking JB's conviction is the worst MoJ in British criminal history:

Judge's summing up/Geoffrey Rivlin's fatal mistake in his defence strategy

As we know the blood sample found in the silencer matched Sheila's blood type/group. With conflicting opinion about a remote possibility of the sample representing an intimate mix of June and NB's blood type/group.

Here's the table which shows the blood type/group of the victims along with the sample found:

ABO PGM EAP AK Hp

Nevill Bamber O PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
June Bamber A PGM1+ EAP BA AK2-1 Hp2-1
Daniel Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Nicholas Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Sheila Caffell A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
Blood Sample A Nil EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1

I have been unable to find anywhere in the judge's summing up or CoA doc any reference to what % of the population share blood type/groups. However my own perhaps rather crude methods and calculations indicate about 10% but the above results are certainly not exclusive to the individuals ie they are shared by many others.

As the relatives found the silencer they were asked to provide samples, which they did, to rule out contamination. I am unsure as to who exactly provided samples but RB did and his sample ie blood type/group matched the sample found in the silencer and Sheila Caffell's blood type/group.

Furthermore there is no audit trail as to who had access to and handled the silencer from manufacture to it arriving at FSS for analysis. For example at the manufacturing stage, transportation, gun shop, others that Nevill may have lent the gun/silencer to eg farm workers, friends etc

If 10% of the population share the same blood type/group then imo this should have been made clear to the jury ie spelled out in no uncertain terms. For example:

10% of the population will share the same blood type/group found in the silencer which matched SC's blood type/group and RB's blood type/group. Put another way 1 in 10 or statistically at least one member of the jury.

However this is part of the judge's summing up and imo is very misleading:

Page 12 of summing up

"Now I think that does complete the evidence of those experts, so it all comes down to this, does it not? Mr Hayward says, "Well to begin with, merely analysing the blood inside the moderator, it correponds with Sheila Caffell's.

Page 13 of summing up

"then come to Mr Fletcher's evidence: "*One of Sheila's wounds clearly was a contact wound", so that is entirely consistent with it being her blood in the end of the moderator".

The above statements imply that the evidence points to Sheila's blood being found in the moderator. This is WRONG as it was impossible to conclude then that Sheila's blood was in the moderator. It was only possible to state that the blood found in the silencer matched Sheila's blood type/group which is not exclusive to her and also matched RB's.

It appears that the possibility of contamination and the fact that it could never be proved that Sheila's blood was in the silencer was never presented to the jury?

*The judge states above "One of Sheila's wounds clearly was a contact wound". That is not what the pathologist stated. He states "There were two gunshot entry wounds which appear to have been fired at contact or near contact".

PortofinoRevisited Sat 25-Jan-14 00:23:47

One of Sheila's wounds - as quoted above. No one ever shot themselves twice in the head, without any gunshot residue etc.

WildThong Sat 25-Jan-14 00:25:16

Nope. Guilty as charged. and an evil bastard

There were some very dodgy police investigations in the past and I've no doubt some have occurred recently and will in future.

As to your query is this the worst British MoJ, then obviously not as we don't have the death penalty any more.

The one that sticks in my mind is Stefan Kiszko.

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 01:27:42

Pathologist confirms first wound would have enabled Sheila to walk around for a short while. I do not believe she did walk around but could certainly have fired a second shot.

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 01:28:45

Pathologist unable to confirm murder or suicide

VivaLeBeaver Sat 25-Jan-14 08:06:27

Since the trial the blood was retested and came back with more than just a blood group. Have copied the next bit from MoJ forum. If its true then the arguments about well 10% of the population have that blood group are null and void.

The truth however as we now know it is that the DNA recovered from inside the silencer and originating from the baffles returned 17 similar markers with Sheila Caffell and it is accepted that up to 13 could be coincidental rendering it highly likely that the DNA found deep within the sound moderator did come from Sheila Caffell.

It should be noted that by using 15 or 16 markers the chances of two people having the same DNA is estimated to be around 1 in a trillion. The chances then that the DNA in the silencer just happened to derive from someone other than Sheila Caffell are so infinitesimally small as to be nigh impossible.

JakeBullet Sat 25-Jan-14 08:19:00

One of the biggest reasons I didn't believe it was Sheila Caffel was the fact that Neville Bamber had evidently struggled/fought with someone in the kitchen. When you consider that he was 6ft 4in and Sheila was a recovering anorexic it is hard to see how she would not have been overpowered by him. Add to that that she had no signs of a struggle on her body as far as I know.

I have requested to join the Jeremy Bamber forum as this thread has interested me and made me want to read more about it all.

ExcuseTypos Sat 25-Jan-14 12:07:48

Viva- I agree with your last post and believe that Shelia was killed by someone- her brother.

I think a lot of that forum is full of stupid ideas- one is that the police shot Sheila and tried to cover it uphmm. Well why would they try to cover up killing someone with a gun who had already killed 4 people? They wouldn't need to cover that up! It's a ludicrous suggestion.

Yeah - I don't get that Viva

Oops I meant Excuse!

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 12:27:16

Scientists found the mother's (June Bamber) dna in the silencer and could only state that Sheila's may have been in it. However three appeal court judges found it "completely meaningless". This was due to the potential for contamination. See points 497 and 506 of the Court of Appeal hearing:

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 12:30:10

Yes agreed forums etc attract a lot of oddballs with weird ideas grin blush

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 13:17:48

Stefan Kiszko remains the worst and most tragic miscarriage of justice in my opinion. Bamber's (if he is innocent) doesn't come near it.

TunipTheUnconquerable Sat 25-Jan-14 13:24:47

Kiszko was in prison for 16 years, Bamber so far has been for nearly 29. If Bamber was innocent I don't see how that's not worse.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 13:39:22

My comment is not solely predicated upon length of time served. I am talking about so much more than that.

Read up on Kiszko- his learning disability, the crime he was accused of, the wya he would have been treated in prison and what happened to him afterwards. He had so few resources, emotionally and cognitively.

Much more tragic.

PoshPaula Sat 25-Jan-14 13:43:22

Derek Bentley, Timothy Evans - both hanged for crimes they did not commit or where there was reasonable doubt.

flippinada Sat 25-Jan-14 13:50:08

I agree Mignonette.

Even if (and that's an extremely big if) Bamber is innocent, it's a very, very long way from being the worst MoJ in British history. Not even close.

What about Sally Clark? Her story is absolutely heartbreaking.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 13:50:36

Yes I would concede that anybody convicted when capital punishment was still law is more tragic. i should have clarified that I was referring to people convicted since its abolition.

ExcuseTypos Sat 25-Jan-14 13:57:34

Sally Clark's story is indeed heart breaking.

Being falsely accused of killing anyone is horrific, but to be falsely accused of killing your own baby. Beyond horrific.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 13:59:21

sad

WhamBamThankYouMam Sat 25-Jan-14 14:03:11

I agree mignonette, I don't think it even compares to what Kisko went through.

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 14:08:37

Good points made about the definition of "worst MoJ". I guess I was thinking about duration in terms of numbers of years spent incarcerated if innocent. I think I shall rephrase "worst MoJ in recent times" so it reflects those that lost their lives through capital punishment and were subsequently found to be innocent. Thanks for highlighting.

In terms of years spent incarcerated Stephen Downing was the longest at circa 27 years but Bamber has now overtaken that.

I agree Stefan Kiszko's MoJ is heartbreaking and he died shortly after his release so too his mother.

Bamber though was adopted ie his life took an unnatural course. His birth parents went on to marry each other. He has two full birth siblings. One a professional artist. The other a founding director of a ship broking company. How different their lives ie three full birth siblings. If Bamber is innocent he also lost his entire immediate adoptive family to murder. He was almost murdered by an inmate. His probation officer contacted his birth parents to ask if they would help with his appeal and they said they didn't want to know. How much sadder does it get IF he's innocent?

Greythorne Sat 25-Jan-14 14:17:08

I agree Stefan kisko is a worse miscarriage of justice, although it's not a competition.

RIP Stefan

And no, I'm not a friend if his.

PoshPaula Sat 25-Jan-14 15:11:16

I agree Sally Clark suffered terribly. It's impossible to imagine what that woman went through (and the experience caused her death, indirectly).

HoGo1 Sat 25-Jan-14 15:19:01

Yes Prof Roy Meadows had a lot to answer for with his misleading statistics into cot death.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 16:32:55

Interesting and mind blowing thing to ponder -

What is worse in your eyes- being falsely imprisoned or a guilty party going free?

That is just a general question to all. I just don't know what to think about that one.

PoshPaula Sat 25-Jan-14 20:03:53

The two go hand in hand. It's impossible to say which is worse. When considering the guilty party going free, there is also the consideration that others are then put at risk - the person is or has been a danger to the public.

LauraBridges Sat 25-Jan-14 20:27:29

Whether he's guilty or not I doubt society is very well served by keeping him in anyway. He's certainly been in there a very long time.

TunipTheUnconquerable Sat 25-Jan-14 20:34:32

I think in this case the consequences for the family if he was guilty but the conviction found to be unsafe, would be awful.
Given the nature of the crimes, and the fact that the family were involved in finding the evidence that had him convicted, and that there are property ownership issues, it would be a living nightmare for them if he was released.

AngelaDaviesHair Sat 25-Jan-14 20:47:57

I agree with Mignonette about Stefan Kiszko. I also always remember Engin Raghip. He was one of the three people originally charged with PC Blakelock's murder. He too had a lerning disability. The way he was terrified and coerced into confessing over a period of days is truly Kafkaesque and awful.

Trouble is these cases do bring out the Plastic Poirots with their encyclopaedic grasp of the facts (however peripherally relevant) and minimal judgment. Bamber has never been able to convince professional investigators or adjudicators, whether the Court of Appeal or CCRC or anyone else, that he was wrongly convicted.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 22:40:41

That's awful Angela. I remember the old Stoke Newington Police Station and the horrendous racist, disablist and sexist attitudes and actions of those officers. The way they treated mentally unwell people in detention.....sad

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 22:42:12

And their treatment of black people w/ mentall illness including using restraint techniques that are now known to be particularly dangerous to people of Afro Caribbean descent. They left one detained man to die on the floor after restraining him.

Still happening today. Look at that poor man killed by G4S on a deportation flight a year or so back. AFAIK no one has been prosecuted for smothering the poor man to death.

Mignonette Sat 25-Jan-14 23:04:31

Yes that was terrible. And the reports of abusive treatment of labouring women.

and the baby denied formula for a whole weekend at Yarl's Wood - I wrote to my MP about that one (G4S or whoever runs it says it was OK because they gave the baby rehydration stuff, FFS).

And the latest reports of people dying in chains who were detained at a deportation facility in Birmingham. And a man in his 80s with Alzheimer's who was shackled during a hospital visit.

Contemptible, all of it. WTF are the bastards who do this thinking? Do they get a kick out of it? (And I don't just mean the security people, I mean their fucking bosses as well, all the way up to the boardroom. AND the shareholders. Who probably include those institutions that manage our pension funds.)

Mignonette Sun 26-Jan-14 13:16:39

Yes the man with Alzheimers is the case that appalled me too. Such cruelty and inhumanity. How DO they sleep at night?

I have no idea. Except not giving a fuck.

How are G4S even still getting contracts and running things.

That poor man who'd come to track down his long lost DD. where the fuck is basic kindness and humanity?

Mignonette Sun 26-Jan-14 13:57:14

As the NHS is broken up and sold off piece meal to companies like Serco you are going to see more of this attitude and callousness not less.

God help us all.

So depressing

Suzietwo Mon 27-Jan-14 22:02:37

Another local who is pretty sure he done it

JakeBullet Mon 27-Jan-14 22:12:26

I find from what I have read that Julie Mugford is pretty credible witness once you get beyond the incredulity that she did not act sooner with what JB had allegedly said and done.

I think the initial police investigation was bungled as police thought they were dealing with murders and a suicide. Items were moved etc. which all muddies the waters now.

There is a lot of accusation that Julie Mugford was a scorned woman taking revenge. However, she has maintained silence ever since apart from reiterating that she believes JB to be guilty. Certainly she could have sold her story many times over but didn't. ..she seems simply to have moved on and put a terrible event behind her.

Fact is that I believe JB has convinced himself of his innocence. How could you want to acknowledge that you were responsible for the murder of two little boys....as well as their mother and grandparents.

Catkinsthecatinthehat Tue 28-Jan-14 07:21:26

I find from what I have read that Julie Mugford is pretty credible witness once you get beyond the incredulity that she did not act sooner with what JB had allegedly said and done.

One thing that struck me from the Guardian article cited above was that Julie Mugford implicated another man as well as Bamber for the murder, but it was found he had a cast-iron alibi. The Guardian also ran a story in 2012 as they'd received documents showing that charges of burglary, cheque fraud and drug smuggling against her were dropped ahead of her giving evidence.

I'm very on the fence as to whether JB did it, but there are real issues about the credibility of Mugford.

JakeBullet Tue 28-Jan-14 08:57:41

She implicated the other man as JB told her he had arranged a hitman and gave her that name.

I think she believed that statement from him. When it seemed like their relationship was over she might have had good reason to fear that she could be next.....knew too much etc.

I guess she got a lawyer who arranged a deal. ....that she would get immunity in exchange for her evidence, rightly or wrongly that was given.

If JB is innocent (and it would be a terrible MOJ if he is) then it would mean that not just Julie Mugford lied but so did many others. ...AND maintained those lies ever since.

WHY would somebody lie about something so serious as this?

I believe that Julie Mugford told the truth and still believes it to be the truth.

Obviously JB coukd just have been a silly and immature young man making stupid statements about killing his family. He might well have been the arrogant young man he was painted as.....it doesn't make him a killer. But if he did make all those statements.....and then suddenly the family all end up dead, well you'd have to be mad not to have believed he did all he said he was going to.

You just would not lie about that.

Then again...even at that young age when she was equally as immature as JB I find it amazing that she did not speak straight to the police when the family were murdered. I know I would have done.

BMW6 Tue 28-Jan-14 10:05:45

Whatever next? Ian Brady innocent? hmm

OP - what is your relationship to Jeremy Bamber? You seem to have a vested interest in trying to prove his innocence......

AngelaDaviesHair Tue 28-Jan-14 10:07:41

I guess she got a lawyer who arranged a deal

Or possibly, the charges against her were dropped because there was nothing in them, or not enough to stand up in court.

JakeBullet Tue 28-Jan-14 10:19:36

Possibly, although I gather she did confess to the joint taking of cash with regard to the Osea caravan park.
In any case I still think she told the truth as I saw it at that time.

As I said....being an immature and arrogant young man does not make JB a killer. But having said a he is alleged to have said.....and then the family turn up dead....well frankly I would believe he was responsible in those circumstances.

Have joined both the JB forum and the MOJ forum. I am still to be persuaded totally either way but am leaning towards him being guilty as charged. I could be persuaded the other way with substantive evidence though.

Still reading all the statements which are interesting.

nennypops Tue 28-Jan-14 13:42:27

My feeling is that Bamber's case will become a global news story of epic proportion later this year

This sounds very much like the way Bamber's supporters try to hype up his chances every time they come up with yet another ludicrously complex theory that might prove his innocence but doesn't.

OP, you really need to stop reading solely what you get from the Bamber discussion group, or at least read it much more critically, and also start reading the actual evidence with an open mind. You really can't get round the DNA evidence of the blood spatters in the silencer, and I note that you make no attempt to deal with the fact that Sheila Caffell had no gunshot residue on her arms and hands and her fingerprints aren't on the rifle. If she was going to kill herself she obviously wouldn't have stopped to wipe it, and she certainly wouldn't have bothered to take the silencer off the gun.

nennypops Tue 28-Jan-14 13:47:54

Interesting point from the 2011 article:

"At the original trial, there was a great deal of evidence, for example from Barbara Wilson, the farm secretary, which could not be given because it was hearsay.

Today, that evidence would be admissible. Her testimony about what Nevill told her — that he believed Jeremy intended to kill him and had said: ‘I must never turn my back on that young man’ — would be disastrous for him."

AngelaDaviesHair Tue 28-Jan-14 15:20:23

In 2002 the Court of Appeal said:

'The final ground of appeal is a generalised allegation that as a result of "the activities of Detective Superintendent Ainsley, DS Jones and DCI Wright as detailed in grounds 1 to 13, the prosecution case is tainted and the convictions therefore unsafe. We have already recorded our conclusions on the individual grounds and have made clear that we find none of the allegations of serious misconduct made out. Before reaching final conclusions about the individual allegations, we have deliberately reconsidered the matter to see whether looking at the wider picture gives rise to any concern that in looking at matters of detail, we might have missed evidence of the kind that only is capable of being perceived by having regard to a number of smaller matters. We can see no reason to revise our view on any of the matters and we have found no evidence at all to support the allegations of serious wrongdoing by the police that is suggested.

'As Mr Temple observed in his closing address to us, one of the striking features of this case was the difference between Mr Turner's opening address and the speech that he felt able to make once the evidence had been examined. In the former, suggestions of a widespread conspiracy to present a false case and to deprive the defence of material that would assist them in answering the case were made. By the close of the case, many of those allegations had been abandoned because they were patently obviously unjustified once the evidence was scrutinised.

'This case has been scrutinised since conviction with as much care as probably any comparable case. In our judgment nothing has emerged to cause us to believe that there was any improper conduct by the investigating officers that threatened the integrity of the trial process, such as is alleged in this ground.

'Conclusion
'Having considered and rejected each of the grounds advanced on behalf of the appellant, it follows that this appeal must be dismissed. Each member of the court has reached the conclusion that there is nothing in any of the matters raised before us that throws doubt upon the safety of these convictions.

'It should be understood that it is not the function of this court to decide whether or not the jury was right in reaching its verdicts. That is a task that is wholly impossible in virtually every case because this court does not have the advantage of hearing and seeing the witnesses give evidence, and deciding which of the witnesses are trying to tell the truth and which of those who are trying to do so are accurate in their recollection. Our system trusts the judgment of a group of 12 ordinary people to make such assessments and it is not for the Court of Appeal to try to interfere with their assessment unless the verdicts are manifestly wrong, or something has gone wrong in the process leading up to or at trial so as to deprive the jury of a fair opportunity to make their assessment of the case, or unless fresh evidence has emerged that the jury never had an opportunity to consider. We have found no evidence of anything that occurred which might unfairly have affected the fairness of the trial. We do not believe that the fresh evidence that has been placed before us would have had any significant impact upon the jury's conclusions if it had been available at trial. Finally the jury's verdicts were, in our judgment, ones that they were plainly entitled to reach on the evidence. We should perhaps add in fairness to the jury that the deeper we have delved into the available evidence the more likely it has seemed to us that the jury were right, but our views do not matter in this regard, it is the views of the jury that are paramount.'

ExcuseTypos Tue 28-Jan-14 15:38:13

Thank you for posting that Angela, the last sentence is especially telling-

"We should perhaps add in fairness to the jury that the deeper we have delved into the available evidence the more likely it has seemed to us that the jury were right, but our views do not matter in this regard, it is the views of the jury that are paramount."

lastcowboy Wed 12-Feb-14 17:39:10

It's not possible for anyone to commit 5 murders and not leave one microscopic piece of forensic evidence at the scene. I have discussed the case with Jeremy for many hours, asked him many questions and I know he's 100% innocent. New unseen evidence will soon prove this. I wonder how many of you judge him by books or by hearsay. There's NO evidence against Jeremy FACT.

AngelaDaviesHair Thu 13-Feb-14 00:15:26

JB supporters have been saying this for years, lastcowboy, how odd that successive reviewers at CCRC and in the Court of Appeal can't see it.

lastcowboy Thu 13-Feb-14 10:58:24

I don't really care what you say Angela. You appear to know nothing about the case. Keep listening to the hearsay...I deal in facts. It's pointless having a discussion with you when you so obviously are ignorant of any facts so will leave you to read the books and follow other peoples opinions. Have a nice day.

AngelaDaviesHair Thu 13-Feb-14 11:09:41

No need to get ratty, lastcowboy.

The Court of Appeal judgment quoted above is hardly hearsay, that's my point. That is the most authoritative statement on the case, and it is, to say the least, not helpful to JB.

HoGo1 Thu 13-Feb-14 12:20:11

I think most will agree that Jeremy's conviction was based on the silencer ie that the silencer was found to contain blood deep within it. Upon analysis the blood sample within the silencer was found to match Sheila Caffell's blood type/group. It is confusing as many people think that blood type/group belong exclusively to an individual much the same as DNA. This is not true it is what it says a 'type' and 'group' shared by many. Jeremy's QC at trial, Geoffrey Rivlin, did not present the jury with the realistic possibility that the silencer was contaminated either accidentally or deliberately. Jeremy's adoptive uncle, Robert Boutflour, shared the same blood type/group as that 'found' in the silencer and Sheila Caffell's. Robert Boutflour had a hand in 'finding' the silencer. The jury were unable to reject the silencer 'evidence' as they were not presented with the realistic possibility of contamination. Once a jury has returned a verdict it is notoriously difficult for those representing Jeremy now to go back and claim contamination when the jury should have been presented with this possibility at Jeremy's trial.

I am sure if any of you were convicted on 'evidence' that a member of an extended adoptive family found who a) disliked you simply because you were 'different' and b) benefitted financially by your conviction you might be a little peeved assuming you were innocent.

Authorities do get it wrong. The idea that a large section of the judiciary can't call it wrong is silly. We only have to look at the financial crisis and how the banks nearly went bust despite supposedly being overseen and managed by the great and the good to know how very wrong those in charge get it at times.

Nancy66 Thu 13-Feb-14 15:37:51

You don't know he's a 100 % innocent!

AliceinWinterWonderland Thu 13-Feb-14 15:56:45

I have discussed the case with Jeremy for many hours, asked him many questions and I know he's 100% innocent.

That's hardly conclusive. Many people, when accused of a crime, state they are not guilty. A bit self-serving. He can say what he wants, that's not proof.

AngelaDaviesHair Thu 13-Feb-14 17:57:26

Authorities do get it wrong. The idea that a large section of the judiciary can't call it wrong is silly

Well, I agree with that, but if you want to challenge a detailed, reasoned judgment and be credible, you have to do it in a detailed, reasoned way, no?

BMW6 Thu 13-Feb-14 19:54:58

Myra Hindley claimed for many many years that she was innocent, and her supporters 100% believed her too.

Then a few years before she died she finally admitted her participation in the torture and murder of Lesley Anne Downey and the other children.

Her supporters were horrified that they had been so duped by her for so long.

Psychopaths are excellent liars and are adept at manipulating weaker personalities.

HoGo1 Thu 13-Feb-14 20:13:56

Well, I agree with that, but if you want to challenge a detailed, reasoned judgment and be credible, you have to do it in a detailed, reasoned way, no?

Errrr I thought the rest of my post was detailed and reasoned, no?

HoGo1 Thu 13-Feb-14 20:51:21

As a cat A prisoner JB is assessed psychologically on an annual basis. To date he has undertaken some 26/27 assessments by different psychologists using different methods. None have found any trace of psychopthy nor any mental illness or personality disorder. In fact he scores low on psychopathy ie you or I might score higher!

I don't see myself as being easily "duped" or falling into the category of "weaker personalities".

BMW6 Thu 13-Feb-14 22:08:14

Correction - Hindley was never diagnosed as psychopathic, (unlike Brady) yet she still did those terrible things and fooled her own supporters for years.

None of her supporters would decribe themselves as easily duped or weak personalities either (at least not until after the real truth was revealed).

So, JB may not be a psychopath but could very well be lying through his teeth. He may even have come to believe it himself.

I believe he is as guilty as sin, based on the evidence presented.

AngelaDaviesHair Fri 14-Feb-14 11:20:11

Errrr I thought the rest of my post was detailed and reasoned, no?

Sorry dear, was talking to lostcowboy not having a pop at you.

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 12:02:23

BMW6 I appreciate that you don't share my views on JB, fine, but please refrain from suggesting that for me hold my views I am easily duped and a weak personality. I can assure you I might be many things but I am certainly not easily duped or a weak personality.

The Moors Murders were a bit before my time. I think the only real supporter Myra Hindley had was Lord Longford who was ostracised for doing so? Conversely JB has an army of supporters including a former right wing tory mp, established writer of true crime, past and present members of the judiciary, respected journalists and a growing number of the public to name but a few.

Are you able and willing to share what evidence was presented which causes you to believe that JB is as guilty as sin.

JB might be lying through his teeth. On the other hand he might just be telling the truth as evidenced by the results of his lie detector tests.

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 12:43:46

OP, you really need to stop reading solely what you get from the Bamber discussion group, or at least read it much more critically, and also start reading the actual evidence with an open mind. You really can't get round the DNA evidence of the blood spatters in the silencer, and I note that you make no attempt to deal with the fact that Sheila Caffell had no gunshot residue on her arms and hands and her fingerprints aren't on the rifle. If she was going to kill herself she obviously wouldn't have stopped to wipe it, and she certainly wouldn't have bothered to take the silencer off the gun.

Nennypops I appreciate you don't share my views but that doesn't mean I'm incapable of critical thinking and keeping an open mind!

The three appeal court judges and scientists involved at the 2002 Court of Appeal hearing found the DNA evidence "utterly meaningless". See CoA doc:

http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

If Sheila Caffell was responsible then I suggest she showered/washed before she committed suicide. One of her fingerprints was on the rifle along with one of Jeremy's. I don't believe the silencer ever left the gun cupboard on that fateful night.

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 14:15:06

OP - what is your relationship to Jeremy Bamber? You seem to have a vested interest in trying to prove his innocence......

BMW6 I have no relationship whatsoever with JB. I feel passionately about him suffering a MoJ. It is not for me to prove his innocence and I have no interest in trying to convince others. Happy just to debate the case. I have not accused any member here of anything. On the other hand I have been accused of being duped, incapable of critical thinking, having a weak personality and closed mind.

My interest in the case stems from the fact that like Sheila and Jeremy I was adopted as a baby. Unlike myself I think Sheila and Jeremy were adopted into a completely unsuitable family. I also studied psychology at degree level in the 80's and recall studying 'attachment theory'. Imo the case hinges on the following which were not presented at trial or in any appeal hearing etc since:

-Attachment (SC) due to June Bamber's depression caused by adopting SC in 1959

-Maternal depression (June Bamber) Effect on SC brain circuitry

-Adoption psychology

-Adoption reunions

Now lets see who has been duped, has a weak personality, is incapable of critical thinking and has an open mind!

JakeBullet Fri 14-Feb-14 14:36:41

I have read extensively from the available documents. I believe this man to be guilty.....primarily because his story of events as they unfolded just does not add up.

You don't have to be a psychopath or have a personality disorder to commit this type of crime. You just need the desire, will and the ability to do it.

The fact that he hated his family as reported by more than one person....not just his girlfriend.....leaves me feeling a tad hmm when he now refers to them as "my dear Mum and Dad". The odd behaviour after the murders, and the fact he told his girlfriend he wanted them dead.

I personally don't buy the "woman scorned" stuff....it would have to be a pretty bloody messed up woman to frame someone for murder. No evidence that Julie is messed up....she has gone on and lived her life.
Money? She could have sold her story many times over if money was a motivation...she hasn't.

And as for looking Jeremy in the eye, questioning him and "knowing he is innocent". Am pretty sure that Adrian Prout's girlfriend did the same.....up until the point he finally came clean and confessed.

From what I have read he comes across as a manipulative and controlling individual who does not fancy being behind bars for the rest of his life. Ever since he was imprisoned he has thrown up issues from the case files ....he has picked them apart for every single discrepancy and yet.....none of this has made a court of appeal rule in his favour.

The more I read, the more convinced of his guilt I am.

For him to be innocent a whole load of people would have had to lie.....and to have maintained those lies over the years.

He continues to try and lay the blame on his sister despite her being dozy on Haliperidol, having immaculate nails and no signs of a struggle with her father. No sign that she had fired a gun that day....and her blood was in the silencer....the expert who has looked at this since says it still matched Sheila's blood more than anyone else's. And the silencer was in a cupboard....what a neat murderess she was.....putting the silencer carefully away before killing herself.

Finally the oft quoted "police were talking to someone in the house while Jeremy was outside". Strange he didn't bring that up at trial isn't it?

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 15:14:21

There is not a scintilla of evidence to support JB's conviction. Just much rumour, myth, hearsay and gossip.

It has never been proven that SC's blood was in the silencer. Not by way of the blood type/grouping analysis carried out in '85 or the DNA analysis carried out in '02. I don't believe the silencer ever left the gun cupboard that fateful night.

There was no need for anyone to struggle with Nevill Bamber as he was too badly injured having been shot initially 3 or 4 times. Sheila Caffell is likely to have showered/washed before committing suicide. Women engage in all manner of things with long nails without necessarily causing any damage. Firing a gun is no more difficult than thousands of manual tasks any typical woman carries out domestically or in caring for children.

I don't know whether Julie Mugford was "messed up" but from what I have read she claims to have suffered:

- physical abuse at the hands of her step-father
- an anonymous brutal rape while on holiday in France
- her boyfriend of some 2 years murdered his entire immediate family

That's a lot of violence for a young woman born and bred in UK from a middle class background who attended grammar school and university. If its true she was very, very unlucky and I am pleased she has been able to move on with her life.

By agreeing to act as a prosecution witness she had other charges against her dropped for a crime she carried out with a friend that JB had no involvement in whatsoever. Had she have been charged it would have been bye, bye teaching career for Julie Mugford.

I don't believe many people have told lies (some but not all) The police readily admit that it was a badly handled investigation. It was not Geoffrey Rivlin's finest (QC's do cock up) and the trial judge misled the jury. Sadly miscarriages of justice do happen and imo JB's case is one of them.

AngelaDaviesHair Fri 14-Feb-14 15:24:32

You know, I admire your passion and I'm happy to discuss JB (about which I have no very strong views though I tend to believe the conviction is correct).

However, I do very much take issue with suggesting that (i) Julie Mugford's claim to have suffered physical abuse at the hands of her step-father and an anonymous brutal rape while on holiday in France is per se incredible; and that (ii) whether or not true it somehow has any impact on her credibility as a witness against JB; is really wrong-headed, offensive even.

Why shouldn't that be true? Is there any reason to suppose it isn't? And if true, surely it has no relevance to her credibility as a witness at all?

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 15:38:57

They are her claims. I think it statistically very unlikely that a woman from that era born and bred in the UK from a middle class background suffered directly or indirectly as described above. She was not born/raised in war torn Sudan or from a highly dysfunctional low socio-economic family in the UK where such incidents might be common place.

There is also much evidence supporting her criminal past and dishonesty. Imo she was a totally unreliable prosecution witness.

AngelaDaviesHair Fri 14-Feb-14 15:43:37

You do know about the Mumsnet 'We Believe You' campaign, right? I'm struggling to say more because I don't want to be rude but I am just astonished at your last post. Really really awful.

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 16:02:24

No I don't believe that statistically a middle class woman born in the UK during the 1960's, and brought up in the UK, is likely to have suffered as described in the three incidents above. I am not saying one or all are not true. The only person who knows for sure is Julie Mugford. I am saying it is statistically unlikely.

I really don't see the relevance in anything I've posted with the Mumsnet 'We Believe You' campaign?

JakeBullet Fri 14-Feb-14 16:32:59

so let me get this straight....Sheila Caffell kills everyone in the family.

then she showers, changes her clothes pops the silencer away etc before killing herself,

all very convenient..,,.

....and Neville who was seriously wounded is in the kitchen because he tried to phone Jeremy for help except of course the Pathologist said he would have been rendered unable to speak by his injuries. ...which makes me wonder how he told Jeremy anything.

Also the phone was off the hook.....okay after two mins or so the line would have cleared.....but how did Jeremy get an engaged tone I wonder?

How did Sheila reload the gun when her coordination was so poor....she had been given 100mg of Haliperidol hours before....she would have been too woozy to do anything. Have you ever seen anyone on Haliperidol? I have.....they are zonked out and certainly not capable of the coordination needed for these murders.

Wake up and smell the coffee.....JB is guilty. ...he has soent so long saying "but I'm innocent" he probably cannot even admit it to himself after all this time.

Whethet he should still be in prison is another matter entirely but certainly the wider family believe he is in the right place.

HoGo1 Fri 14-Feb-14 18:36:13

No one "pops the silencer away" as it never left the gun cupboard on that fateful evening.

Why the assumption that Nevill phoned JB AFTER he was shot. I am inclined to think that Nevill phoned JB BEFORE any shots were fired.

A log exists showing Nevill called the police. This could well be the reason JB was unable to return Nevill's call.

A rifle is relatively straight forward to load and fire. Sheila lived independently and shared joint custody of her children with her ex husband, ie her coordination did not render her incapable of carrying out a wide range of domestic chores and caring for her children eg dressing and washing them. She also had enough manual dexterity to skilfully apply full face make-up.

Interesting on this site that if you have an opposing view you get told all manner of things including "wake up and smell the coffee"!

It's posts like yours JakeBullet that I find so lacking that reinforce my views that JB is suffering a MoJ; coupled with your..."wake up and smell the coffee".

lastcowboy Fri 14-Feb-14 19:11:08

The truth is exactly how Jeremy Bamber tells it. I repeat that I know that he's 100% innocent...he couldn't have done it even if he wanted to. The police statements condemn themselves. Four murders and a suicide beyond the shadow of a doubt. That is why there is so much non disclosed evidence. If it could condemn Jeremy then it would be in the public arena. The withheld evidence obviously proves his innocence otherwise it wouldn't be hidden away. It really is as simple as that...no evidence against him, only a contaminated sound moderator and hearsay.

JakeBullet Sat 15-Feb-14 10:09:07

So explain the blood then?

Go on...you are convinced by his innocence...explain the blood in there.

You are deluded if you believe him to be innocent....he is guilty but has spent so long screeching "I am innocent" he believes it himself.

Read his first interviews....evasive evasive evasive unlike anyone else.

...and why has he been refused by the court of appeal three times now...who will have access to documents not in the public domain.

Anyway done debating with you....he is guilty...there is no new evidence and he will die behind bars where he belongs. Two six year old boys shot dead in their beds .....

.....and he phoned his girlfriend to say "all going well"...a fact corroborated by her flatmate.

....he fed a load of lies to police

....the Pathologist agreed to suicide in Sheila until he saw the photographs...after which he said he would not have deemed it a suicide by Sheila.

....why were Sheila's nails immaculate?

....how did she load and re-load the gun given her uncoordinated state? Honestly....look up Haliperidol and see for yourself what it does.

I am done debating and am now hiding this threa. Bye....give my regards to Jeremy when you see him but tell him to accept his guilt in the same way that Adrian Prout had to.....who equally had people bleating about his "innocence".

lastcowboy Sat 15-Feb-14 10:44:24

Re Jake Bullet. There is new evidence yet to be revealed. You are typical of Bamber haters....run and hide when the argument is lost haha. To tell you the truth, I can't be bothered to continue this thread either...you all deal in second hand theories. Jeremy will soon be free...so in my view, that's all that matters to me.

BMW6 Sat 15-Feb-14 19:09:37

I couldn't agree more with Jakebullet's last post.

I don't "hate" JB. He didn't murder MY family. I believe, based on the evidence, that he did it, and as I believe in justice for crimes comitted I believe he should stay in prison for the rest of his life.

That's all. It's not "personal" animosity.

JakeBullet Sat 15-Feb-14 20:17:20

From what I have read it seems that Jeremy will always "be free soon" and yet to date this has not happened.

I am not a Jeremy hater (whatever one of those is) but from the evidence available he appears to be guilty as charged.

The Court of Appeal had all the available documentation...including those NOT in the public domain.....he was not released.

As for the phone calls.....the forms I have seen give the same caller ID on both....ie from Jeremy. He rang the police....his call was given a caller ID, it was phoned through to a main station and the "original caller ID" is the same. One call to police...not two.

Yes I did assume from the evidence that Neville was shot upstairs.....funny how he couldn't phone from his bedroom isnt it? Could it be the phone was off the hook downstairs?

Also cannot imagine him ringing anyone but the police if Sheila had truly gone mad with a gun.

Really am hiding this thread now.

HoGo1 Sun 16-Feb-14 08:03:49

Jake Bullet What about the "blood in there"?

Here's the table showing the four readings from the blood analysis of the victims along with the sample and Robert Boutflour's:

ABO PGM EAP AK Hp

Nevill Bamber O PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1
June Bamber A PGM1+ EAP BA AK2-1 Hp2-1
Daniel Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2
Nicholas Caffell O PGM2+1+ EAP B AK1 Hp2

Sheila Caffell A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1

Blood Sample A Nil EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1

Robert Boutflour A PGM1+ EAP BA AK1 Hp2-1

The above are blood types/groups they are not exclusive to individuals. As you will see Sheila has the same readings as Robert Boutflour who had a helping hand in 'finding' the silencer...what about the "blood in there"? You tell me?

Evasive or assertive? A lot of forced confessions in the era that Jeremy's interviews took place: Guildford Four, Stefan Kizsko, Stephen Downing. In the case of the Maguire Seven the police were found to have doctored the statements.

Jeremy has not been refused three times by the CoA as you claim. He has had two unsuccessful appeals. This is a usual feature of MoJ's. Google some of the longest running MoJ's: Sally Clarke, Guildford 4, Maguire 7, Birmingham 6, Stefan Kiszko, Stephen Downing to name but a few and you will see they all suffered at least one failed appeal.

Julie Mugford's flat mates did not corroborate anything said during the telephone conversation. They were only able to say Julie received a phone call from Jeremy with differing times given for the call.

Jeremy told the police the whole truth and nothing but during his interviews.

The pathologist, having seen all the evidence, was unable to confirm suicide or murder.

What about Sheila's nails. Yes they were intact and well manicured. Mine are too and I do all sorts with them winkwinkwink far in excess of loading and firing a rifle winkwinkwink

Yes about those manicured nails and coordination...did Sheila use a manicurist...winkwinkwink

You're done with debating...sadsadsad

TidyDancer Sun 16-Feb-14 11:40:50

I've never been convinced either way on this. There's too much conflicting evidence that for me doesn't fit exactly with JB's guilt or innocence. I think SC was a credible threat and that she either was guilty or JB took advantage of that to pin it on her. The silencer aspect I tend to disregard, not because it's not important, but because it's impossible to know what the truth is there. The surviving family members aren't credible to me, especially as it was in the interests of their inheritance to find evidence to back up JB's guilt. Julie Mugford is very difficult to trust and believe.

So yeah, I really can't call this one.

JakeBullet Sun 16-Feb-14 18:14:31

Advances in forensic science means the blood has been looked at again. Out of 20 markers there were 17 which matched Sheila's blood. Advances is science have shored up the prosecution case and not weakened it to date.

For Jeremy to be innocent then so many people must have lied....and continued to lie over the years.

If I was a member of the Boutflour family I would be horrified by the accusations being thrown their way.

Oh God I said I was done debating.....smile

HoGo1 Sun 16-Feb-14 18:24:38

Hahaha my friend I knew you would be back. We are both addicted. 20 markers out of 17 indeed read on...

I don't really see the blood and DNA test results connected. The blood sample found in the silencer matched Sheila's blood type/group but as we know it also matched Robert Boutflour's. The blood type/group test results available in 85/86 are not exclusive to individuals.

As we know the CoA ruled that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer but they were unable to confirm either way. DNA results can identify a positive match normally to about 0.3% making it pretty damn conclusive.

Lets assume for argument sake Sheila's DNA was in the silencer it by no means proves that her blood was ever in the silencer due to the potential for contamination. By contamination I mean that when staff at fss, court officials or jurors handled the silencer they did not take the necessary precautions to prevent contamination as DNA testing was not even envisaged in 85/86. So it was possible when jurors were handling the silencer along with other exhibits that contained Sheila's dna eg blood, skin etc that the silencer was contaminated.

Confirmation from CoA doc re potential for contamination:

504. Mr Webster then reviewed in detail the history of the handling of the moderator and the various opportunities for contamination. He considered the fact that Dr Lincoln had taken out all the baffles and tested them all. He referred to the fact that both Mr Hayward and Mr Fletcher had handled the moderator in the witness box, a place where other exhibits were produced without any precautions being taken to avoid contact. He pointed to the fact that the judge specifically told the jury that they could "empty the baffles out later" and that it could not be established what use had been made of the moderator by the jury during their deliberations or what other exhibits may have been in their possession. He observed that the judge had told the jury that if they handled any of the clothing, they should put on plastic gloves for their own protection, thus giving rise to the possibility that blood stained items were examined by the jury with no precautions being taken to ensure that if they then went to handle the baffles there was not contamination

End

Futhermore the DNA detected by the LCN-DNA testing did not reflect the distribution of blood found in the silencer in 85/86:

Confirmation from CoA doc re distribution of DNA not reflecting distribution of blood within the silencer

72. Even given these limitations of LCN profiling, I do consider that the tests were worth attempting. The results obtained would have been of value if the distribution of DNA within the sound moderator detected by the LCN DNA profiling test reflected the distribution of blood within the sound moderator when it was originally tested. Unfortunately they do not.

The Relatives

The best they can hope for is losing much of their ill gotten gains...

Polyethyl Sun 16-Feb-14 19:03:56

Yes I think he is guilty.

What I find thought provoking about this story is that mr and mrs Bamber adopted a little girl who grew up a paranoid schizophrenic. And they adopted a little boy who grew up to be a vicious murderer. Now that's extraordinarily unlucky!

HoGo1 Sun 16-Feb-14 19:19:26

Nothing to do with luck. Mrs Bamber adopted Sheila Caffell and then suffered severe depression as a result of her decision. Check out 'Attachment' and 'The effects of maternal depression'.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/youth-justice/yjb-toolkits/parenting/specialist-issues-attachment-disorder.pdf

http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp8/

Sheila Caffell should have been removed from the Bambers care and as a couple they should have been prevented from ever adopting again.

HoGo1 Sun 16-Feb-14 19:24:41

Jeremy's Court of Appeal Hearings and submissions to the CCRC:

I think I'm right in saying that JB's case was initially heard by the CoA in 1989. This was on the basis of the judge's summing up showing bias. This was rejected.

He then submitted an application to the CCRC who referred the case to the CoA in 2002. This was rejected with the appeal court judges commenting as follows:

"Having considered and rejected each of the grounds advanced on behalf of the appellant,it follows that this appeal must be dismissed".

AND

"We should perhaps add in fairness to the jury that the deeper we have delved into the available evidence the more likely it has seemed to us that the jury were right..."

This is what was said about other MoJ's:

Stefan Kizsko

"We can find no grounds whatsoever to condemn the jury's verdict of murder as in any way safe or unsatisfactory. The appeal is dismissed". Lord Justice Bridge.

Stephen Downing

"The court felt that her evidence was not credible and secure enough to allow an appeal against the conviction".

Sally Clarke

"Despite recognition of the flaws in Meadow's statistical evidence, the convictions were upheld at appeal in October 2000."

Guildford Four

"Both the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven unsuccessfully sought leave to appeal their convictions immediately".

"The Guildford Four tried to obtain from the Home Secretary a reference to the Court of Appeal under Section 17 of Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (later repeled) but were unsuccessful.

Birmingham 6

"In March 1976 their first application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Widgery CJ".

"In January 1988 after a six week hearing (at that time the longest criminal hearing ever held), the convictions were ruled to be safe and satisfactory. The Court of Appeal, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane dismissed the appeals".

JakeBullet Sun 16-Feb-14 21:45:54

grin Mercy HoGo......let me off tonight...will debate tomorrow...and read your post properly then (when I am wine free) grin.

NigellasGuest Sun 16-Feb-14 21:52:11

we lived in the next village.
general feeling was guilty.

JakeBullet Mon 17-Feb-14 09:36:01

I totally agree with regards to the adoption....both Sheila and Jeremy had issues as a result. In fact Jeremy has been rejected twice....at birth and as an adult by his biological father. No matter what he may (or may not) have done I think that is sad.

nennypops Tue 18-Feb-14 22:02:51

The three appeal court judges and scientists involved at the 2002 Court of Appeal hearing found the DNA evidence "utterly meaningless".

But that was in the context of dismissing out of hand an argument that Bamber made based on the DNA evidence. They made no finding whatsoever that this demolished the reasons for believing that it was Bamber and not his sister who committed the murders.

nennypops Tue 18-Feb-14 22:10:10

There is not a scintilla of evidence to support JB's conviction

And yet, of the people who have seen and/or heard all the evidence, the original jury, two sets of very experienced Appeal Court judges, various lawyers and forensic experts have all decided that there is more than a scintilla of evidence to support the conviction. But you, as a person who has read a lot of very one-sided stuff on the internet, know better. Right.

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 08:14:17

Come back HoGo...yes am addicted to this case at the mo. Not as knowledgeable as some of the people who post on the miscarriage of justice forums for and against JB's conviction though.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 11:15:53

But that was in the context of dismissing out of hand an argument that Bamber made based on the DNA evidence. They made no finding whatsoever that this demolished the reasons for believing that it was Bamber and not his sister who committed the murders.

Nennypops You are correct when you say that the three appeal court judges made no findings to question the safety of Bamber's conviction, but this does not mean that he is not the victim of a MoJ. Please see the verdicts of failed appeals for victims of MoJ's that have since been quashed:

Stefan Kizsko

"We can find no grounds whatsoever to condemn the jury's verdict of murder as in any way safe or unsatisfactory. The appeal is dismissed". Lord Justice Bridge.

Stephen Downing

"The court felt that her evidence was not credible and secure enough to allow an appeal against the conviction".

Sally Clarke

"Despite recognition of the flaws in Meadow's statistical evidence, the convictions were upheld at appeal in October 2000."

Guildford Four

"Both the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven unsuccessfully sought leave to appeal their convictions immediately".

"The Guildford Four tried to obtain from the Home Secretary a reference to the Court of Appeal under Section 17 of Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (later repeled) but were unsuccessful.

Birmingham 6

"In March 1976 their first application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Widgery CJ".

"In January 1988 after a six week hearing (at that time the longest criminal hearing ever held), the convictions were ruled to be safe and satisfactory. The Court of Appeal, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane dismissed the appeals".

The point I was endeavouring to make with regard to the DNA analysis is that many use the fact that 17 markers out of 20 matched Sheila Caffell's DNA profile as some sort of indication that her DNA was likely to have been in the silencer and that this proves her blood was in the silencer. It does not. As contamination cannot be ruled out the appeal court judges found it "utterly meaningless". I do agree with their findings on this point. However it is perhaps worth noting that for the case to have gone before the three appeal court judges it had to bypass an army of officials at the CCRC over a long time period. This perhaps gives an idea of the complexity of the case. Its also worth noting that only a very small % (approx 2.97%) of applications submitted to the CCRC during its history are referred to the CoA.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/criminal-cases-review-commission

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 11:40:26

yay...you are back smile

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 11:46:28

And yet, of the people who have seen and/or heard all the evidence, the original jury, two sets of very experienced Appeal Court judges, various lawyers and forensic experts have all decided that there is more than a scintilla of evidence to support the conviction. But you, as a person who has read a lot of very one-sided stuff on the internet, know better. Right.

Yes I absolutely believe Jeremy Bamber is the victim of the worst Miscarriage of Justice in modern British Criminal history.

I am not afraid to go against prevailing orthodoxy.

The information that leads me to believe Jeremy Bamber is the victim of a MoJ is entirely my own.

Remind me how many of the great and the good called it wrong across the globe over the financial crisis:

Central bankers
Politicians
Regulators
Banks' senior managers
Accountants
Auditors
Credit rating agencies
Fund managers
Compliance personnel

This was based on the concept (wrongful belief) that credit risk could be managed/mitigated by complex mathematical modelling. Similar to the belief that Sheila Caffell's blood was in the silencer from backspatter or blowback.

But you, as a person knows I have read a lot of very one-sided stuff on the internet. Right

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 11:51:58

yay...you are back

Awwww thanks JakeBullet smile

I have to do some REAL work now. I'll try to get back later. That's of course assuming members are not in shock and awe at my posts and lost for words wink grin

nennypops Wed 19-Feb-14 13:44:50

The information that leads me to believe Jeremy Bamber is the victim of a MoJ is entirely my own.

Really? And how do you have this privileged access to information which even the court doesn't apparently have? I assume you must have, given that you have said very confidently that there is not one single scintilla of evidence against Jeremy Bamber.

Sorry, the undoubted fact that people are not infallible does not lead to the conclusion that every single person who has looked at and heard the evidence and arguments was wrong to decide that Bamber was guilty. That is what is known as a complete logic fail.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 14:22:48

Really? And how do you have this privileged access to information which even the court doesn't apparently have? I assume you must have, given that you have said very confidently that there is not one single scintilla of evidence against Jeremy Bamber.

I do not have access to any information that is not in the public domain. I just connected some dots with info not previously looked at in connection with the case. Does not necessarily mean that I am right or that it is relevant to the case but it is this information that led me to my conclusion and beliefs about the case. Are you able to provide any evidence that proves beyond doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family?

Sorry, the undoubted fact that people are not infallible does not lead to the conclusion that every single person who has looked at and heard the evidence and arguments was wrong to decide that Bamber was guilty. That is what is known as a complete logic fail.

Logic fail or flawed group thinking/herd mentality in the absence of any firm evidence? May I ask how you think long running MoJ's like the Stefan Kiszko case happen? Or when the former Chairman of the FSA , Lord Turner, stated:

“I think we – as the authorities, central banks, regulators, those involved today – are the inheritors of a 50-year-long, large intellectual and policy mistake,” what is meant by this if not complete logic fail?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/9934819/Adair-Turner-Bankers-no-longer-in-denial.html

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 15:34:21

I am still reading through the available documents. ...some are quite shocking. sad

I still lean towards guilty BUT there are issues I dont like such as the remaining evidence being destroyed etc. A pity as it might answer questions definitively.

I still do not think Sheila could have done all those things qnd remained immaculate (or as clean as she was), There have been several high profile cases of murder/suicide by parents, I don't know of a single case though where the perpetrator showered and changed before taking his or her own life. Sheila was just too clean....also the initial wound woukd have more or less incapacitated her amd certainlu caused a drainage of blood down her clothes. The fact she is so clean tells me that she is unlikely to have moved anywhere in an upright position after the initial gunshot wound.

AchyFox Wed 19-Feb-14 16:10:25

No.

You just need to look at the very detailled account of his girlfriend, who he phoned directly after the killings.

nennypops Wed 19-Feb-14 16:13:31

Are you able to provide any evidence that proves beyond doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family?

I don't have to. The prosecution has already provided evidence that satisfied a jury beyond reasonable doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family, and in two subsequent appeal hearing his lawyers, with access to all the documents you have seen, failed to demonstrate that there was anything unsafe about his conviction.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 16:21:51

Which account? The one she gave to the police the day after the murders where she makes no reference to Bamber's involvement. Or the one she gives a month later when he dumps her and she makes all sorts of claims about Bamber planning the murders for over a year. In the intervening period between the two statements she identifies the five victims at the morgue, including the two little boys she read a bedtime story to and put to bed the Saturday prior to the tragedy, and shares Bamber's life and bed.

AchyFox Wed 19-Feb-14 16:33:00

He doesn't deny the phone call, just the content.

There were flatmate witnesses her end of the call.

She is a criminal too and shouldn't have been cut the deal the police did.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 16:35:36

I don't have to. The prosecution has already provided evidence that satisfied a jury beyond reasonable doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family, and in two subsequent appeal hearing his lawyers, with access to all the documents you have seen, failed to demonstrate that there was anything unsafe about his conviction

The above does not mean that Jeremy Bamber's conviction is not the worst MoJ in modern British criminal history?

Two jurors were not convinced. The CCRC obviously had their doubts hence the referral to the CoA. Only 2.97% of applications submitted to CCRC have been referred to CoA. All of this will just make the case even more sensational when the conviction is quashed in the not too distant future.

Any ideas about why so much information is held under pii? Or why Essex Police destroyed many exhibits when they were told not to do so?

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 16:46:00

JakeBullet

Very sad example of a father killing his wife and their two sons. He then spent some 24 hours at the family home, including washing his car, before committing suicide.

Apparently he wasn't having an affair he had become depressed about a miscarriage his wife suffered.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2072921/Pudsey-family-murder-suicide-Was-killer-father-Richard-Smith-having-affair.html

If Sheila was responsible I think she must have showered and changed her clothes. Then committed suicide in the position she was found in.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 16:47:31

Grateful if anyone can explain why my links don't work? confused

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 17:22:43

Hi HoGo...just put [[ ]] around your links....then they should work.

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 17:25:13

sad....awfully sad case.

Presuming nobody else had a motive to want the family dead though.

I am addicted to the for and against forums now......reading, re-reading etc.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 17:31:08

Hi HoGo...just put [[ ]] around your links....then they should work

Many thanks. I should have read the instructions below properly. Makes me wonder what else I might be missing/not reading properly wink

nennypops Wed 19-Feb-14 17:40:36

HoGo, I think we have already established that, if this were a miscarriage of justice (in my book MoJ is definitely Ministry of Justice and nothing else), it still isn't the worst miscarriage of justice in modern history.

I answered your direct question about whether I could produce proof beyond doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family. That answer being inconvenient to you, you have tried to turn the question into a different one.

Bamber's supporters have been saying for years that the conviction was about to be quashed. Last time round, his barrister started out by making very confident assertions about his case which he had to abandon before the end of his arguments. Therefore I'm not going to hold my breath about the likelihood of the conviction being quashed any time soon.

HettiePetal Wed 19-Feb-14 18:06:29

Interesting thread.

This might have been covered and I missed it, but do the phone records support JB's claim that his father called him that night?

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 18:12:33

Hi Hettie, unfortunately not, the technology presumably was not available at that time for household phones.

Its one of the things Jeremy said during a police interview...that they could check the phone but they told him no they couldn't and his response came across as one of surprise. I lean towards the guilty verdict and his response in that interview suggested to me that he had planned for there to be proof of a call from White House Farm...and was surprised when he was told that they could not confirm/deny a call made at that time.....but of course I could be wrong.

VivaLeBeaver Wed 19-Feb-14 18:14:42

I don't think that phone records back then were as efficient as in modern day.....so there's no proof afaik about where the phone calls were made from.

Phone calls to the police were recorded but the tapes were destroyed and never heard as evidence in court. Which is odd as you'd think it would be a really crucial bit of evidence. Did Jeremy make both calls to the police, pretending to be his dad in the first one? Or was it really his dad which would support Jeremy's claim of innocence.

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 18:14:46

Depending on which view you read in other forums....

Neville Bamber made the call as Jeremy said he did....

or

Jeremy made the call to his home phone from White House Farm nd then simply cancelled the call when he got home. After around 2 mins the line would have cleared and he could then have phoned.....his girlfriend/the police...again depending upon whicch view you read.

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 18:17:12

The call ID's on the forms I have seen are the same informant ID...ie Jeremy Bamber which seems to suggest that JB phoned the police and the local station then phoned it through to a more central station.....with info that there was an incident at "White House Farm, daughter gone beserk."..based upon JB's info to the local station.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 18:44:34

HoGo, I think we have already established that, if this were a miscarriage of justice (in my book MoJ is definitely Ministry of Justice and nothing else), it still isn't the worst miscarriage of justice in modern history.

Lets not split hairs over acronyms. MoJ = Ministry of Justice and Miscarriage of Justice. FSA is Financial Services Authority and Food Standards Agency. How would you define 'worst' in terms of MoJ? I base it on length of sentence served to date.

I answered your direct question about whether I could produce proof beyond doubt that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family. That answer being inconvenient to you, you have tried to turn the question into a different one

You did not even attempt to provide any evidence. You are happy to let a man's liberty rest on ten jurors and a handful of appeal court judges. Not good enough when the soc was treated as 4 murders/1 suicide for a month and much 'evidence' destroyed. Where much of the info still remains under pii and many exhibits destroyed by the police when they were told not to do so.

Bamber's supporters have been saying for years that the conviction was about to be quashed. Last time round, his barrister started out by making very confident assertions about his case which he had to abandon before the end of his arguments. Therefore I'm not going to hold my breath about the likelihood of the conviction being quashed any time soon

I would not describe myself as a 'Bamber supporter' in that I am not actively involved. No Nennypops don't you go holding your breath I am told the wheels of justice grind slowly BUT exceedingly fine wink

lastcowboy Wed 19-Feb-14 19:53:38

Everyone goes on about the fact that Sheila was so clean. Jeremy didn't have a mark on his body (Julie Mugford's words) and the sniffer dog at the SOC took no notice of Jeremy. It's quite ludicrous that he would murder 5 members of his family just for money. To read books is to judge this case on someone else's opinion. He was not a playboy as commonly depicted but someone who grew to love the farm life. There was no fight in the kitchen, the sugar on the floor and broken glass was caused by the TFU as they stormed through the kitchen...this they acknowledge. ACC Peter Simpson issued a statement to the press saying that a sound moderator had been removed from WHF on the day of the tragedy...apart from David and Robert Boutflour's also seized by the police...so you see that there were 4 Sound moderators taken by the police...again backed up by police statements. These facts are not opinions or make believe but undisputable facts. These are only a very small amount of facts documented by the police...too many to mention. The cover up is full of holes and with the new evidence recently uncovered I'm very confident that when the submission is complete then it'll result in Jeremy's release.

nennypops Wed 19-Feb-14 20:11:05

How would you define 'worst' in terms of MoJ? I base it on length of sentence served to date.

I base it on things like, for instance, people who were hanged.

You are happy to let a man's liberty rest on ten jurors and a handful of appeal court judges.

Well, yes. It's called the British justice system, and it's the way the courts operate all day every day. Do you assume that everyone in prison must be wrongly convicted because they have been convicted by "only" 12 jurors, or indeed "only" one judge?

And it's not good enough to dismiss those people as if they were tossing a coin. They are the ones who have seen all the evidence (not just what Bamber's supporters choose to put up on his website) and actually saw and heard the witnesses give evidence, and who have heard the arguments of counsel instructed on his behalf who I am quite sure put his case - including the issues you refer to - as forcefully as possible. No-one is saying that the system is infallible, but they have a better chance of knowing the truth than someone reading documents on a selective website.

HoGo1 Wed 19-Feb-14 21:41:27

I base it on things like, for instance, people who were hanged.

Agreed that's why I have been using the word 'modern' ie worst MoJ in modern British criminal history.

Well, yes. It's called the British justice system, and it's the way the courts operate all day every day. Do you assume that everyone in prison must be wrongly convicted because they have been convicted by "only" 12 jurors, or indeed "only" one judge?

No, but I would like to see if a correlation exists between majority verdicts and MoJ's. Also I think Bamber's case is unique in many ways. All concerned eg police, pathologist, ballistics were satisfied that they were dealing with 4 murders/1 suicide for the first month. As such the SoC was not treated as it would have been with an ongoing investigation. Evidence that might well have proved Bamber's innocence was lost or destroyed. Bamber's extended adoptive family were able to exert undue pressure on the police to change the investigation to five murders with Bamber being the perpetrator. The suggested motive for the crime was supposedly Bamber fast forwarding his inheritance - the estate being valued at circa 436k in 1985. After his conviction the extended family then went on to successfully claim the estate. Much information was held from the defence and remains under pii. Why?

It is also clear that the judge showed bias, and in fact misled the jury, in his summing up. The first appeal was based on the judges summing up. Some appeal process where one judge judges another judge. Lol. Sounds a bit of a closed shop to me/old boys network. I do not like the lack of transparency/accountability here at all. I'm sure when Bamber's conviction is quashed it will change the face of British justice forever.

And it's not good enough to dismiss those people as if they were tossing a coin. They are the ones who have seen all the evidence (not just what Bamber's supporters choose to put up on his website) and actually saw and heard the witnesses give evidence, and who have heard the arguments of counsel instructed on his behalf who I am quite sure put his case - including the issues you refer to - as forcefully as possible. No-one is saying that the system is infallible, but they have a better chance of knowing the truth than someone reading documents on a selective website.

Did the jurors see ALL the evidence? I am led to believe much was held back, lost or destroyed.

FYI I posted on 'The Jeremy Bamber Forum' for some 20 months under the username 'Naughty Nun' but on 31st October 2013 I was banned for life for winding up posters/supporters. I currently post on the 'UK Justice Forum' which is very anti Bamber. There put that in your pipe and smoke it Nennypops. grin

JakeBullet Wed 19-Feb-14 22:03:01

Ah....I have recently found the UK Justice Forum too. Joined the JB Forum some time ago but never got round to posting there. ....just reading.

Fascinating to read the different opinions.

nennypops Wed 19-Feb-14 22:15:28

Even excluding sentences in pre-abolition of capital punishment days, I would still put the Kiszko and Clarke cases higher in any league table of worst miscarriages of justice.

If you haven't investigated where there is any correlation between majority verdicts and miscarriages of justice, don't suggest that there is one.

Agreed, the initial investigation was incompetent because of the immediate assumption that Sheila Caffell was guilty. But that incompetence worked as much in Bamber's favour as against him, because it is highly likely to have led to the destruction of more incriminating evidence against him.

The first appeal was based on the judges summing up. Some appeal process where one judge judges another judge. Lol. Sounds a bit of a closed shop to me/old boys network

That would be the first failed appeal. Your comments about closed shops and old boys networks might stand up were it not for the fact that that "closed shop" regularly does allow appeals, including ones based on bias by the original judge.

Did the jurors see ALL the evidence?

They saw much more than you have. They also had the inestimable advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses and argument. They clearly found Julie Mugford, for instance, more credible than Jeremy Bamber.

There put that in your pipe and smoke it Nennypops

The 50s called. They want their cliché back.

JakeBullet Thu 20-Feb-14 10:52:47

I think miscarriages of justice are difficult. I was involved with a fairly high profile case several years ago where a woman was found guilty of killing two of her babies. She was sentenced to life imprisonment and then released due to the faulty expert evidence of Roy Meadows.

I think most of the women released on this basis WERE indeed innocent...Sally Clarke for instance.....I remain however, convinced of this particular woman's guilt.....from my involvement in the care of both children. As were many others involved in their care......the fallout from her release amongst those of us who had cared for these babies was enormous.

Life moves on though....am not sure where she is now but I hope to God she has not had any further children.

Interestingly the appeal court judges made the comment that there was compelling evidence in her case that the decision to convict had been the correct one, I am at loss to understand why there was not a retrial....in her case....not in anyone elses.

So I don't believe all miscarriages of justice .....are such.

Then you have the case of Stefan Kizko......where DNA evidence finally exoneratee him.

JakeBullet Thu 20-Feb-14 11:06:47

Just re-read the appeal for this woman. the appeal judges did not prder a re-trial but with many misgivings. They stressed that this woman's case was different from those of Sally Clarke and Angela Cannings. That there was compelling evidence against her but that when it came down to experts fighting over statistical evidence it weakened the Crown s case. Therefore yhey said "with regret" they did not order a retrial and apparently this has not been asked for.

I still believe she got away with murder. ...unless you count the few years she served.

HoGo1 Thu 20-Feb-14 14:48:42

Even excluding sentences in pre-abolition of capital punishment days, I would still put the Kiszko and Clarke cases higher in any league table of worst miscarriages of justice.

Based on what? Surely the severity of a MoJ is best measured by the defendant's loss of liberty in terms of days? I appreciate that Sally Clarke and Stefan Kiszko suffered mentally and physically and also appear to have met early demises as a result of their MoJ's.

If you haven't investigated where there is any correlation between majority verdicts and miscarriages of justice, don't suggest that there is one

I did not suggest there was one. I said I wondered if one existed. As with most things judicial there appears to be a distinct lack of transparency and accountability. Sally Clark 10 - 2, Stefan Kiszko 10 - 2, Stephen Downing unanimous. I will need to look at many more to establish whether or not a correlation exists.

Agreed, the initial investigation was incompetent because of the immediate assumption that Sheila Caffell was guilty. But that incompetence worked as much in Bamber's favour as against him, because it is highly likely to have led to the destruction of more incriminating evidence against him.

Then that is a failing on the part of the police and other professionals involved eg pathologist, ballistics. Justice should not be served based on the ability of those investigating to act competently.

That would be the first failed appeal. Your comments about closed shops and old boys networks might stand up were it not for the fact that that "closed shop" regularly does allow appeals, including ones based on bias by the original judge

I think some might wonder, I certainly do, whether judges judging the decisions of other judges are able to act impartially from a number of perspectives. wink.

They saw much more than you have. They also had the inestimable advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses and argument. They clearly found Julie Mugford, for instance, more credible than Jeremy Bamber.

As no transcript of the trial exists it is difficult to determine exactly what the jury heard/saw. I understand much was held back from the defence to bolster the prosecution's case? Why is so much held under pii? And why when the police were told not to do so did they destroy exhibits? According to Geoffrey Rivlin QC he had great difficulty cross examining Julie Mugford as she continually broke down in tears.

nennypops Thu 20-Feb-14 16:43:55

HoGo, that last post is full of speculation which doesn't take this discussion any further and doesn't support your case in any way.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now