Page 19 | To think Jeremy Bamber might be innocent

KimberleyClark · 2025-12-07T11:37:24+00:00

Or that at the very least his conviction wasn’t safe and there needs to be a retrial? Ihe was convicted in 1985 of murdering his adoptive parents, sister and her twin sons at his parents’ farmhouse. It was at first deemed to be murder-suicide by the sister, Sheila Caffell, who was a diagnosed schizophrenic. Bamber had been on full life tarriff ever since and still protesting his innocence. I always assumed he was guilty until I listened to a podcast called Blood Family. There was a lot of evidence the jury didn’t hear, it seems the police mucked up the crime scene, his cousins had a financial motive for framing him and a police officer in the control room apparently took a 999 nonspeaking call from the farmhouse while Bamber was outside with the police, which would indicate someone was still alive at that point.

WigglywagglyWanda · 11/12/2025 22:34

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:21

His case has been reviewed multiple times hasn’t it?

Show quote history

It has, and a lot of examination on the phone calls took place. Jeremy said the logs at the police station showed that Neville had phoned. However the police officer who logged the call was able to explain that it could read like that, however he was stating that it was Jeremy he had spoken to.

Other bits ive forgotten, I know there was talk of someone still alive in the house while they were outside, which was explained by reflections on the window.

He has a Ted Bundy type following certainly, who believe him innocent.

For me Id be crap on a jury as to me once the defence starts throwing doubt in Id find it hard to find someone guilty! But I believe in my gut he is.

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:28

TidyDancer · 07/12/2025 12:10

I’ve always been on the edge with this one. I can’t make my mind up either way. If I had to call it I would say he’s innocent.

Who did it then?

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:27

KimberleyClark · 07/12/2025 12:06

Not necessarily. This was 1985, pre mobile phones.

Show quote history

They could still see if landlines been used

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:26

Hoardasurass · 07/12/2025 11:47

No hes a classic sociopath who was up to his eyeballs in debt and lies. He couldn't keep up the lies or bully anymore money from his family so tried to get away with murdering his family and blaming his sister to get all the inheritance.
Just because it initially looked like a murder suicide doesn't mean it was, they investigated and found that Jeremy Bamber is a family anhilater.
May I suggest that you look up family anhilaters and then look into the character of JB as you'll see he fits tge profile completely

The footage of his fake crying at funeral is what I remember

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:21

doyoulikeunicorns · 11/12/2025 13:34

I don’t think anyone says ‘he is innocent.’ What they say is that there isn’t enough to be convinced of his guilt.

Michael Stone is another troubling one.

It is bone chilling to think you can spend your entire life in prison for something you didn’t do. But it’s happened before, hasn’t it? And once you’ve been convicted then that’s it; no opportunity for redress or appeal. It’s that which troubles me and it should trouble everybody.

Show quote history

His case has been reviewed multiple times hasn’t it?

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:13

berlinbaby2025 · 11/12/2025 22:12

Case closed!

Thanks for that contribution.

Show quote history

No problem 😌

berlinbaby2025 · 11/12/2025 22:12

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:00

Guilty as charged

without shred of a doubt

Edited

Case closed!

Thanks for that contribution.

WigglywagglyWanda · 11/12/2025 22:08

Allisnotlost1 · 11/12/2025 19:58

I’ve found some of the points on this thread really thought provoking. Also this, from
ghe Guardiam article posted by @berlinbaby2025

‘Stan Jones then carried out another test. He attached a silencer to a gun and asked somebody the same height as Sheila to pretend to shoot herself. She was unable to do so. The silencer increased the length of the gun and meant she couldn’t reach the trigger. Stan Jones believed he had his killer.’

Is that really the extent of the testing? Somebody the same height was asked to pretend to shoot themself? In the 2002 appeal it says the forensics show Sheila was sitting up on the floor when she received the gunshot wound/s. I wonder if Stan Jones ‘test’ included that.

I dont disagree with what you say, perhaps she could have somehow shot herself with the silencer attached in spite of the failure to properly test.

But if she did, how did it get in the cupboard downstairs?

Maddyisqueen · 11/12/2025 22:00

Guilty as charged

without shred of a doubt

WigglywagglyWanda · 11/12/2025 21:58

FannyGotobed · 11/12/2025 13:56

I remember this case well from the time, I've read the Whitehouse Farm book and watched the drama based on it. I believe he is guilty.

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that provides his motive. But two things stand out for me that indicate it wasn't Sheila. One is the fact her fingernails were still perfectly manicured and polished. There is no way she could have reloaded the gun without damaging her nails (this is way before acrylics or gels so the polish would have chipped very easily). And for me, if she did kill everyone and then herself, she would have been found in the room with her boys, not with her mother.

This is without the facts that her father had been beaten up (he was a big strong farmer and she was described as very slight and frail) and that she had never used guns yet managed to reload and shoot very efficiently.

There is no doubt that Essex police completely screwed up the investigation which is why there's now all this scope for debate. But I believe he did it and I feel so sorry for all the victims, especially Sheila, her boys and of course Colin.

Yes this is the nearest to my views. Ive read a couple of books and saw the drama though it was some time ago.

I did vacillate a bit on a few things. Julie Mugford struck me as a woman scorned who didnt come out of the woodwork for a long time in such an emotive multiple family murder, I did wonder why.

As regards the phone calls, he took time to look up the phone book for the local station while his sister was going mental with a gun?

The thing though for me was Shielas condition, Neville was beaten badly, he was a well over 6ft strapping farmer, even if he was in his sixties, Sheila, apart from blood from her wounds was clean, nightie pristine, nails freshly manicured.

I could go over the silencer, her arms weren't long enough, how did she shoot herself twice in the neck, go downstairs and put the silencer in the cupboard, but acknowledge it could have been done without it...

I think it was auch a horrific event that folk are still interested, and part of me thinks hes still protesting his innocence, but when I look logically, hes guilty.

Americano75 · 11/12/2025 21:53

FanofLeaves · 11/12/2025 20:45

This detail stood out to me too! It reminded me of an aspect in the Joanne Lees/peter Falconio case where they said there was no way she could have escaped the cables tied round her wrists by moving them from behind her back to the front as she claimed, then in court she showed them she could, easily.

Edited

Show quote history

I remember that but I think that was an error by the defence, something about them thinking she'd said she'd been cuffed?

MistressoftheDarkSide · 11/12/2025 21:29

FanofLeaves · 11/12/2025 20:45

This detail stood out to me too! It reminded me of an aspect in the Joanne Lees/peter Falconio case where they said there was no way she could have escaped the cables tied round her wrists by moving them from behind her back to the front as she claimed, then in court she showed them she could, easily.

Edited

Show quote history

https://innocencetexas.org/cases/sandra-melgar/

This sort of thing fascinates me, and the "how and why" of crimes should be robustly demonstrated IMHO.

The Sandra Melgar case is another one that seems "circumstantial" to the point of witch trial....

Sandra Melgar - Innocence Project of Texas

https://innocencetexas.org/cases/sandra-melgar

FanofLeaves · 11/12/2025 20:45

Allisnotlost1 · 11/12/2025 19:58

I’ve found some of the points on this thread really thought provoking. Also this, from
ghe Guardiam article posted by @berlinbaby2025

‘Stan Jones then carried out another test. He attached a silencer to a gun and asked somebody the same height as Sheila to pretend to shoot herself. She was unable to do so. The silencer increased the length of the gun and meant she couldn’t reach the trigger. Stan Jones believed he had his killer.’

Is that really the extent of the testing? Somebody the same height was asked to pretend to shoot themself? In the 2002 appeal it says the forensics show Sheila was sitting up on the floor when she received the gunshot wound/s. I wonder if Stan Jones ‘test’ included that.

This detail stood out to me too! It reminded me of an aspect in the Joanne Lees/peter Falconio case where they said there was no way she could have escaped the cables tied round her wrists by moving them from behind her back to the front as she claimed, then in court she showed them she could, easily.

Allisnotlost1 · 11/12/2025 19:58

I’ve found some of the points on this thread really thought provoking. Also this, from
ghe Guardiam article posted by @berlinbaby2025

‘Stan Jones then carried out another test. He attached a silencer to a gun and asked somebody the same height as Sheila to pretend to shoot herself. She was unable to do so. The silencer increased the length of the gun and meant she couldn’t reach the trigger. Stan Jones believed he had his killer.’

Is that really the extent of the testing? Somebody the same height was asked to pretend to shoot themself? In the 2002 appeal it says the forensics show Sheila was sitting up on the floor when she received the gunshot wound/s. I wonder if Stan Jones ‘test’ included that.

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 11/12/2025 16:49

KimberleyClark · 11/12/2025 12:15

In that podcast they spoke to a family friend who worked in the farm office doing the accounts. I can’t remember her name. Jeremy said he had overheard his mother telling She disliked Jeremy intensely, but when he said he overheard his mother in the kitchen telling Sheila she should put the boys in foster care. Jeremy was considered to have lied about this. But this family friend said he was telling the truth,she was in the kitchen at the time. She disliked Jeremy, had no time for him, so why would she have backed him on this unless it was the truth?

Show quote history

I've not followed the case closely, although I do remember it and have read bits and pieces about it but one thing occurred to me on this one - why would Sheila have put her boys in foster care when they had a father who had until recently had custody and would have taken them back in a heartbeat? Why not just send them back to their father?

PodMom · 11/12/2025 15:36

Michael Stone is another troubling one.

Even Shaun Russell isn’t sure he’s guilty

Mymanyellow · 11/12/2025 14:36

doyoulikeunicorns · 11/12/2025 13:34

I don’t think anyone says ‘he is innocent.’ What they say is that there isn’t enough to be convinced of his guilt.

Michael Stone is another troubling one.

It is bone chilling to think you can spend your entire life in prison for something you didn’t do. But it’s happened before, hasn’t it? And once you’ve been convicted then that’s it; no opportunity for redress or appeal. It’s that which troubles me and it should trouble everybody.

Show quote history

I agree about Michael Stone. I’ve always thought so.

FannyGotobed · 11/12/2025 13:56

I remember this case well from the time, I've read the Whitehouse Farm book and watched the drama based on it. I believe he is guilty.

There is a lot of circumstantial evidence that provides his motive. But two things stand out for me that indicate it wasn't Sheila. One is the fact her fingernails were still perfectly manicured and polished. There is no way she could have reloaded the gun without damaging her nails (this is way before acrylics or gels so the polish would have chipped very easily). And for me, if she did kill everyone and then herself, she would have been found in the room with her boys, not with her mother.

This is without the facts that her father had been beaten up (he was a big strong farmer and she was described as very slight and frail) and that she had never used guns yet managed to reload and shoot very efficiently.

There is no doubt that Essex police completely screwed up the investigation which is why there's now all this scope for debate. But I believe he did it and I feel so sorry for all the victims, especially Sheila, her boys and of course Colin.

Original poster

KimberleyClark · 11/12/2025 13:55

doyoulikeunicorns · 11/12/2025 13:34

I don’t think anyone says ‘he is innocent.’ What they say is that there isn’t enough to be convinced of his guilt.

Michael Stone is another troubling one.

It is bone chilling to think you can spend your entire life in prison for something you didn’t do. But it’s happened before, hasn’t it? And once you’ve been convicted then that’s it; no opportunity for redress or appeal. It’s that which troubles me and it should trouble everybody.

Show quote history

And innocent people don’t even get any support when they leave prison, just booted out and left to pick up the pieces of their lives. Whereas guilty people released after life sentences do get support.

OP posts:

doyoulikeunicorns · 11/12/2025 13:34

surreygirly · 11/12/2025 13:20

Someone on the internet says he is innocent and people believe it
OMG

I don’t think anyone says ‘he is innocent.’ What they say is that there isn’t enough to be convinced of his guilt.

Michael Stone is another troubling one.

It is bone chilling to think you can spend your entire life in prison for something you didn’t do. But it’s happened before, hasn’t it? And once you’ve been convicted then that’s it; no opportunity for redress or appeal. It’s that which troubles me and it should trouble everybody.

surreygirly · 11/12/2025 13:20

Someone on the internet says he is innocent and people believe it
OMG

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 11/12/2025 13:11

KimberleyClark · 11/12/2025 12:15

In that podcast they spoke to a family friend who worked in the farm office doing the accounts. I can’t remember her name. Jeremy said he had overheard his mother telling She disliked Jeremy intensely, but when he said he overheard his mother in the kitchen telling Sheila she should put the boys in foster care. Jeremy was considered to have lied about this. But this family friend said he was telling the truth,she was in the kitchen at the time. She disliked Jeremy, had no time for him, so why would she have backed him on this unless it was the truth?

Show quote history

Barbara something.
Yes, the interview with her was very good. She seemed like a sane person with no axe to grind.
I was struck by her descriptions of what a bad state Sheila was in. Iirc part of the case against Jeremy was that he had exaggerated Sheila’s condition to cover up his crime. But she also described some very unpleasant behaviour by Jeremy, against both her and his mum.

Original poster

KimberleyClark · 11/12/2025 12:15

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 11/12/2025 11:50

I’ve just listened to the first two episodes of that podcast.
It’s very well made, very skilful storytelling. It’s also obvious how it’s going to go because when Ann Eaton was introduced she was described as wearing clouds of perfume and having dyed hair, and everyone knows that in fiction these things are code for ‘not a good woman! Can’t trust her!’
And of course the conviction was also about storytelling and making people fit existing negative stereotypes. It would be good if a conviction was more about solid scientific evidence rather than how much people fit stereotypical detective fiction tropes and whether their behaviour fits with how you would expect someone in their situation to behave (shock horror Bamber went on holiday! Omg Ann Eaton moved into the farmhouse and didn’t change the carpets!) but of course the police fucked that one up by allowing the crime scene to be messed with and later destroying evidence.

In that podcast they spoke to a family friend who worked in the farm office doing the accounts. I can’t remember her name. Jeremy said he had overheard his mother telling She disliked Jeremy intensely, but when he said he overheard his mother in the kitchen telling Sheila she should put the boys in foster care. Jeremy was considered to have lied about this. But this family friend said he was telling the truth,she was in the kitchen at the time. She disliked Jeremy, had no time for him, so why would she have backed him on this unless it was the truth?

OP posts:

berlinbaby2025 · 11/12/2025 12:04

Parcell · 08/12/2025 17:53

I think the phone call is the clincher and his biggest mistake. He claimed his father called from the farm saying Sheila had got the gun and gone berserk. So it has to be either Sheila or Jeremy.

The forensics did not believe she was strong enough to reload the magazine twice, with no damage to her nails or gunshot residue on her hands and body. Also no evidence of the fight with Nevill in the kitchen on her body. He was badly beaten.

That wasn’t a clincher. There’s a photo of the transcript of the phone call in the Guardian article I linked. He says his daughter is shooting.

Bushwoolie · 11/12/2025 11:53

Wellstonethecrows · 07/12/2025 11:53

No I think he is guilty.

I have always felt that and have heard nothing that has changed my opinion

I do have doubts about the conviction of Luke Mitchell though..

Edited

I have very strong doubts that Luke Mitchell is guilty!