Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Was Jeremy Bamber innocent?

152 replies

Yappy12 · 03/12/2019 08:04

Have been interested in this case for years and am uneasy about his 10-2 majority conviction of murdering his parents, sister and 2 nephews. ITV 6 part drama-doc starting 6th Jan. Lots of stuff doesn't add up. He and a cop supposedly saw someone moving about inside hours after everyone was supposedly dead. Was that the sister and did she go crazy and kill them all? Not saying he's innocent but just saying I don't think he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt. There's said to be proof now of the second phone call, from his home at 3.37am. First had been allegedly by his father to him at 3.26 saying the sister had a gun and was going mad. He couldn't have got home, 3.5 miles away, after killing them all in 11 minutes.

OP posts:
Original poster
Yappy12 · 03/12/2019 11:12

Yes, one jury and the others were appeal court judges.

OP posts:
AlexaAmbidextra · 03/12/2019 11:13

@ChestnutSmoothie I understand that you're a Bamber apologist. It's nothing to be ashamed of. Much grin

And there was me thinking that this was an adult discussion. 🙄

DGRossetti · 03/12/2019 11:22

The blood on the silencer was only very similar to Sheila's so "thought" to be hers. This was before DNA remember.

but even in 1985 there was enough science to get a blood type and antigen match. Certainly enough to

Some people think it was rabbits blood as Bamber sed to go rabbit hunting.

distinguish between rabbit and human blood

A US gun expert who has seen all the crime photos said it's perfectly possible that no silencer was even used.

What's wrong with our own firearms experts ? Just being "US" means nothing. The doctor that was forced to carried out JFKs postmortem managed to mistake a lot of detail because he was unfamiliar with gunshots.

VaggieMight · 03/12/2019 11:30

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at poster's request.

AlternativePerspective · 03/12/2019 11:33

It’s also worth remembering though that as much as if someone is found guilty they could be innocent, equally if someone is found or then seen to be innocent doesn’t mean that they’re not actually guilty.

For every miscarriage of justice which is being quoted here there will be others where, despite convictions being overturned there is still a question over their potential guilt.

Someone else having been freed is no proof that this particular individual is innocent as well.

Going by that logic we might as well just assume that everyone is innocent because everyone will appeal their sentence and even the most heinous criminals have their apologists and supporters,

VaggieMight · 03/12/2019 11:37

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at poster's request.

LochJessMonster · 03/12/2019 11:42

Never heard of this before, but just spent a bit of time reading up about it. Very interesting!

I think he is guilty, and what persuades me is the lack of any marks, blood or debris on Sheila. The prosecution said that downstairs, where Nevill was fatally shot, the floor was covered in sugar from a broken jar.
Sheilas feet did not have any sugar or blood on them, which you would expect from walking around.

She also didn't have any blood on her, other than her own. If she had killed 4 other people, and had a physical fight with one, you would expect some blood splatter on her.

A very interesting, but tragic, case.

doublebarrellednurse · 03/12/2019 11:47

Ok I love this case and am a murderino 😂 but this

She was a schizophrenic though, as acknowledged by her psychiatrist, and on drugs. She could have snapped.

This isn't how it works. She was a person called Sheila who had a diagnosis of Schizophrenia. Not contrary to movies and tv people with schizophrenia very rarely "snap". Many live perfectly stable lives. Usually what you see is a steady deterioration in mental state followed by an explosion of activity.

From what I know of the case is there were no warning signs that she was deteriorating. Nothing was said that she was ill.

I think he's guilty because everything that's ever come out to defend him has been manipulated in some way (later proven to be manipulated at least)

Icimoi · 03/12/2019 11:48

The DNA evidence was thoroughly considered at the 2002 appeal. Neither of the forensic experts called on behalf of Bamber at the trial suggested that it was animal blood.

Torchlightt · 03/12/2019 11:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Jbforensic · 03/12/2019 11:56

Haven't read the full thread yet. I've talked about this before on a different thread hence the NC. I'm a forensic sciences student and several people I have been in contact with throughout my degree worked on the case in some capacity. They are dubious. Though a lot of the evidence seems strong, lab scientists aren't supposed to support a hypothesis (Jeremy Bamber took this action...), they are simply to examine everything to find out all the info, whether it supports the prosecution or otherwise. There was definitely influence on them at the time to only make certain interpretations from the evidence received and what they were advised had happened.

Original poster
Yappy12 · 03/12/2019 14:41

@VaggieMight

Just got to say I love your username. LOL.

OP posts:
Morporkia · 03/12/2019 16:22

@SpiderCharlotte www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html. if you scroll down to point 72 and read on it details who found the silencer, where it was taken and when police officers retrieved it.

SpiderCharlotte · 03/12/2019 16:26

@Morporkia thank you will have a good read of that later.

ProfessorSlocombe · 03/12/2019 16:31

if you scroll down to point 72 and read on it details who found the silencer, where it was taken and when police officers retrieved it.

The phrase "hopelessly compromised" jumps to mind. Along with "chain of evidence".

Morporkia · 03/12/2019 16:42

For anyone who thinks that a trial and subsequent appeal equates to rightful imprisonment I suggest you google Barry George..

ProfessorSlocombe · 03/12/2019 16:56

For anyone who thinks that a trial and subsequent appeal equates to rightful imprisonment I suggest you google Barry George..

Ah yes. He wasn't innocent enough for compensation. As indeed no one will ever be again. Still, I'm sure none of us would begrudge a few years in chokey and ruined life if it means we can all sleep safe at night ?

FAQs · 03/12/2019 16:57

We had to study this case as part of my degree, although it was almost 20 years ago. From what I can remember, we looked at a lot of cases.. The length of the gun, the length of the sisters arm and the place of her injuries meant she couldn’t have shot herself. We were only tasked with that particular fact to look at and come to a conclusion.

Original poster
Yappy12 · 03/12/2019 17:00

Was that with the silencer on though? Would be slightly shorter without it and possible so I read.

OP posts:
AlternativePerspective · 03/12/2019 18:30

For anyone who thinks that a trial and subsequent appeal equates to rightful imprisonment I suggest you google Barry George.. and yet there are still some who believe that he was guilty. Personally don’t know and think it’s unlikely, but he certainly wasn’t an innocent bloke with some quirks who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, he was a vile sexual predator with a history of sex offences and prison time to prove it.

Morporkia · 03/12/2019 18:41

there’s no doubt Barry George has a multitude of psychiatric issues and as you state has previous convictions for sexual assault and attempted rape, I believe. As well as impersonating a policeman and pretending he was in the SAS (although I don’t think that’s actually a crime, just what I know of B.G) undoubtedly he was predatory in his behaviour towards women. However, the Dando murder was more like an assassination, not a sexually motivated attack. Bringing a previous conviction into an argument should only be valid if the subsequent crime fits previous M.O

Morporkia · 03/12/2019 18:42

Just to clarify by argument, I meant legal argument, not a discussion on a forum 😊

AlternativePerspective · 03/12/2019 18:52

But was it ever really looked at as an assassination? From watching the documentary recently I was under the impression that the police always considered it to be the work of an obsessed stalker, which doesn’t really make sense when you look at how she died, but that seemed to be the premise they were working on, which could be why BG’s former convictions were brought into the equation?

haverhill · 03/12/2019 19:00

I have no idea whether he’s guilty or not. It was a truly horrific crime.
Two things that struck me from a documentary I saw was that his ex-girlfriend got £25000 from a newspaper for her story, but only if he was found guilty. Another thing was that Sheila’s ex-husband and psychiatrist both said that she was capable of violent rages and had spoken whilst delusional about killing her children.
Of course, Jeremy Bamber could have manipulated Sheila with catastrophic results if he knew about the latter fact.

sashh · 04/12/2019 09:32

The phone off the hook in the kitchen meant at that time Mr and Mrs Bamber would not be able to call police from the phone in their bedroom. Jeremy took the phone off the hook to build his story that Neville has phoned from there.

Taking the phone off the hook wouldn't stop the bedroom extension working, you would need an open line to another number to stop someone calling.