To think Jeremy Bamber might be innocent

[KimberleyClark]

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.

Sure, but as mentioned many times on this thread, some of the circumstances in this case likely mean the perpetrator was a psychopath. But JB has been assessed as not being one.

I think Bamber did it but the paucity of evidence demonstrates to me I’m not even 50% sure he did. Nobody should be convicted because of a hunch like the one I have or because there’s a lack of other credible suspects or because there isn’t much evidence. I’m looking forward to seeing what happens with the CCRC about the phone call he may have made.

Thanks for that. Yes early on here i said id never be helpful on a jury due to being so on the fence when listening to each side.

Im guilty over the years of rabbit holing this case, reading and watching too much about it. Im not like this with anything else!

They keep throwing out any new 'evidence' which is odd, if there was indeed a call at 6am this should be looked at. And im very childish as I think hes in the right place either way, which is NOT what the legal system is about 😁

Im guilty over the years of rabbit holing this case, reading and watching too much about it. Im not like this with anything else!

I’m doing exactly this now! Helping me displace some difficult stuff I have in my own life tbh.

I’m listening again to the last couple of episodes of the TNY podcast. Two things strike me: Sheila’s handwritten notes which don’t amount to a suicide note but potentially reveal declining mental state, despite medication. Also the foster care that was discussed - and verified by the housekeeper - was that the children would stay with June and Nevill, not go into foster care outside the family.

Sheila felt damaged by her adoptive parents’ lack of physical affection towards her. They adopted both the children at a time when it was very easy to do so, there was a ready supply of babies because of attitudes to unmarried mothers, practically all you had to do was show you could provide materially. June called Sheila “child of Hell” once. I can understand why Sheila would not like the idea of June and Neville bringing up her sons.

Assuming for the moment he is guilty as sin. Why make or talk about the phone calls? Just go to bed at home and claim you slept through the night .

He’d have had more chance of getting away with it if he’d done that. I guess he thought he was being clever and giving himself an alibi? As well as casting immediate suspicion in Sheila’s direction. He turns up at the scene after the police, how it possibly have been him??! It nearly worked!

I think it was Julie’s testimony that was the clincher to convict him.

If this all turned out that he was released what would happen to the inheritance?

The house is still in the family and at the time they owned a holiday park.

They still own the holiday park. It’s a much bigger and more profitable business than it was in the 80s. The MD is Ann Eaton’s daughter Janie.

https://osealeisure.com

Yes he was creating an alibi

Oh love this - the deplacement - I’m doing the same thing - avoiding family hell

Im reading Carol Ann Lees book again😅

Yes and J staged that burglary there didn’t he and they lost £1k which is equal now to about £3k - a lot of money

the fact that he did that shows his colours

She is interviewed a lot on the Sky Crime Documentary

Totally agree. You call the police and THEN your girlfriend's house. And finally set out to the scene of the crime driving 10mph. It had all happened already.

Thank you. Ill look out for that. She's a great crime writer, sticks to facts but makes it interesting and not dry.

Yes I think his claim that he was doing it to help make them understand how poor the security was at the caravan site was one of the least convincing of his lies, and that’s saying something.

He really did get it very wrong didn’t he. As mentioned above, if he’d stayed at home that night he wouldn’t have been suspected (provided he gave himself a cast iron alibi).

But of course, he couldn’t resist turning up on scene to start dropping hints about Sheila’s mental state.

It also never made sense that Neville phoned him and not 999, arousing more suspicion.

Typical narc behaviour, he thinks he’s cleverer than everyone else and we can’t work it out.

Omg he’s a fantasist!!

what a crock 💩

Sorry but for me that clinches it - he’s living in a different world to everyone else where he is the CENTRE and we are plebs

and so clever

not!!

Couldn't agree more with you - yes the police procedurals were crap even for the time. But the blindingly obvious stuff is still blindingly obvious. He has nothing to lose by claiming innocence as pleading guilty wouldn't change his whole life tariff. He is a blowhard arsehole who couldn't wait to inherit money. And he had no issue committing a mass murder to make it happen. And denigrating his adopted family along the way - having murdered them BTW!

Would he get Parole if he admitted it?

prob not? Is it whole life tariff?

Yep . No parole for him

He was sentenced to 25 years originally, increased to whole life in 1985.

Hes nothing to lose with all these submissions as its his only way out.

Hes got main character syndrome, thsts for sure

No he wouldn't. That's why he continues to lie.

It's interesting isn't it - I have no issue with people wanting to reinvestigate situations with modern knowledge. What I do find nuts is people who think anything modern exonerates him - it puts him so much more firmly in the guilty circle. And let's not forget - there is no one else. Only two people would murder their whole family. And one is dead and couldn't have killed herself.