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.

Well the tv programme I watched was a long time ago and provoked a lot of debate. And Banber himself capitalised on the publicity and used it to promote his innocence.

I certainly hadn't been aware that there had been further tv broadcasts or any new evidence presented recently.
So for me this thread has come out of the blue for no apparent reason.
That is why I'm interested. Because my assumption atm is that OP has a definite axe to grind on behalf of this man.

He has lots of lady fans apparently who write and visit him and he sells his artwork, he’s still an attractive and eloquent man and quite the charmer like he always was, but IMO he is a family annihilator

There is a new and fascinating podcast from the New Yorker about the case. The journalist is very experienced and very compelling.

The news story about his possible alibi came out a month ago so maybe that's why the thread was started.

Why would an alibi come out some 40 years later?

There is no shortage of docs, podcasts and of course the ITV drama Whitehouse Farm, Fred Dineage has an episode of `crimes that shook Britain ‘ about him too.

That's interesting as I had huge doubts at the time as well.

I think it was JB. Who was it if it wasn’t him?

I’d always assumed he was guilty u til I listened to the New Yorker podcast which cast some doubt on it for me. That’s all there is to it. I have no ulterior motive.

I imagine that’s an interesting listen. They were also the ones first to raise questions about Lucy Letby IIRC.

I think though it’s important to remember in virtually all cases there is contradictory evidence, things that don’t quite fit etc but that’s not the same as an unsafe conviction. It’s because piecing together an event after it’s happened with no objective witnesses is very difficult.

But most cases where someone is convicted of murder aren't like this one where there's so little evidence that proves his guilt.

I watched it for the first time recently and you're spot on.

Countless appeals with nothing coming back

as recently as July this year there’s zero evidence to disprove anything

But that has been the case with so many other proved miscarriages of justice as well. And that is what’s worrying in a way; that once the conviction is made that’s it, the door slams shut and there’s nothing further to see here thank you.

Of course, in some cases that’s with good reason, but not all.

He’s guilty. His behaviour after the murders was deeply incriminating.

i believe he genuinely believes he isn’t guilty though hence passing the lie detection test. This confidence is partly what causes the doubt from others about the conviction. I feel he has trauma related to his adoption and then upbringing in this weird family (including the cousins who did themselves no favours) which caused disordered thinking which means he is unable to believe he isn’t right.

even though I think he’s guilty I’m not sure I agree with the whole life order.

Enough time wasting and money spent!

every prisoner says they are not guilty!

I’m not totally convinced he’s guilty, there was very little evidence, and the police made many mistakes.

The whole family are very odd though. I’m pretty sure the cousin that found the silencer after the police had already searched the house is the one that inherited the farm. Some of the family still live there.

And some aren’t!

Sorry was meant to @berlinbaby2025

Circumstantial Evidence

And very little of that, as I said earlier today.

I was unconvinced by the Blood Family podcast. The extra evidence seemed inconclusive at best.
I've always thought he was guilty and haven't changed my mind yet.

Definitely guilty. Not worth wasting public money on a retrial. I remember the case at the time. I do think there were some policing errors - but they still convicted the right person.

I find all the phone call stuff the most interesting. There is no evidence - none - that any phone calls were made from the farmhouse to anyone at any time - it’s down to interpretation of later logs. If he had a brain he would have not said his dad called him (and why would Nevill him call and not the police - they were estranged - oh but yes Nevill also called the police but again… no evidence of this either). Apart from a recent thing about a call at 6:09am when Jeremy was already outside with the police - again, sod all evidence. Jeremy thought call evidence would absolve him as it gave him an alibi of being far away. I truly think he’s guilty as all sin and blamed it on his mentally unwell adoptive sister. He went after the money after being imprisoned, which was his motive all along.

The CCRC turned down Bamber’s application in July, several years after subission and a couple of days after the Chief Exec resigned. The New Yorker released a podcast of a years long investigation that was published in long form last year, and Louis Theroux has a recent show on the case.

You not being aware of things isn’t - as far as I know? - the barometer for whether others have a legittimate interest in them.