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

[HoGo1]

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 Does anyone else think he might be innocent?

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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".

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.

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 far in excess of loading and firing a rifle

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

You're done with debating...

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.

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.....

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...

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!

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'.

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

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.

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".

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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