White House Farm - The Bamber Murders. Jan 8th ITV 9pm

[Dogleg]

Is anyone else planning to watch this six part series? I vaguely remembered the killings and on seeing this advertised have now lost hours to reading up about it online and have also downloaded a book about the case. I’m really looking forward to this one!

www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-12-25/itv-drama-white-house-farm/

countess the reason Nevill couldn't have made the call upstairs is that the line had been disabled by taking the kitchen phone off the hook.

The belief is that he was badly injured upstairs and the billet casings support this.

He went downstairs to try the phone down there, had a physical altercation with Jeremy/someone there before the final four shots were fired into him.

Apple from what I can see the physical evidence showed a mixture of blood in the silencer which came from Sheila Caffell plus likely Nevill and June Bamber. Some marker in Sheila's blood indicated its presence there. Sheila wasn't tall enough to have shot herself with the silencer on so you have either

Sheila shooting herself once and then taking the silencer off to put it away in a bag in the cupboard OR

Someone else wielding the gun and staging a suicide scenario before realising that it would be obvious Sheila couldn't have killed herself with the silencer on. This person then hid the silencer back in the cupboard.

Both Sheila and Jeremy's fingerprints were on the gun but Sheila's hands were too clean and her nails too pristine to support the murder/suicide theory.

Any other potential physical evidence was lost with how badly the crime scene was managed.

Largely Jeremy was convicted on circumstantial evidence and the testimony of many other people.

I think the defence really went for Ann Eaton when she gave evidence and rightly so as she had the most to gain with Jeremy's conviction.

Duck last night they suggested the upstairs phone had been taken to the kitchen so no one could call

Noeuf yy one of the journalists (who supported JB originally) changed his mind when he realised the bedroom phone had been moved downstairs for no reason.

The other phone in the kitchen was working but had been unplugged and replaced with the bedroom phone. The journalist felt that pointed to someone in the house deliberately moving the phone so no-one could call for help from upstairs, and that led him to believe it was JB.

On the face of it JB appears guilty however imagine being behind bars for a crime you didn’t commit. (I’m not saying this is the case here just thinking out loud).

It’s also something I remember as I was in my 20s.

CanI what did you think of the case at the time? I was only at primary school so all I remember is that it was all over the news saying Sheila did it. Then there was something complicated about a gun and suddenly it was Jeremy! I didn't understand what had happened. I think that's why I'm so interested in this series now. It's trying to make sense of something that made no sense when I was a child.

Okay so I almost bought the CAL book (still might give it a go) when I came across this within one of the 5 star reviews:

"Sheila discovered her period beginning, at about 3 am she went downstairs and made a noise tossing bloody knickers in a bucket of water in the kitchen. Hearing this, and checking this was not an intruder, Nevill came downstairs and she no doubt challenged him about June's plans for her and her children. Sheila grabbed the gun Jeremy had left loaded, Nevill rang Jeremy, she went upstairs and shot June 5 times as she slept. Nevill dropped the phone, raced upstairs and from the doorway she shot him twice in the mouth. He turned and received two shots to the left arm....."

So is it possible that the phone call could have been made after an initial argument but before any shooting and that's why the phone was left off the hook when NB raced upstairs?

Apple there's no evidence to support Sheila going downstairs to wash underwear at 3am. That's not from the book so presumably the review was from someone using a hypothesis from someone unconnected to the case but committed to Sheila's guilt.

Neville's blood was at the opposite side of the bed from June so he would have had to pass June, be shot on the opposite side of the bed, then go back downstairs, have a fight downstairs, receive the fatal wounds downstairs - and all of this without making a sound because the BT operator was listening on the line by then and didn't hear any of that.

all of this without making a sound because the BT operator was listening on the line by then and didn't hear any of that

Now I'm totally confused! How long would it take for JB to call the police and for them to call someone at BT, explain the whole situation and then for them to monitor the line? Why can't the shootings all have been done and dusted in the same time frame?

Isn't it more plausible that an argument could have started downstairs which escalated with a gun being grabbed and nothing being premeditated rather than the scenario that Sheila walked zombie like upstairs while everyone slept and started shooting?

I was in my 20s at the time of the murders. I don't remember what I thought about them at the time, but looking back now I can't for the life of me understand why it wasn't considered odd that Neville hadn't rung 999. If a family member of mine was on the rampage with a shotgun and there were young children in the house, that's what I'd have done, not rung a relative in the middle of the night.

There were marks on Neville back, perhaps from a poker, in the TV series. Does anyone have any more real life info about that?

Aren't we looking at this in isolation? If it happened out of the blue then I dare say your first instinct would be to call 999. But how many times in the past had the two women, who both had gone away for treatment at one time or another, had emotional outbursts that NB had to deal with.

How could he know that this time would be different before it was too late? He might have said 'I'm calling your brother' in an attempt to calm her down. It's too simplistic to say that because person A didn't do this then person B didn't do that.

I'm still sitting on the fence and beginning to think there just isn't any solid evidence left over that wasn't destroyed by crime scene mismanagement.

There were three marks which they said could have been a poker or the end of a gun (if the gun had just been fired a lot and was hot). But there weren't corresponding marks on his pyjama top.

There was discussion about whether it was possible, if he was wearing his top and poked with something hot, that it would leave marks on his skin but not his top.

I think someone suggested, he was poked in the back by someone walking behind him trying to get him to reveal where his money was hidden. Someone else suggested it happened after the final shots, as the murderer poked him to see if he was dead. (sorry I can't remember if the 'someones' were police/forensics/journalists/or just people on the internet!)

I've not read any final conclusive theory on it.

There were marks on Neville back, perhaps from a poker, in the TV series. Does anyone have any more real life info about that?

I thought they were from the barrel of the gun? Suggesting Nevill had been prodded from behind, either to see if he was still alive after he’d been shot or to make him walk in a certain direction or something before he was finished off?

I thought they were from the barrel of the gun?

So does that mean the silencer was not used and more likely to be fabricated evidence?

I’ve just found an article on the Guardian website which reads:

“The issue of the silencer was vital in persuading the jury, with the judge instructing them the silencer “could, on its own, lead them to believe that Bamber was guilty”.
A week before Bamber’s trial started, the head of biology at Huntingdon Science Laboratories wrote a letter to Essex Police, seen by the Guardian, saying that the results of the blood tests would show that the blood “could have come from either Sheila Caffell or Robert Boutflour”.

After the jury were sent to reach a verdict, they returned and asked for clarification regarding the silencer. The judge told them it contained only the blood of Sheila Caffell. Seventeen minutes later, they returned and convicted Bamber by a 10 to two majority.”

So it seems that the jury believed the silencer to be the main piece of evidence. I’m beginning to see why there is such a divide on this one!

Apple silencers get hot too.The more recent DNA tests (that Jeremy requested in one of his appeals) didn't mention Robert Boutflour.

I was 12 when this happened. This and the miners strike were the first news stories i paid some attention to as a child.

It’s quite confusing and I still don’t quite get the bit about the phones proving Sheila couldn’t have done it. I’ve seen circulated (I think by JB legal team) a log that they unearthed that records that Neville did call the police from the farm? I mean it could potentially be JB pretending to be Neville but presumably he would probably have spoken to the same person manning the phone about 10 mins apart, seems a bit of a silly strategy if he was rumbled putting on a fake old man voice! Also if JB had known that he made that call why didn’t he direct his legal team to it before now (I think this log was ‘unearthed’ last year or quite recently)?

Also I’ve read somewhere that the all they actually proved was the blood on the silencer could have come from S, RB or a rabbit as a was a particular enzyme that they found. The evidence was appalling either way, and the police handling of it a complete joke that I don’t think they’ve ever really had to provide many answers for. I’m amazed he was convicted. I still can’t decide if I think he’s guilty or not, not that it matters what any of us think.

Yes there's huge divide in opinion Apple. for all the reasons you've said.

However if Neville couldn't have made the call that Jeremy said he did then you have to wonder why Jeremy lied.

I'm inclined to think that either Jeremy carried out the shootings or a hitman arranged by Jeremy did. Either way I am convinced as much as I can be that he carries guilt in some way.

If he arranged a hitman then he can sit in prison and legitimately say "I didn't do it."

Personally I think his initial psychiatric assessment arranged by his defence team was correct. I think he is a psychopath.

This doesn't mean he should automatically be assumed guilty but does go some way to show why he could be emotionally detached.

Colin Caffell's book is proving excellent in looking at why both Jeremy and Sheila were so messed up emotionally by their upbringing. He is clear that he believes Jeremy to be guilty but he makes a good attempt at trying to understand what made him the person he was.

It seems that Neville was lovely but distant and June was cold and not affectionate although she clearly loved both her adopted children.

Peapod I think the phone 'evidence' is weak but I don't know the case as well as the journalist so we may be missing something. The journalist, who worked on the case for years and campaigned for JB, seemed to feel the phones showed an element of pre-planning that didn't fit with a psychotic episode or break. No-one ever proposed Sheila was capable of premeditated murder.

Imo the most interesting part of the moving phones story is how JB reacted to it.

As for Nevill calling the police, you can read the call log online. It clearly states the son called. Even JB's team agreed it could be read that JB called but they argued because they could choose to read it differently then the record taking was poor.

However if Neville couldn't have made the call that Jeremy said he did then you have to wonder why Jeremy lied

I absolutely agreed that if NB did not make a phone call then this points to JB's guilt.

But I'm still not convinced that a phone call can be ruled out before shooting began and that the shooting was not over before the line was monitored.

The very simplest explanation can sometimes be the right one. No premeditation, an emotionally unstable person, firearms left lying around. An escalating argument. It's a tinderbox that doesn't need a complicated hitman plot.

I don't think it can be proved the silencer was used (or even if that would change anything) nor if the order of shooting rules out a phone call occurring beforehand. So what other evidence are we left with?

I am now feeling even more sympathy towards how DCI Taff Jones has been portrayed and if there is a possibility that he was actually right and knew it, the poor man must have been going out of his mind.

Different story but same sort of thing, a possible miscarriage of justice is the case of Dai Morris from South Wales who was convicted of murdering Mandy Power and her family in 1999.
A new book has been written called ‘The Clydach Murders’ that appears to cast doubt on the conviction. Be prepared though it’s a harrowing read.
A growing group is on Facebook determined to bring justice and free Dai Morris. If you are interested in this type of thing then it’s really fascinating.

Carol Ann Lee (p165/ Kindle loc 2805) says the BT switchboard worker checked the line at 3.42am and found it off the hook, then checked it again and listened at 3.56. So there would have been time before that but after Nevill's supposed call to Bamber for the murders to be carried out.
(She also says that the switchboard worker listened again at 5.40, which suggests the line wasn't continuously monitored.)

'Imo the most interesting part of the moving phones story is how JB reacted to it.'

Tell me more!
The moving phones thing is very interesting. It seems to me to be yet another of these pieces of evidence that can be taken either way (like the various ambiguous police logs). It makes sense that a premeditating killer would move the phones about as described. But equally there are a number of perfectly innocent explanations for it. I think it was Barbara Wilson who said it was like 'musical phones' in the house as they were always being moved around. For that reason I find it puzzling if this was the main thing that made Bob Woffinden change his mind. I find it harder to believe, say, that the relatives or police would deliberately plant and contaminate the silencer than that someone moved the bedroom phone to the kitchen for some reason even though the kitchen one actually wasn't broken after all.

I guess the question is whether "Sheila has gone berserk with the gun" necessarily means "Sheila has started shooting people" or "Sheila is having a psychotic break and waving the gun around". Local numbers werent recorded in '85 iirc, so maybe that bit is even true - maybe Neville rang Jeremy at say 1am (I haven't seen any evidence that it was JB that moved the phone, just evidence that it had been moved at some point), JB lost his temper with all of them, drove up to the farm and killed everyone, then drove home and rang the police. He'd be able to insist then under oath, knowing that he wasn't lying that Neville had called him or what Neville had said. It's a lot easier to convince yourself and others of a lie if it has a part truth in it

And of course if the blood in the silencer only 'might' be sheilas, it's entirely possible - though obv not what I think happened - that everyone else was shot with it on (so they didn't wake up), then she found she couldn't reach to kill herself so took it off to shoot herself. Why hide it in the cupboard though, but then why would anyone who did it hide it in the cupboard?