Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Telly addicts

Related: Film discussion forum.

Original poster

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

859 replies

Dogleg · 30/12/2019 21:04

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/

OP posts:
LordOfTheWhys · 06/02/2020 19:39

I don't know if any of you watched The Staircase on Netflix? I went to a talk last year by the lawyer who represented the husband. It was very interesting.

He made the point that notions of innocence or guilt can confuse jurors because they're such loaded concepts. Ultimately it's just about was this argument proven or not proven?
He also said that if it's a serious case then a percentage of jurors will struggle because they can't bear the burden of sending someone to jail for life (or whatever the sentence would be). I don't know if that's relevant to these jurors but your question just reminded me of his talk.

AlexaAmbidextra · 06/02/2020 19:51

I'm pretty sure Vaulty Farm is now a wedding venue and yes, very beautiful.

It’s a much nicer looking building than the one used to portray it in last night’s episode. Vaulty Manor is indeed a wedding venue. It spent some years out of the family’s ownership but was bought back by them a few years ago and is now run by Ann Eaton’s daughter.

TheresWaldo · 06/02/2020 20:30

I know when I did jury duty, a few people wanted to call "not guilty" just because the young guy would go to prison. And it wasn't nearly such a serious case. It totally shocked me, as the evidence was all there.

ChicChicChicChiclana · 06/02/2020 21:26

Can't believe Julie Mugford wasn't charged with something. What an awful individual she turned out to be.

LordOfTheWhys · 06/02/2020 21:42

Not as awful as JB.

I'm not defending Julie. I think she should have spoken up sooner but let's not lose perspective. She did eventually come forward even though she had no evidence, was implicating herself in at least three crimes and risked JB coming after her.

JB murdered five people in cold blood including two children. And continues to put the family through hell with every nonsense 'appeal' and pretence of new evidence.

ChicChicChicChiclana · 06/02/2020 22:12

I'm not losing perspective.

Sorry, didn't I make myself clear? "What an awful individual she turned out to be although obviously nowhere near as awful as Jeremy Bamber" - is that better?

Really wouldn't have thought it necessary to state the bleeding obvious. This is Mumsnet, not the Year 7 debating society.

JediJim · 06/02/2020 22:17

JB has spent most of his adult life in prison, he’s had many years to convince himself of his innocence.
What else is he going to do with his time other than appeal and shout his innocence?

LordOfTheWhys · 06/02/2020 22:44

Chic my comment wasn't directed at anyone in particular. I had criticised JM earlier too. But it just struck me reading other articles tonight that there was a lot of focus on Julie. She was being criticised by every side whereas JB had people defending him. It seemed odd that a convicted murderer wasn't attracting as much vitriol as his gf.

Oulu · 06/02/2020 23:34

Are jurors allowed to speak about a case once the trial is finished?

No

CanIHaveATiaraPlease · 06/02/2020 23:36

I think you can speak about the case but not about the jury deliberations.

AppleJane · 07/02/2020 11:36

Really wouldn't have thought it necessary to state the bleeding obvious. This is Mumsnet, not the Year 7 debating society

@ChicChicChicChiclana I think you got off lightly there!

This thread has had an undercurrent of 'policing' since it's beginning.

If you dare to question any of the evidence you are accused of being a supporter of JB or a conspiracy theorist.

One poster was told 'why don't you start a thread about your campaign for Jeremy?'

Personally, I think it's okay to question the evidence and police practice of the 1980's without being a supporter of JB.

I think some posters wishing to have an open discussion about the TV prog and this case have gone elsewhere tbh.

susiella · 07/02/2020 12:50

I researched the White House Farm murders extensively in 2011 when I broke my back & was bed bound for a number of weeks.
I tend to think Bamber probably did do it.
If he were to admit his guilt, he would probably get parole, BUT, would leave prison penniless.
If his next appeal were to prove successful, he could challenge, & probably win, the decisions to disinherit him. He would then be very wealthy. He's playing a (very) long game imo.

LordOfTheWhys · 07/02/2020 12:54

That makes sense susiella . He does seem to be motivated by adoration and money. How would it work if he challenged the decision to disinherit him? Do they calculate what the estate should be worth today and force those who did inherit to reimburse him?

susiella · 07/02/2020 13:07

LordOfTheWhys If he wins his next appeal & is released I don't think there would be any doubt about him challenging the decision to disinherit. I think, (as I'm definitely not qualified to do anything else), the value of the estate would have to be calculated at today's value. His cousins would effectively be made bankrupt.

susiella · 07/02/2020 13:10

It's definitely in the family's interests for him to stay where he is. It's also good for them to have the ear of a prominent politician to ensure this continues to happen,

LordOfTheWhys · 07/02/2020 13:12

That's quite a big motivator to keep on appealing and protesting his innocence then.

AlexaAmbidextra · 07/02/2020 13:13

I think some posters wishing to have an open discussion about the TV prog and this case have gone elsewhere tbh.

AppleJane. Yes, I agree with you about the element of policing. In fact it was me that was told to start my own thread about my ‘campaign’ and to have regard for those family members who were still grieving. Quite frankly, while having immense sympathy for Colin Caffell I have absolutely none for the Boutflour/Eaton contingent. I am still here watching and shall continue to post when I choose.

AlexaAmbidextra · 07/02/2020 13:19

He also said that if it's a serious case then a percentage of jurors will struggle because they can't bear the burden of sending someone to jail for life (or whatever the sentence would be). I don't know if that's relevant to these jurors but your question just reminded me of his talk.

Or maybe the two jurors who found JB not guilty, having been in court and heard the evidence first hand simply felt that he was actually not guilty.

AppleJane · 07/02/2020 13:31

I am still here watching and shall continue to post when I choose.

I am the same, mainly because I can no longer be bothered to argue with people who seem to think they just 'know' how other people think, feel and 'would' act.

As I said previously, having lost someone to suicide I no longer have the luxury of believing I know what anyone would think or do.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 07/02/2020 14:23

'If you dare to question any of the evidence you are accused of being a supporter of JB or a conspiracy theorist.'

I don't think that's fair, I have mentioned some of my concerns with the conviction and given Bamber's version several times in the thread but haven't felt attacked for it. LordOfTheWhys in particular has responded to my points but never been anything other than helpful and informative.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 07/02/2020 14:29

'I am the same, mainly because I can no longer be bothered to argue with people who seem to think they just 'know' how other people think, feel and 'would' act.

As I said previously, having lost someone to suicide I no longer have the luxury of believing I know what anyone would think or do.'

I get that - a huge amount of the case against Bamber rests on what seem to me very dubious assumptions about appropriate or likely behaviour in situations most of us have never been in. However I think it is possible to pick your way through the morass and focus on the areas where the evidence is more concrete.

AppleJane · 07/02/2020 15:00

TheCountessOfFitzdotterel I don't feel inclined to wade through the whole thread picking out the comments that have been aimed at me but there certainly have been some. And I'm a 'neutral'.

We should be 'allowed' to disagree.

LordOfTheWhys · 07/02/2020 15:05

Thank you Countess. I have an issue with people creating their own facts, or presenting JB's campaign material as facts.
I don't have any problem with posters expressing their own opinions. I've also asked questions and developed my own pov through this thread. I think it's obvious when posters are being disingenuous or deliberately misreading my posts.

LordOfTheWhys · 07/02/2020 15:08

I've also said I find the relatives and Julie problematic, as is the silencer. Hence my opinion being based on the facts that both sides agree on. (Taking into account that Sheila wasn't a regular shooter).

AppleJane · 07/02/2020 15:28

So LordOfTheWhys you didn't tell someone to go start their own thread?

Or was that because you thought that wasn't their 'own' opinion they were expressing? How can we prove it wasn't their opinion?

Really I can't see a problem with just letting people be and making their own minds up. It feels like we're being told 'no, you're wrong, because the book of CAL says so'.