Jeremy Bamber White House Farm...Innocent or Evil scumbag?

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
There were 2 moderators at the farm one owned by another member of the family who kept his gun there. One moderator was recorded as being fingerprinted 2 days before the one found by the family was given to police.
The reason Jeremy got an engaged tone was because Nevill was phoning the police as their records show.
But why let evidence get in the way of a good theory.
The claims around whether Jeremy's dad telephoned the police represent a divisive argument even amongst supporters. Personally I find exploration of the calls a labyrinth not suited to my brain, which is not very analytical. No only has Bamber changed his call times, seemingly in accordance with the release of evidence over the years - but Julie Mugford was pressured in to changing the time of her call received from Bamber; and Ann Eaton appears to be complicit in this. This is explored is very well Scott Lomax's book.

One aspect of note is that PC West must have been instructed to re-write the first page of his log. From the copies that exist, he attempted to do so - but curiously, he did not change the crux of the details that were in the original log. The different logs from West can only be differentiated by way of spelling mistakes and certain letters being out of place when compared. He has not altered the call time. It is suspected by the defence that this copying was done to prevent ESDA testing from discovering what else was imprinted upon the original log. In other words, when an expert for the defence tested West's log, they were provided with the copy, rather than the original.

Anybody looking at the case, from any perspective, has to question why on earth would a police officer be re-writing part of the event logs?
 
Last edited:


“What evidence of Nevill phoning the Police? “
Again, Posts 263,264 & 265, which infer “new evidence” dating back as recently as October last year, and which you contributed to, may answer that very question.
Conjecture is fine and adds to the interest but at the end of the day guilt, provable beyond reasonable doubt is all that matters. I think so far there are doubts which are reasonable, irrespective of other personal opinions about Bamber himself.
None of that reveals the evidence that a call from Nevill was logged. Personally, I don't think he did call the Police as the common sense thing would be then leave the phone off the hook with the line open so that the call handler could continue to hear what went on. The Police would have at least have some evidence until the call was ended by the killer.

None of my conjecture is based on any personal opinion of Bamber but on the shots fired into each victim, the location of shell casings and the complete lack of any forensic evidence on Sheila.
 
Last edited:

UrbanFox

Goalkeeper
None of that reveals the evidence that a call from Nevill was logged. Personally, I don't think he did call the Police as the common sense thing would be then leave the phone off the hook with the line open so that the call handler could continue to hear what went on. The Police would have at least have some evidence until the call was ended by the killer.

None of my conjecture is based on any personal opinion of Bamber but on the shots fired into each victim, the location of shell casings and the complete lack of any forensic evidence on Sheila.
I’m puzzled how you keep saying that. Have you read the link? It contains a copy of a log which records a call fron Nevill. And the blurb beneath those copy logs says, in the first paragraph:

“New Evidence : Discovered in the post conviction Dickinson Review which reveals Jeremy Bamber was still on the phone at 3.37. Definitive evidence that he did not call police at 3.26, as the prosecution claim. Jeremy's father made the 3.26 call.”

This is stuff which by all accounts is going to form the basis of another appeal so Jeremy Bamber’s lawyers must be pretty confident that there is indeed evidence that Nevill did make a call, which was logged.

(By the way MB, I didn’t intend to convey that your conjectures were in any way coloured by any opinions you may have about JB, so apologies if that’s what came across.
 

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
"Sophisticated equipment" turns out to be Taff Jones doing a quick visual tour
This Implies that DI Miller blatantly lied to the relatives, i.e. he (Miller) totally invented that police had used sophisticated equipment that did not detect any tampering - which in turn, caused Miller to disbelieve that access / egress had been obtained via the windows. Miller is now deceased, so he cannot be asked to provide a comment on the unearthed COLP documentation relating to this. He would likely face a dilemma (if he could be asked) and would probably decline to comment.

No disrespect meant - but it's as if you are replying to my post without having watched the video (your replies fail to address the content of the video)...

The unearthed documents appear to show that Det. Supt Ainsley (2nd investigation) internally supported the original findings regarding the locked and bolted status of the ground floor doors and windows. Your inference that the then deputy head of CID (DCI Jones) failed to carry out a thorough check of the doors and windows on the morning, is pure conjecture, designed to fit in with the later, externally presented arguments, that Bamber had the means to enter and exit the house via a window and make it appear locked from the outside. The relatives chose the kitchen window as part of their many theories; which as we know, also involved a wetsuit (to account for lack of forensics and the lack of injuries on Bamber) and a bicycle.

I agree I don't think Bamber used the kitchen window. Yet he did prove he could get into the property using the old sash window in the bathroom and it is possible to flip the catch shut on these old worn sash windows using a piece of string.
The police prosecution did not specifically run with the bathroom window scenario (which was originally found to have been locked - like the kitchen - but then during the course of police activities during the day, was found to be unsecure).

You keep saying there is no forensic evidence to link Bamber to the murders but what forensic evidence is there linking Sheila?
This has already been dealt with in previous posts. Sheila has a number of grazes, nicks, cuts and gouges not mentioned by the pathologist (in his disclosed report), some of which are visible after washing of the body and some of which are not connected to any other stream of blood (ie. they are situated in isolation). Naturally, the visibility of such marks post washing is somewhat dependent upon the quality of crime scene photography at the mortuary. In addition, she had a pendant earring snagged on the front of her nightdress that is not mentioned. There is a graze on her throat (below one of her gunshot wounds) that matches the clasp on her pendant necklace. There is a crimson coloured dint (with a line running through it) on her mam's chin, not mentioned by the pathologist. Mam also has what appear to be cuts on her shins, again not mentioned. I'm also a little dubious about the pathologist's claim, that the marks on her dad's forearm are from the rifle (and are not fingernail gouges). Sheila also has an bloodied indentation on the inside span of her right hand, that is particular shape and may be caused by her hand being pressed against part of the rifle.

In short, all three deceased have adults consistent with a desperate struggle, that at trial, would have exculpated Bamber, given he had no injuries (hence the ridiculous wetsuit theory from beneficiary, Robert Boutlflour). Bamber also had short fingernails, so presumably he must have clipped his own nails after committing the killings, cycling home and removing his wetsuit etc.

The police have a case file on Sheila when she was a suspect. They also commissioned a review of the case evidence which concluded she was responsible. The police will not disclose these documents. The same people telling you that there were 'no forensics' relating to Sheila, are the same people telling you the single sound moderator is kosher.

Looking at this in greater depth, Jeremy claimed in interview that it sounded like the call from Nevill had been interrupted and cut off, presumably by Sheila. So what does Nevill do except say to Sheila, "Hang on pet. I know you've gone crazy and got the gun but can we just have a pause in your psychotic breakdown while I call the Police?". Sheila says "Of course dad" and then when he is finished this waif of a lass batters him unconscious with the butt of the rifle before shooting him dead in the head. I must say these middle class are very polite even in the middle of a killing spree.
I'm not sure whether he did or didn't attempt to phone the police. He was dealing with a horrific situation in the dead of night. I am unsure as to how Sheila presented during these events. She may have appeared zombie-like, going about things in a seemingly calm manner (which could be considered 'berserk' given the crics) or she may have been experiencing auditory or visual hallucinations. It's not possible to know how it played out.
 
Last edited:
So what is the sophisticated equipment that was used?

I did watch the video which mainly deals with the kitchen window.

So where can we view the photographs after washing of the body at the mortuary?
 

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
So what is the sophisticated equipment that was used?

I did watch the video which mainly deals with the kitchen window.

So where can we view the photographs after washing of the body at the mortuary?
Whatever the sophisticated equipment was that DI Miller claims was used, don't you think the jury should have been told?

PM photos are not in public domain. Some crime scene are but are generally poor quality (a solicitor allowed a supporter to photograph crime scene photographs), in about 2004.

Lab prints were made in about 2011 / 2012, from negatives that belong to Essex Police, which were released to CCRC and by CCRC temporarily for this purpose. It is the study of those prints that have enabled more discoveries regarding the crime scene and the bodies.

They were all involved in a scrap at some point. A scrap between Sheila and June and a scrap between Sheila and Nevill. Sheila won the scraps because she had fired shots in to both adults, partially incapacitating them.
 

MonkeyLove

Striker
I don't recall him being tested but I do agree with you that Sheila doesn't appear likely to have done it and Jeremy doesn't either.
BUT.....
Someone has or some people have. Now whether it's Jeremy and an accomplice? Possible and possible Jeremy was telling Julie Mugford of the assassin. Possible.

I just find it all a bit too odd.
I could certainly go with an assassin type who has no compunction about taking out the kids. I seriously cannot see Sheila or even Jeremy doing that......but....but. This is the issue. I don't know him nor Sheila, nor the dad.
What's to say there isn't a massive twist in this carry on. A twist that's maybe so far out as to never warrant a thought.

I have a few potentials that may be close or so far away as to be worthless.
The problem with any other scenario is the phone call from Neville to Bamber.

That either happened and Sheila is guilty.

Or it's a lie in which case Bamber sits it or at least colluded with those who did.

It's that single piece of evidence that closes down any other possibilities and is probably the reason why the police have never looked at any other suspects, wider family etc...
 
Whatever the sophisticated equipment was that DI Miller claims was used, don't you think the jury should have been told?

PM photos are not in public domain. Some crime scene are but are generally poor quality (a solicitor allowed a supporter to photograph crime scene photographs), in about 2004.

Lab prints were made in about 2011 / 2012, from negatives that belong to Essex Police, which were released to CCRC and by CCRC temporarily for this purpose. It is the study of those prints that have enabled more discoveries regarding the crime scene and the bodies.

They were all involved in a scrap at some point. A scrap between Sheila and June and a scrap between Sheila and Nevill. Sheila won the scraps because she had fired shots in to both adults, partially incapacitating them.
To be honest the term "sophisticated equipment" sounds very patronising and if he said it to me I would have thought he was taking the piss. Bamber admitted in his interview he had gained entry to the house through the windows on previous occasions and after the killings proved he could. The jury were directed by the Judge that the details didn't matter but I agree Miller's "sophisticated equipment" should have been made known to the jury although whether that would have helped Bamber's defence is debatable.

Who was this supporter that was allowed by a solicitor to photograph crime scene photographs?

Who has studied the photographs released to the CCRC?
 

UrbanFox

Goalkeeper
This Implies that DI Miller blatantly lied to the relatives, i.e. he (Miller) totally invented that police had used sophisticated equipment that did not detect any tampering - which in turn, caused Miller to disbelieve that access / egress had been obtained via the windows. Miller is now deceased, so he cannot be asked to provide a comment on the unearthed COLP documentation relating to this. He would likely face a dilemma (if he could be asked) and would probably decline to comment.

No disrespect meant - but it's as if you are replying to my post without having watched the video (your replies fail to address the content of the video)...

The unearthed documents appear to show that Det. Supt Ainsley (2nd investigation) internally supported the original findings regarding the locked and bolted status of the ground floor doors and windows. Your inference that the then deputy head of CID (DCI Jones) failed to carry out a thorough check of the doors and windows on the morning, is pure conjecture, designed to fit in with the later, externally presented arguments, that Bamber had the means to enter and exit the house via a window and make it appear locked from the outside. The relatives chose the kitchen window as part of their many theories; which as we know, also involved a wetsuit (to account for lack of forensics and the lack of injuries on Bamber) and a bicycle.



The police prosecution did not specifically run with the bathroom window scenario (which was originally found to have been locked - like the kitchen - but then during the course of police activities during the day, was found to be unsecure).



This has already been dealt with in previous posts. Sheila has a number of grazes, nicks, cuts and gouges not mentioned by the pathologist (in his disclosed report), some of which are visible after washing of the body and some of which are not connected to any other stream of blood (ie. they are situated in isolation). Naturally, the visibility of such marks post washing is somewhat dependent upon the quality of crime scene photography at the mortuary. In addition, she had a pendant earring snagged on the front of her nightdress that is not mentioned. There is a graze on her throat (below one of her gunshot wounds) that matches the clasp on her pendant necklace. There is a crimson coloured dint (with a line running through it) on her mam's chin, not mentioned by the pathologist. Mam also has what appear to be cuts on her shins, again not mentioned. I'm also a little dubious about the pathologist's claim, that the marks on her dad's forearm are from the rifle (and are not fingernail gouges). Sheila also has an bloodied indentation on the inside span of her right hand, that is particular shape and may be caused by her hand being pressed against part of the rifle.

In short, all three deceased have adults consistent with a desperate struggle, that at trial, would have exculpated Bamber, given he had no injuries (hence the ridiculous wetsuit theory from beneficiary, Robert Boutlflour). Bamber also had short fingernails, so presumably he must have clipped his own nails after committing the killings, cycling home and removing his wetsuit etc.

The police have a case file on Sheila when she was a suspect. They also commissioned a review of the case evidence which concluded she was responsible. The police will not disclose these documents. The same people telling you that there were 'no forensics' relating to Sheila, are the same people telling you the single sound moderator is kosher.



I'm not sure whether he did or didn't attempt to phone the police. He was dealing with a horrific situation in the dead of night. I am unsure as to how Sheila presented during these events. She may have appeared zombie-like, going about things in a seemingly calm manner (which could be considered 'berserk' given the crics) or she may have been experiencing auditory or visual hallucinations. It's not possible to know how it played out.
Interesting stuff. Where did you get all that from?
 

Lord Potts

Winger
It seems to me that Bamber has always exploited the cock up that was the initial investigation in to the murders. He's clearly quite a clever man so he has managed throw some doubt on his conviction several times but without any success.

I don't think however that an innocent man has been put in prison. The idea that his step sister went crazy with a gun has never rung true to me. There have been several miscarriages of justice over the years which took a lost of campaigning to expose but I have never been persuaded that Bamber's case fell into that category. In those cases you could always detect an uneasiness even among the "powers that be" about the conviction but with Bamber they have always been very confident of his guilt. I think that they are right.
 

Nukehasslefan

Central Defender
The problem with any other scenario is the phone call from Neville to Bamber.

That either happened and Sheila is guilty.

Or it's a lie in which case Bamber sits it or at least colluded with those who did.

It's that single piece of evidence that closes down any other possibilities and is probably the reason why the police have never looked at any other suspects, wider family etc...
I agree it does seem a stumbling block.
An even bigger stumbling block even if the call was made would be as to why both parties... Nevill and Jeremy.... would call local police numbers rather than 999.

I do agree it doesn't bode well for Jeremy.

I just find the case weirdly at odds all over the scene from Julie Mugford apparently knowing Jeremy was planning it and her being a liar and a thief and could've actually stopped it happening if she opened up and yet chose to allow it to potentially happen, even if she said she didn't believe he would go through with it.
It makes her almost as guilty as JB if he actually had carried it out by assassin or by himself.

It seriously does not add up and it all seems contrived.
I think there might be something a bit more in depth that's went on with all this.

I still have no clue as to what and who is responsible, even if some of it points right at JB.
If JB is guilty then Julie Mugford has to go down with him as guilty simply by the law of joint enterprise.

However, she not only walked away from it and had her other crimes squashed...she also got a golden handshake of £25,000.

It potentially stinks to high heaven.
 
Last edited:

UrbanFox

Goalkeeper
I agree it does seem a stumbling block.
An even bigger stumbling block even if the call was made would be as to why both parties... Nevill and Jeremy.... would call local police numbers rather than 999.

I do agree it doesn't bode well for Jeremy.

I just find the case weirdly at odds all over the scene from Julie Mugford apparently knowing Jeremy was planning it and her being a liar and a thief and could've actually stopped it happening if she opened up and yet chose to allow it to potentially happen, even if she said she didn't believe he would go through with it.
It makes her almost as guilty as JB if he actually had carried it out by assassin or by himself.

It seriously does not add up and it all seems contrived.
I think there might be something a bit more in depth that's went on with all this.

I still have no clue as to what and who is responsible, even if some of it points right at JB.
If JB is guilty then Julie Mugford has to go down with him as guilty simply by the law of joint enterprise.

However, she not only walked away from it and had her other crimes squashed...she also got a golden handshake of £25,000.

It potentially stinks to high heaven.
I agree, and that's what makes it a fascinating study. From Jeremy Bamber, Sheila & June, the extended family, Mugford, Essex Police and its agencies, trial and appeal lawyers, the whole lot has a very distinctive whiff about it. The Essex Police files are the cornerstone for me: they should be made to release them in their absolute entirety. For what reasons are they being withheld when a man's conviction could be properly proved or otherwise?
Until then, like yourself, I can't say either way. I am however open to Roker Skate's theory in post 286 above that "They were all involved in a scrap at some point. A scrap between Sheila and June and a scrap between Sheila and Nevill. Sheila won the scraps because she had fired shots in to both adults, partially incapacitating them". That's a thought that had already entered my head when looking at the various reports. And as for Julie Mugford I agree that there is more to her than meets the eye. Even the recent TV drama gave a nod to Stan Jones's possible thoughts on her during the closing scene.
 
....Even the recent TV drama gave a nod to Stan Jones's possible thoughts on her during the closing scene.
Stan Jones is dead. That closing scene was fiction. It's like that bit in the Bible in the Garden of Gethsemane where all the disciples are asleep and Jesus goes off to pray all alone. How the fuck did Mark who never met him know what he prayed?
Anyway this bloke has over 30 years of research in the Bamber Case and to his credit has made known public a lot of information.


Not sure what the whispered American accent is about though, he's from Barnsley.
 
Last edited:

Nukehasslefan

Central Defender
I agree, and that's what makes it a fascinating study. From Jeremy Bamber, Sheila & June, the extended family, Mugford, Essex Police and its agencies, trial and appeal lawyers, the whole lot has a very distinctive whiff about it. The Essex Police files are the cornerstone for me: they should be made to release them in their absolute entirety. For what reasons are they being withheld when a man's conviction could be properly proved or otherwise?
Until then, like yourself, I can't say either way. I am however open to Roker Skate's theory in post 286 above that "They were all involved in a scrap at some point. A scrap between Sheila and June and a scrap between Sheila and Nevill. Sheila won the scraps because she had fired shots in to both adults, partially incapacitating them". That's a thought that had already entered my head when looking at the various reports. And as for Julie Mugford I agree that there is more to her than meets the eye. Even the recent TV drama gave a nod to Stan Jones's possible thoughts on her during the closing scene.
It makes you wish you could be the fly on the wall to see the reality. Only the dog likely knows the real script.
I recall reading that Nevill had said to someone that something dreadful was going to happen. I can't find where I saw it. Can anyone shed any light on that?
 

UrbanFox

Goalkeeper
Yes mate, I know Stan Jones is dead. I also know that the TV program was drama. The opening credits made it clear before every episode that certain scenes were fictionalised. I even cautioned Fetch Fletch earlier about taking the drama as gospel (to use another biblical reference). However, I’ve also read that Stan Jones had some private misgivings about Julie Mugford after she so quickly arranged her press money pay off. The last scene in the drama simply gave a subtle hint as to his feelings.
 
It makes you wish you could be the fly on the wall to see the reality. Only the dog likely knows the real script.
I recall reading that Nevill had said to someone that something dreadful was going to happen. I can't find where I saw it. Can anyone shed any light on that?
He said to Barbara Wilson that he should never turn his back on Jeremy. May have said similar to some else as well.
 

Nukehasslefan

Central Defender
He said to Barbara Wilson that he should never turn his back on Jeremy. May have said similar to some else as well.
Yeah I remember that bit but I seem to recall him saying something to his secretary or accountant or some female who asked him if he was ok because he looked gaunt or something. She asked him if he had cancer and he said ...no, nothing like that.....he seemed to mention that he had a dreadful feeling that something terrible was going to happen.

I should remember it all because I thought it was massively significant in a twist in this saga.
It just appeared as if he actually knew something was going to happen rather than having a feeling, kind of thing.
 

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
However, I’ve also read that Stan Jones had some private misgivings about Julie Mugford after she so quickly arranged her press money pay off. The last scene in the drama simply gave a subtle hint as to his feelings.
On the day of the verdicts, Stan Jones telephoned Julie Mugford at a hotel in Sloane Square, where she was being put up by NOTW. He had coached her through her statements and she was in effect, the star witness. I'd be very surprised if he had any misgivings about Mugford's actions, as they were tied up with his own actions. Thick as thieves.
He said to Barbara Wilson that he should never turn his back on Jeremy. May have said similar to some else as well.
I'm not 100% certain the above is true. He said I should never turn my back on that man (which may refer to Jeremy). However, he had also had trouble with somebody called James Bell, who had thrown bullets at his car. James Bell went on to kill and commit suicide.

The defence were unaware that Sheila Caffell had said 'all people are evil and should be killed'. Ann Eaton and the police knew this had been said - Ann had written it in her notes, post killings.
The problem with any other scenario is the phone call from Neville to Bamber.

That either happened and Sheila is guilty.

Or it's a lie in which case Bamber sits it or at least colluded with those who did.

It's that single piece of evidence that closes down any other possibilities and is probably the reason why the police have never looked at any other suspects, wider family etc...
The police couldn't confirm or disprove the alleged from father to son. Bamber couldn't prove that it happened. But when the police were trying to get everyone on board, in order to prosecute Bamber, they informed witnesses that the call didn't happen, thus casting doubt in the minds of those witnesses, with regards to Bamber's version of events.
On the day of the verdicts, Stan Jones telephoned Julie Mugford at a hotel in Sloane Square, where she was being put up by NOTW. He had coached her through her statements and she was in effect, the star witness. I'd be very surprised if he had any misgivings about Mugford's actions, as they were tied up with his own actions. Thick as thieves.


I'm not 100% certain the above is true. He said I should never turn my back on that man (which may refer to Jeremy). However, he had also had trouble with somebody called James Bell, who had thrown bullets at his car. James Bell went on to kill and commit suicide.

The defence were unaware that Sheila Caffell had said 'all people are evil and should be killed'. Ann Eaton and the police knew this had been said - Ann had written it in her notes, post killings.


The police couldn't confirm or disprove the alleged from father to son. Bamber couldn't prove that it happened. But when the police were trying to get everyone on board, in order to prosecute Bamber, they informed witnesses that the call didn't happen, thus casting doubt in the minds of those witnesses, with regards to Bamber's version of events.
*alleged call
On the day of the verdicts, Stan Jones telephoned Julie Mugford at a hotel in Sloane Square, where she was being put up by NOTW. He had coached her through her statements and she was in effect, the star witness. I'd be very surprised if he had any misgivings about Mugford's actions, as they were tied up with his own actions. Thick as thieves.


I'm not 100% certain the above is true. He said I should never turn my back on that man (which may refer to Jeremy). However, he had also had trouble with somebody called James Bell, who had thrown bullets at his car. James Bell went on to kill and commit suicide.

The defence were unaware that Sheila Caffell had said 'all people are evil and should be killed'. Ann Eaton and the police knew this had been said - Ann had written it in her notes, post killings.


The police couldn't confirm or disprove the alleged from father to son. Bamber couldn't prove that it happened. But when the police were trying to get everyone on board, in order to prosecute Bamber, they informed witnesses that the call didn't happen, thus casting doubt in the minds of those witnesses, with regards to Bamber's version of events.

*alleged call from father to son
Who was this supporter that was allowed by a solicitor to photograph crime scene photographs?
Whoever it was, it led to this, which caused panic within Essex Police. Re the article, we now know the crime scene photography was closer to 10am.

 
Last edited:

MonkeyLove

Striker
One thing I can’t understand is did they not prove if a call was made out from White House farm on the night?

Surely BT even in those days had itemised bills recording call records
 

Top