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

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
No they were about to start introducing the technology but at the time it was simply a meter that charged according to calls made out.
 


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.
I think you will find it was Mike "Tesko" that was shown the photos by a solicitor. That's the bloke in the video I posted earlier that blames Essex Police for the death of Sheila. It's interesting that Mike now claims Bamber confided in him when they were in prison together that he had killed the rest of the family but not Sheila. Weird all round.
Anyway the Bamberettes who run the Campaign Team and Official Site have now disproved the theory the Jeremy used his mothers bike.


Keep an eye out for their exciting new knitting competition coming soon...Jers Jumpers.
 
Last edited:
Old now.. but still worth a read. Andrew Hunter (ex Conservative / DUP) in the house of commons...

Some of the points he raises really is old stuff that has already been addressed over the years as the Bamber supports are fully aware.

At 5:25 they did hail the house and that was recorded by the operative listening over the radio link as talking to those inside. In fact the same log reports only a few minutes later that there had been no response to their hail.

We've already discussed the fact that one officer mistook Nevill's body for a female in the kitchen but the same officer later made comment on her body's position upstairs immediately afterwards.

There was not extensive blood on the underside of Sheila's feet. She will probably have walked over the area at the bottom of the bed to arrive at the other side thus walking over the area is known June did walk back and forth.

The photographs of Sheila's body does not indicate fresh wet blood. They were taken using flash as also indicated by the reflection on the Bible next to her body. As any photographer will know that can make some dried surfaces appear to be wet when they are not. Liver mortis is apparent on her legs.

Any pathologist claiming they can determine time of death from a photograph is a bullshitter.

Yet still these myths continue to be propagated by Bamber supporters.

However, if Bamber is so cock sure of his defence why does he continue to refuse permission for the full and detailed report presented to him by the CCRC in 2012 to be made public?
 
Last edited:
MBC, will reply to points when I get the chance.
That's ok but my main point is:

However, if Bamber is so cock sure of his defence why does he continue to refuse permission for the full and detailed report presented to him by the CCRC in 2012 to be made public?
...
For anyone interested in examining the legal arguments there are these posted earlier:

01 Court of Appeal Decision 2002


02 Judicial Review 2012


This Judicial Review followed an 8 year consideration by the CCRC who rejected a further appeal.

If Jeremy Bamber wanted to end the perpetuation of myths then he could give his permission for the CCRC Decision and Reasoning to made public.
 
Last edited:

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
That's ok but my main point is:

However, if Bamber is so cock sure of his defence why does he continue to refuse permission for the full and detailed report presented to him by the CCRC in 2012 to be made public?
...
For anyone interested in examining the legal arguments there are these posted earlier:

01 Court of Appeal Decision 2002


02 Judicial Review 2012


This Judicial Review followed an 8 year consideration by the CCRC who rejected a further appeal.

If Jeremy Bamber wanted to end the perpetuation of myths then he could give his permission for the CCRC Decision and Reasoning to made public.
The CCRC / judicial review chose to ignore burns evidence that a sound moderator wasn't used on Sheila Caffell.. Because her blood was apparently found inside the exhibit. In other words, they won't consider the possibility that the sound moderator exhibit was fabricated.

The 2002 appeal is now 18 years old.

This link will give a more up to date precis of evidence STILL to be disclosed and possibly destroyed by EP.

 
The CCRC / judicial review chose to ignore burns evidence that a sound moderator wasn't used on Sheila Caffell.. Because her blood was apparently found inside the exhibit. In other words, they won't consider the possibility that the sound moderator exhibit was fabricated.

The 2002 appeal is now 18 years old.

This link will give a more up to date precis of evidence STILL to be disclosed and possibly destroyed by EP.

Sheila's mental state at the time of the murders was extensively and comprehensively covered at the original trial in 1986 and at the Appeal Court in 2002. The prosecution called her consultant psychiatrist Dr Ferguson and several witnesses from the days immediately before the fateful night to confirm she was in a stable and reasonably happy state if somewhat sedated as the result of her medication. There is no relevance to be found in historical references to previous states when she was experiencing psychosis and/or was not receiving medication such that her condition was not being managed. That was not the situation on the night of the murders, so therefore there is no reason to make public her medical history.

On the other hand Jeremy Bamber has continued over many years to campaign that he is not a psychopath. In fact he cites 27 assessments he has undertaken, yet he refuses permission to make the details of those assessments public. So we only have his word.

We do not know the details of the CCRC decision as Bamber refuses to make that public but we do know from the Judicial Review that the burns were considered and reference was made to the expert opinions of the defence. All of those tests concluded more research was required but none provided any explanation as to how the rifle barrel could be heated sufficiently even using the AGA oven plates that can reach a maximum of 200 Celsius. However, the plates were not designed to heat a cylindrical object to that temperature. None of these experts considered any other object and conducted no tests as a result but no soot was found in the barrel of the rifle indicating it had not been poked into the solid fuel heat source for the actual oven. Therefore the defence argument was quite rightly dismissed at the Judicial Review.
 

Roker Skate

Goalkeeper
Sheila's mental state at the time of the murders was extensively and comprehensively covered at the original trial in 1986 and at the Appeal Court in 2002. The prosecution called her consultant psychiatrist Dr Ferguson and several witnesses from the days immediately before the fateful night to confirm she was in a stable and reasonably happy state if somewhat sedated as the result of her medication. There is no relevance to be found in historical references to previous states when she was experiencing psychosis and/or was not receiving medication such that her condition was not being managed. That was not the situation on the night of the murders, so therefore there is no reason to make public her medical history.

On the other hand Jeremy Bamber has continued over many years to campaign that he is not a psychopath. In fact he cites 27 assessments he has undertaken, yet he refuses permission to make the details of those assessments public. So we only have his word.

We do not know the details of the CCRC decision as Bamber refuses to make that public but we do know from the Judicial Review that the burns were considered and reference was made to the expert opinions of the defence. All of those tests concluded more research was required but none provided any explanation as to how the rifle barrel could be heated sufficiently even using the AGA oven plates that can reach a maximum of 200 Celsius. However, the plates were not designed to heat a cylindrical object to that temperature. None of these experts considered any other object and conducted no tests as a result but no soot was found in the barrel of the rifle indicating it had not been poked into the solid fuel heat source for the actual oven. Therefore the defence argument was quite rightly dismissed at the Judicial Review.
At present I don't have time to properly reply to this or your other recent post. I think you are misrepresenting some of the evidence around Sheila and around the use of the sound moderator. For example, you keep tying the burns to Nevill to the gunshot wounds of Sheila, whereas you should be looking at them distinctly. I know that Ballistics experts do not believe a sound moderator was used in the killings, literally at all. This raises the spectre of a fabricated exhibit, which is hugely embarrassing for the authorities. The authorities will therefore bar by any means possible, the way back for a third appeal. Forensic tests are expensive and Bamber does not have access to funds, other than donations. It is easy for the authorities to run the clock down on submission deadlines, simply by demanding more tests, for which they know full well that the funds don't exist for.

I'll be back when I have time.
 
....At present I don't have time to properly reply to this or your other recent post. I think you are misrepresenting some of the evidence around Sheila and around the use of the sound moderator. For example, you keep tying the burns to Nevill to the gunshot wounds of Sheila, whereas you should be looking at them distinctly.....
That's not true. You said:

The CCRC / judicial review chose to ignore burns evidence that a sound moderator wasn't used on Sheila Caffell.. Because her blood was apparently found inside the exhibit.

I never mentioned the sound moderator and blood found inside but simply the evidence presented by the defence regarding the burns to Nevill.
...
I am not sure what you are alleging about the blood in the moderator:

01 That it is Sheila Caffell's blood
02 That it is a mix of Nevill and June Bamber's blood

This has been very comprehensively debated at trial in 1986 ans subsequently again on Appeal in 2002.

Mr Haywood presented evidence for the prosecution and Mr Lincoln was employed by the defence. However, Lincoln came to the same conclusions as Hayward and later withdrew his opinion that it could be a mix of Nevill and Junes blood. Hayward had considered this to be also very remote. A Mr Webster gave evidence for the defence on Appeal but the earlier experts had considered that if thorough mixing of wet blood had occurred then they would have noticed other indicators present alongside each other and as this was not evident it must be Sheila's blood alone and certainly not come from solely from any other victim. And thorough mixing could be assumed because the surface containing the blood was metal and non porous.The scientific argument is contained in the Appeal Report of 2002.

So do you doubt that the blood in the moderator was that of Sheila Caffell?
 
Last edited:

Bacchus

Midfield
What's your views on Jeremy Bamber who is serving a whole life sentence for killing 5 members of his family.

He has passed a lie detector test and Essex police are not disclosing key documents to his defence team

Some very prominent people believe he is innocent.

White House farm on tonight 9pm itv starring the always excellent Stephen Graham with an atrocious Welsh accent apparently
Follow up on now, channel 5
Not according to tonight's programme
 
Last edited:

Bacchus

Midfield
At present I don't have time to properly reply to this or your other recent post. I think you are misrepresenting some of the evidence around Sheila and around the use of the sound moderator. For example, you keep tying the burns to Nevill to the gunshot wounds of Sheila, whereas you should be looking at them distinctly. I know that Ballistics experts do not believe a sound moderator was used in the killings, literally at all. This raises the spectre of a fabricated exhibit, which is hugely embarrassing for the authorities. The authorities will therefore bar by any means possible, the way back for a third appeal. Forensic tests are expensive and Bamber does not have access to funds, other than donations. It is easy for the authorities to run the clock down on submission deadlines, simply by demanding more tests, for which they know full well that the funds don't exist for.

I'll be back when I have time.
Watch last night's update, evidence withheld from the trial back's up Bamber's series of events
 

Top