Bamber: The New Evidence (Tonight programme)

Bamber: The New Evidence

For anyone interested, this half-hour 'Tonight' programme airs tonight on ITV1 at 19.30. Mark Williams-Thomas gets a mention so could be interesting...

I remember clearly when this mass slaughter happened in Tolleshunt D'arcy. I always thought Bamber to be innocent, no idea why, I was very young and probably subscribed to the 'he doesn't look like an evil murderer' type thinking so beloved of Pro-McCanns.
I will be watching this with interest.

Yes this case has always interested me. I'm sure most people will know the basics of it. It was at first thought that Jeremy Bamber's adopted sister Sheila had killed their parents, her twin sons and then herself but he was later found guilty of the crimes. You'd think that by now he would have accepted his fate if he was guilty so I do have doubts about his conviction.

Jean wrote:Yes this case has always interested me. I'm sure most people will know the basics of it. It was at first thought that Jeremy Bamber's adopted sister Sheila had killed their parents, her twin sons and then herself but he was later found guilty of the crimes. You'd think that by now he would have accepted his fate if he was guilty so I do have doubts about his conviction.

Imo this man is a psychopath - the evidence didn't stack up and unfortunately the first detectives on the scene weren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.
To me it seemed a simple case of sibling rivalry - the profile really doesn't fit the depressed mother/sister - she might have killed herself and her two children but why her parents too? Doesn't work for me at all.
Well - a psychopath will never give in - they are right and superior to the rest of the world - they have rights!
Call Rainbow Fairy, Russian Doll, have a look at the body language and the forensic language - I don't have TB - so am a bit hampered.

tigger wrote:

Jean wrote:Yes this case has always interested me. I'm sure most people will know the basics of it. It was at first thought that Jeremy Bamber's adopted sister Sheila had killed their parents, her twin sons and then herself but he was later found guilty of the crimes. You'd think that by now he would have accepted his fate if he was guilty so I do have doubts about his conviction.

Imo this man is a psychopath - the evidence didn't stack up and unfortunately the first detectives on the scene weren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.
To me it seemed a simple case of sibling rivalry - the profile really doesn't fit the depressed mother/sister - she might have killed herself and her two children but why her parents too? Doesn't work for me at all.
Well - a psychopath will never give in - they are right and superior to the rest of the world - they have rights!
Call Rainbow Fairy, Russian Doll, have a look at the body language and the forensic language - I don't have TB - so am a bit hampered.

I'll do that and write it up after. Fairly confident I'll have formed a definite opinion either way by the end. I haven't studied the evidence in any great detail before.

Incidentally, there is a three-part series on Death Row. The second part airs tonight at 22.00 on Channel 4. Last week, the convict in question was a 'Hank Skinner' - convicted of murder of his girlfriend and her two kids. I am convinced the evidence that was withheld by the DA throws serious doubts about his conviction.
Tonight, the prisoner is a 'James Barnes'. I'm not sure that he is saying he's innocent.
Last week was really interesting, I cried through a lot of it (see, I DO have a heart!). The dialogue is a bit hard to follow, the maker Werner's accent is hard to understand and very slow, but a great watch nonetheless.

Of course I meant to write I don't have a TV! My spell checker is a mad woman living in my computer, most of the time it's not typos but when I'm halfway a word the damn thing finishes it off for me!

Look forward to RB and RD's and anybody else's review!

I really think that if the sister did it, she wouldn't have killed the parents because the gesture would have been pointless. The 'it's all your fault' syndrome - they've got to be alive for that.
Bamber had the money in mind imo.

IMO - Bamber as guilty as hell, he lied, he had a big chip on his shoulder, he was an angry man, there was powerful circumstantial evidence against him (I think he also changed his story a few times) and the jury rightly convicted him; a psychopathic killer who clearly snapped under pressure. Don't have a TV, so wasn't able to see the programme. It's an Essex case which I've followed closely

Here's a link to the programme but I haven't as yet been able to get it to play properly.

http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=313869

I managed to watch the programme - it was very weird the first time, the sound track wasn't matching the visual images. I know that Jeremy Bamber is the obvious suspect but, if the only evidence against him was from his ex-girlfriend (who may have told a pack of lies) it certainly was a weak case.

Well, I must say, I still aren't capable of nailing my colours to the mast either way on this one.
Linguistically, and body language, there was nothing of Bamber to 'get my teeth into'. Not so his ex-girlfriend, Julie Mugford... What I saw and heard of her speaking, I absolutely did NOT believe her. Very shifty indeed.
What I will say:
The MAIN thrust of the prosecution argument was that Bamber confessed to Julie he planned to shoot his own family. She did not come forward though, until a MONTH AFTER she and Bamber split.
So, how reliable was her evidence? Who is to say she wasn't truly a woman scorned? Is there a possibility she was in on it (for the money) then turned on him when they split - one thing that suggests she loved money:
She was paid £25,000 (at the time) by good ol' NoTW for this headline: 'I tried to Smother Sleeping Beast Bamber' - sounds like a charming lady! There was also doubt over when EXACTLY NoTW paid her for the piece.

My jury is definitely still out on this one!

Here's Jeremy Bamber's official website. I haven't had a close look there yet though I'm hoping there are some old clips which will give body language experts something to consider.

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/

Jean wrote:Here's Jeremy Bamber's official website. I haven't had a close look there yet though I'm hoping there are some old clips which will give body language experts something to consider.

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/

Thanks for that Jean, I will certainly have a look at that. Sounds very interesting, and I'd like to be clearer in my mind as to whether I think him guilty or not.
Despite the 'forker' and 'hate' accusations levelled at people like us, I like to have read as much evidence as I can. I may get an instant gut-reaction, as in Maddie's case, but like Pat Brown says, if the evidence points towards something, I'll go with that.
In the McCann case, 'gut' and 'evidence' are the same, Bamber not so clear cut for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Farm_murders

JB looked to me - when the story broke - like an arch manipulator. A great loss to PR and politics.
He was 'lucky' that he got some very second rate detectives and he had plenty of time to adjust the evidence.

I'm still sticking with the fact that his half sister might have killed the children and herself, but not likely the parents. That kind of action is aimed at making the lives of the survivors hell. Without survivors, there's no point.
Besides, it must have been hard for Jeremy to have a half sister who might have had most of the attention.
I also think that shooting yourself is a typical male thing to do, his sister must have had plenty of access to pills. Fitting a silencer onto the gun can't have been that easy and it seems a very strange thing to do, silencers don't cut out all the noise, just dampen it a little.

I think there was also a wet suit which was missing? A fire started in the garden which wasn't investigated very early on?

tigger wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Farm_murders

JB looked to me - when the story broke - like an arch manipulator. A great loss to PR and politics.
He was 'lucky' that he got some very second rate detectives and he had plenty of time to adjust the evidence.

I'm still sticking with the fact that his half sister might have killed the children and herself, but not likely the parents. That kind of action is aimed at making the lives of the survivors hell. Without survivors, there's no point.
Besides, it must have been hard for Jeremy to have a half sister who might have had most of the attention.
I also think that shooting yourself is a typical male thing to do, his sister must have had plenty of access to pills. Fitting a silencer onto the gun can't have been that easy and it seems a very strange thing to do, silencers don't cut out all the noise, just dampen it a little.

I think there was also a wet suit which was missing? A fire started in the garden which wasn't investigated very early on?

Well I took lots of notes - unfortunately they are at home but I'm not - but I can tell you that the 'silencer' is one of the matters of the possible appeal. We were treated to quite a graphic display of an American ballistics expert test-firing the weapon with and without silencer into pigskin! Testing the marks etc. Unless I missed something, the conclusions were somewhat contradictory.
Testimony of JM was another point - from a commonsense viewpoint, and linguistically and body language, I'd say she was LYING. About what - I can't say. Maybe she knew more than she let on. But she was shifty, in the same vein as Team McCann.
I just can't remember the third point! I'll check when I get home.
I don't think its beyond imagination Sheila Caffell did it. OTOH, nor is it beyond the realms of possibility that Jeremy Bamber did it.
I'm just so torn on this one. More study needed!

Arent there photos on the Bamber website re the silencer?

- One showing the wall above the kitchen fireplace - unblemished
- Then one after the police had had it for a few days and somehow a big silencer scrape mark had appeared on it?

Suggesting tapering with the scene after it had been taken over by the police. On top of the tampering/training exercise/playing with the rifle that the police admitted to years after

Then something to do with only half the files being released

Or something like that. I only read a bit about the case a few years ago

26 April 2012 Last updated at 11:35

Family killer Jeremy Bamber fails in appeal bid

Bamber is serving a whole life tariff for the murders

Jeremy Bamber, who was jailed for killing his family 27 years ago, has failed in his latest attempt to appeal against his conviction.

Bamber, now 51, has always denied shooting his adopted parents, sister and her six-year-old twin sons at the family's farmhouse in Essex in 1985.

He was given a whole life tariff for the killings.

A spokesman for the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) confirmed it was not referring the case for appeal.

In a statement issued through his supporters, Bamber said: "I shall continue to campaign to prove my innocence in every way I can.

"I am very shocked and extremely disappointed."

Bamber has always claimed that his sister, Sheila Caffell, murdered her wealthy parents, June and Neville, and six-year-old children, Daniel and Nicholas, before turning the gun on herself at the farmhouse in Tolleshunt D'Arcy.

'Very disappointed'

His latest request for an appeal was based on a fresh analysis of three burn marks found on his father, gunshot wounds on his sister and evidence surrounding weapon "moderators", which suppress the sound of gunshots.

In his statement, Bamber said: "It is illogical that the fresh evidence presented to them (CCRC) regarding the sound moderator has not persuaded the commissioners that this material 'may have' affected the jury's decision had they been presented with it at trial."

But the CCRC said there was no "real possibility" that the Court of Appeal would find the convictions to have been "unsafe".

The spokesman added: "This is a final decision and brings to a close the commission's current longest running case."

Bamber's solicitor Simon McKay said he was considering applying for a judicial review.

He claimed the CCRC had "improperly" dismissed "eminent scientific opinion" relating to the gunshot wounds found on the bodies of some of the victims.

He said: "In my view, the commission have not applied the proper test for determining whether a case should be referred back to the Court of Appeal."

An Essex Police spokesman said it had "co-operated fully" with the CCRC but would not comment further.

The CCRC's decision is the third time Bamber has failed to get his conviction overturned.

The Court of Appeal rejected a request for an appeal hearing in 1989.

He was granted an appeal in 2002, after the case was referred by the CCRC, but the appeal was later dismissed.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-17851314

Rose West has always denied that she was guilty in any way. She still denies it.

I don't think though that she is still demanding that the case be reinvestigated. As I have mentioned before recently there are doubts in my mind about the Bamber case.

Jean wrote:I don't think though that she is still demanding that the case be reinvestigated. As I have mentioned before recently there are doubts in my mind about the Bamber case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Farm_murders

I find this account fairly comprehensive. I followed it at the time, it may well be that JB's girlfriend lied - thus muddying the waters. But leaving her evidence completely out of it, the rest is still heavily against JB.
The investigation was flawed, but his sister had no residue on her nightgown from shooting no less than 25 times. Loading such a rifle takes some force as well. It had to be reloaded twice. According to the earlier evidence, there was blood inside the silencer which was hers.
JB's fingerprints were on the weapon because he had shot some rabbits earlier that evening. Then he left it on the kitchen table.
Not good practice in a house with small children. I'm sure his father would not allow that.
In the days following the murders, the investigation was very lax I believe. JB was able to come and go as he liked.
JB's behaviour - the phone call, then calling the police and then waiting with the police outside the farm for hours. Without calling out to his sister or parents?

When he phoned the police, he helpfully gave the information that his sister had a history of mental illness. His father allegedly said that Sheila had gone mad .... no - for me it doesn't work.
Getting the plot line in the first sentence?
'They've taken her!'
'That dingo's got my baby!'
'My sister's gone mad, has a history of mental illness, father just phoned' (this last is just the gist, not litt)

Thanks Candyfloss for redirecting me here. To all posters,I do believe there was no evidence in this case?

Follow the money too, just happened that the relatives that found evidence ended up inheriting it all

friedtomatoes wrote:Follow the money too, just happened that the relatives that found evidence ended up inheriting it all

I just don't think the sister fits the profile whereas Jeremy does.
One of the bits of evidence I remember is that there was a scuba suit missing from a cupboard in the farmhouse. For some reason that was relevant and there was also the case that a bonfire had been started? This may have been in the days following the murders.

Sheila and her two sons were living at the farm, Jeremy lived 3 miles away - there would have been some friction. There was - I understand - little affection rather jealousy between sister ad brother. If he didn't please his adopted father - there were two grandchildren who'd inherit.

The excuse that he shot at rabbits earlier that evening is a bit thin, unlikely that he'd leave a loaded gun on the kitchen table with two children in the house. His father would probably not allow that.
The fight in the kitchen - Sheila was a slight woman - I don't believe it.
So on and so forth.
Most suspicious is the call to the police. Because he went into too much detail. ('my sister has a history of mental illness') . The fact that his father wasted time on the telephone in the middle of the shooting. The gun had been reloaded twice. There must have been opportunities.

OK Tigger, you obviously followed the case more than I ever did, actually I never did, I just watched the ITV programme last month or so and thought the whole case had flimsy circumstantial evidence, time will tell.
Why did that Mark Williams bloke get involved? I thought he was a child crime expert, remember his name from the Maddie case.

Miscarriages of justice do happen. Even in cases with more evidence than this one.

Just noticed these tweets from Jeremy Bamber today Here is the profile on twitter.....


http://twitter.com/Bambertweets
Jeremy Bamber

@Bambertweets


Wrongly convicted 26 years ago. Jeremy's Official Campaign, we are consultancy working directly for Jeremy, tweet on his behalf with his latest news daily.

HM Full Sutton, York, UK · http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk





Jeremy Bamber ‏@Bambertweets

Jeremy Bamber tonight ITV 10:30 Melanie Ruddell who killed her son in a psychotic episode after leaving hospital, just like Sheila Caffell



Jeremy Bamber ‏@Bambertweets

Jeremy Bamber : Sheila Caffell killed the Bamber family in a psychotic episode, know the truth [url=http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/how-and-why-di …]http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/how-and-why-di …[/url]



Jeremy Bamber ‏@Bambertweets

Jeremy Bamber :Melanie Ruddell "All who knew her agreed that she was a caring and devoted mother before her psychosis." http://www.hartlepoolmail.co.uk/news/local/sho …



Jeremy Bamber ‏@Bambertweets

Jeremy Bamber : Three minutes to find out why Jeremy is an innocent man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ugy3Ga …

Here's a link to the Tonight programme mentioned about a mother who killed her child while in a "psychotic episode".

http://www.itv.com/itvplayer/video/?Filter=320409

9 November 2012 Last updated at 13:21




Jeremy Bamber's latest action against conviction fails


Jeremy Bamber's appeal was heard by two High Court judges

Killer Jeremy Bamber has failed in his latest High Court action to overturn a conviction for murdering five relatives 27 years ago in Essex.


Two judges in London rejected a judicial review application.

Bamber challenged a refusal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) to refer his case back to the Court of Appeal as a miscarriage of justice.

The CCRC, an independent body which investigates possible miscarriages, rejected Bamber's last appeal in April.

The decision on Thursday follows a single judge rejecting Bamber's application for permission to seek judicial review of the CCRC's decision after he studied the case papers in private.
Complex investigation
Bamber made a renewed application dealt with by Sir John Thomas, president of the Queen's Bench Division, and Mr Justice Globe.

Announcing the decision, Sir John said that having looked at the approach taken by the CCRC in the case he could not see "any way" in which a challenge could be made to the decision reached.

"It seems to me that a challenge is impossible to mount," he said.

The 51-year-old who is serving a whole-life term for the 1985 killings at a remote Essex farmhouse, has always protested his innocence.

In April, the CCRC said that despite a lengthy and complex investigation, it had not "identified any evidence or legal argument that it considers capable of raising a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would quash the convictions".

Bamber and two other killers have also started an appeal in the European Court of Human Rights against spending the rest of their lives in prison, claiming a breach of human rights.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-20538663

Just bringing this topic back for anyone who's interested.

This is definitely a case to look at vis a vis wrongful conviction

9 July 2013 Last updated at 10:30



Killers' life terms 'breached their human rights'



Jeremy Bamber's appeal was heard with that of two other men
The European Court of Human Rights has ruled the whole life tariffs given to murderer Jeremy Bamber and two other killers breached their human rights.
The court ruled there had to be both a possibility of release and review to be compatible with their human rights.
However it said this did not mean there was "any prospect of imminent release".
Bamber, along with Peter Moore and Douglas Vinter, argued their sentences were "inhuman" and they should have the right to a review.
The three men had lost a previous legal battle at the European court and now its grand chamber has had a final say.
BBC legal affairs correspondent Clive Coleman said the grand chamber's decision was convincing, in that they ruled by 16-1.
He said the move was significant both legally and politically, and it would now have to be considered by the UK government.
BBC home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani said it would probably require Parliament to create a system to allow the Parole Board to review whole life orders.
'Modern democracy'
They are among a group of 49 people in England and Wales who are serving whole life tariffs.
This means they cannot be released other than at the discretion of the justice secretary on compassionate grounds - for example, if they are terminally ill or seriously incapacitated.
They claimed that being denied any prospect of release was a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

What is a whole life tariff?

• Offenders who receive a whole life tariff cannot be released other than at the discretion of the justice secretary on compassionate grounds - for example, if they are terminally ill or seriously incapacitated
  
• They are not eligible for a parole review or release
  
• However, prisoners can have their sentence reduced on appeal
  
• The sentence is reserved for offenders judged to be the most dangerous to society
  
• 49 people are currently serving whole life tariffs
  
• These include the Yorkshire Ripper Peter Sutcliffe and Moors Murderer Ian Brady
  
• Serial killer Rosemary West is the only woman currently serving a whole life sentence
  
• The most recent murderers to receive the sentence are Mark Bridger, who killed five-year-old April Jones, and Dale Cregan, who murdered two police officers
  

The case was referred to the grand chamber after the men narrowly lost their first European Court hearing in 2012: three of the seven judges ruled in their favour.
The court's first ruling concluded that the men's sentences were not "grossly disproportionate".
Bamber was jailed for murdering five members of his family in Essex in 1985.
He has always protested his innocence and claims his schizophrenic sister Sheila Caffell shot her family before turning the gun on herself.
Moore killed four gay men for his sexual gratification in north Wales in 1995.
In 2008, Vinter, from Middlesbrough, admitted killing his wife Anne White. He had been released from prison in 2005 after serving nine years for murdering a colleague.
Before the judges' decision was announced, Vinter's solicitor, Simon Creighton, said the appeal was not a bid to get his client or the other two killers back on the streets.
He said purpose of the legal challenge was to ensure all sentences have the right of review built into them.
"A whole life sentence without the right of review is at odds with modern democracy and sentencing," he told BBC Radio 5 live.
BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said up until 2003 all terms could be reviewed, including whole life tariffs.
'Pure revenge'
Last year, the Court of Appeal in London upheld the principle of whole life sentences for the most dangerous of offenders, saying it did not breach human rights.
At the time, the Lord Chief Justice said jail without the possibility of release should be "reserved for the few exceptionally serious offences".
He said judges must be convinced those sentenced to whole life need to be held forever for punishment and retribution.
Eric Allison, a former prisoner and the Guardian's prison correspondent, told BBC Radio 5 live that the UK did not have the death penalty and the prison system was about rehabilitation and reform.
He said whole life tariffs were about "pure punishment and pure revenge and we are better than that".
"We are human beings and we are capable of change. I spent time in prison. I did not kill anybody but I have seen people who did kill turn their lives around and that's the aim of the system. That should apply to all prisoners."
Rape victim Helen Stockford's attacker was a convicted murder and she has been campaigning to ensure he now stays in prison for life. She says some criminals do not deserve a second chance.
"They are given chances after chances and it seems they cannot live in society normally," she told BBC Radio 5 live.
"I feel I am doing the life sentence, not him," she said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23230419#