Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unsafe convictions lobby groups in modern UK murder cases

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    To be honest I could just keep posting this stuff and it would bore everyone to death. All I’ll say is that like many on here I’ve read about many a potential miscarriage of justice but I’ve never, ever seen anything that comes close to this one. So many documented lies and mistakes. So many important documents and reports lost and evidence illegally destroyed. So much withheld at the time of the trial. How could it be said that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt? It’s page after page of jaw dropping stuff and it’s not imaginary. It’s documented stuff. I know this might wind some people up (let’s face it it’s not the first time for me) but I think that one one should march up to Bamber’s cell door with a key, open it up and say “off you go Jeremy.” 35 years in prison on that evidence.
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 06-17-2021, 04:20 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    “3. Burn marks to Nevill Bamber’s back. The judge said in his summing up that it was “a fact” that the moderator was on the rifle in the kitchen. New evidence from Dr Caruso, a leading burns specialist, confirms that Nevill’s burn injuries were made by the end of the rifle’s barrel. They were not made by the end of the moderator. Forensic tests and experiments have been carried out by ballistic expert Mr Philip Boyce which has confirmed the conclusions of Dr Caruso. Scientific evidence from five credible experts makes it very unlikely that the moderator was on the rifle during this tragic incident. Evidence strongly suggests that Nevill was burnt with the end of the rifle’s barrel either after death or when he was completely incapacitated. In 2011, the defence discovered that Essex Police had instructed Mr Fletcher (pre-trial) to test whether the burns to Nevill’s back were caused by the end of the rifle’s barrel or the end of the moderator. It was suggested that he used pig skin for these experiments. The results from Mr Fletcher’s tests have never been disclosed.

    Does anyone really believe that the Police would have withheld Fletcher’s test results if it backed up there version of events?

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    It just keeps on piling up.

    “2. New forensic evidence from American expert Dr Fowler, (confirmed by two peer reviewers) found that the fatal gun shot wound to Sheila’s neck was a contact wound. This wound was caused when the end of the rifle’s barrel was in contact with her skin, and not caused by the end of the moderator as the court was told. Dr Fowler’s evidence has been confirmed through experimentation by ballistics expert Mr Philip Boyce. The CCRC reject this evidence from four credible experts stating that their conclusions are “speculation” and incapable of forming a ground of appeal.”

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    On the reliable ‘witness’ Julie Mugford. From the eBook - Why Jeremy Is Innocent.

    I’ve already posted this but…

    “[3] In her 17th December 1985 statement, she states that by the 1st September she had said about Jeremy: “I would really love to hurt him and told him that I tried to stab the teddy bear that he had given me as a present.” Julie goes on to state that during that night, “We didn’t sleep well and at one point I got a pillow and put it over his head, I took it off and he asked me why I did it, and I said if he were dead he would always be with me.”

    ….

    “By the 4th September 1985, the reality of the relationship ending had become all too real for Julie when she discovered Jeremy talking on the phone to another woman called Virginia, with whom he had planned to start a relationship. He was making arrangements to meet her and Julie was furious. Julie had realised that her relationship with Jeremy was over and smashed a mirror by throwing an ornament at it in a fit of rage. She then physically attacked Jeremy.”

    ……

    “On the 8th September, Julie attended Witham police station after Stan Jones had ensured she was “reported for process.” She was charged with burglary, as detailed by Mr Adams of the DPP. The charge was then curiously withdrawn on the 5th December 1985. Adams said in a handwritten addendum: “I also agree the burglary charge can be withdrawn.”

    - the obvious suggestion was that the charges might have been dropped in exchange for her statement against Bamber.

    ​​​​​​…..

    “Back in 1991, the City of London Police had investigated Essex Police, and they detailed a list of crimes which Julie had confessed to carrying out undetected. These included taking cannabis, selling cannabis, accessory to burglary at the caravan park, smuggling drugs back into the UK from Canada and cheque book fraud. [11] Julie Mugford was never charged with any of these offences officially, but newly surfaced documents show that she was charged with burglary, and this was withdrawn with permission from the DPP’s office. In the same document, Julie is also advised she will be called as a prosecution witness. At the 2002 appeal, the Defence put forward the suggestion that Julie Mugford and her friend and co-fraudster Susan Battersby had been given immunity from prosecution as a trade off for Julie’s testimony against Jeremy Bamber, but the documents relating to this were under Public Interest Immunity.”

    ……

    She claimed that Jeremy told he that the hit man had told him that he’d hot Nevill 7 times. But this was what was mistakenly reported in the Press. Nevill had been shot 8 times.

    Her story changed, the time of Jeremy’s call to her changed, she named a hit man who was categorically exonerated. And let’s remember this was a woman (and a trainee teacher) who continued to live and sleep with Bamber after she was allegedly fully aware that he’d slaughtered an entire family including 2 young children.​​​​​……

    Not forgetting the 25,000 she was payed by the News Of The World from which she bought an apartment. She was waiting in a hotel room for this when the verdict came in. The contract she signed conveniently cannot be found. If she’d have signed it before the verdict she’d have been in contempt of court.


    Good witness……….
    Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 06-17-2021, 04:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    Hi Herlock,

    The problem I've always had with cases like this, when there is a 'Sheila' in the picture, as you describe her here, is that it is all too easy to assume she must have done it, when her obvious problems also made it very convenient for someone else, whose behaviour was outwardly 'normal' comparatively, who may have secretly wanted his family out of the way, for reasons of greed, resentment, hatred, revenge or whatever. If Bamber had any such 'issues' with his family, Sheila gifted him a way of killing two birds with one stone. If the nutter is naturally assumed to have killed everyone, followed by herself, and the job is executed well enough, Bamber will be left alone with his grief - or his crocodile tears.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    Hello Caz,

    I certainly wouldn’t dispute that. Sheila can certainly be said to have ticked all of the boxes but from my own point of view and from reading though the evidence in the book I really think that it’s worth mentioning the true extent of her illness. The fact that it looks like she had actually harmed her children and had even mentioned killing them. Also her strained relations with her mother might be important along with the fact that her anxieties and issues appeared to increase during and after a visit to her parents and that there was a very specific argument at the time concerning her children.

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    There’s no way of identifying the voice on the phone as the tapes of the calls are ‘missing.’ Originally the Police had said that they were destroyed but there’s evidence that copies were made.

    I can’t see any reason to eliminate the possibility of a third party Caz unless the question is dealt with later in the book satisfactorily. I still find it difficult to dismiss - schizophrenic / recently released/ reduced meds/ cannabis use/ family argument that night/ history of volatility and violence/ husband concerned about her…etc.
    Hi Herlock,

    The problem I've always had with cases like this, when there is a 'Sheila' in the picture, as you describe her here, is that it is all too easy to assume she must have done it, when her obvious problems also made it very convenient for someone else, whose behaviour was outwardly 'normal' comparatively, who may have secretly wanted his family out of the way, for reasons of greed, resentment, hatred, revenge or whatever. If Bamber had any such 'issues' with his family, Sheila gifted him a way of killing two birds with one stone. If the nutter is naturally assumed to have killed everyone, followed by herself, and the job is executed well enough, Bamber will be left alone with his grief - or his crocodile tears.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    Last edited by caz; 06-17-2021, 01:03 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • caz
    replied
    Originally posted by Yabs View Post

    Hi Caz.

    Out of interest i’ve checked the listings for Bambers choice of viewing for the evening of the 6th of August, going into the early hours of the 7th.
    Bear in mind that there were only four channels in 1985 and tv shut down not long after midnight.

    On ITV the last show of the evening was a repeat of the detective show Travelling Man starting at 11:30 for an hour.

    On CH4 was Ready Steady Go- finishing just after Midnight.

    BBC1’s last programme was ‘Recovery, followed by The Weather at 11:35

    And BBC2 had highlights of the day’s cricket, starting at 11:45.
    Very thorough detective work, Yabs! Thank you.

    Love,

    Caz
    X

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Ok I lied. This is my last post of the evening. This is the witness that basically got Bamber convicted. Why wouldn’t anyone believe her?

    “In her 17th December 1985 statement, she states that by the 1st September she had said about Jeremy: “I would really love to hurt him and told him that I tried to stab the teddy bear that he had given me as a present.” Julie goes on to state that during that night, “We didn’t sleep well and at one point I got a pillow and put it over his head, I took it off and he asked me why I did it, and I said if he were dead he would always be with me.”

    I wouldn’t have asked her the time never mind trusted her evidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post

    well the polices first preferred version of events were that sheila did it, but changed as new evidence came in. so they might have been confused and somewhat inept, perhaps even lied to cover up mistakes, but of actually committing some sort of conspiracy/ cover up goes a little too far imho.

    and its a little too conveniant for me that the only one who was still alive was the one who profitted the most from the murders including hers, and then went on to enjoy the fruits of the murders. his behavior before of targeting his dad and staging it and then afterward profitting in their deaths point to him as being guilty as sin in my eyes. the police and court got it right in the end. theres no mystery in this one for me.
    The new evidence was from Bamber’s jilted girlfriend who initially told a story about a hitman then changed it. And remember if we judge Bamber down for breaking into the caravan park then we should judge her down too as she was involved. When the verdict came in she was in a posh hotel room paid for by the News Of The World waiting for a big pay out for her story.

    He wasn’t the only person to profit Abby, the family members who mysteriously found the silencer (which appears to be a red herring anyway) also stood to benefit hugely. One of them even ended up living at the farm.

    I think that this might be the biggest miscarriage of justice in the history of the British Justice system.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Just a final post of the evening on Sheila. We know that Bamber had zero history of violence and absolutely no psychopathic traits after a huge amount of testing. It’s also worth stating that he and his team fought to get a Lie Detector test which he finally got a passed easily.

    So can we have confidence that Sheila wouldn’t have harmed her children and her family and yet Bamber would?

    “Sheila’s contact with social services can only be traced back in documents as far as the 1st of August 1981. There were concerns by social workers at this point about her ability to seek medical advice promptly when the twins were ill, and there are references to Daniel sustaining scalds and a burn to parts of his body, including his torso and face, and having an ear infection that had been left unattended.”

    ……

    “The next conference on file was during March 1982 where it is stated that the children were being fostered by day foster parents. This is contrary to what the relatives had told police, although there are no notes as to the specific reason for fostering, and again there are no details as to why Sheila was admitted twice to hospital up until this point.”

    …..

    “On the 4th May 1983, Nicholas sustained a head injury which was caused, “it was thought by him falling from a taxi.” [10] The police were involved and confirmed this had happened. Sue Ford, then girlfriend of Jeremy Bamber, stated that Jeremy had told her that Nicholas had been injured when Sheila had pushed [Nicholas] from the taxi. Sue Ford also details in her statements that Farhad “Freddie” Emami had told her that Sheila used to punch the boys in the face, and that Jeremy was concerned that Sheila was unable to cope and had expressed a wish to help look after the children,”

    …..

    “Sheila Caffell was then referred to a private psychologist at St Andrews Hospital in Northampton during August 1983. Dr Hugh Ferguson stated that this was the first time he had seen her and diagnosed her “as in a state of acute psychosis.

    …..

    “The Bamber family, like many others, suffered in silence with little knowledge and understanding. Because of Doctor-Patient confidentiality, Nevill, June and Jeremy (and social services) had no idea that Sheila had thoughts about harming herself or of harming her children - but these thoughts were very real and are documented.”

    …..

    “Sheila had met Freddie, a mature 41 year old, back in 1981. Although he is often described as Sheila’s boyfriend, Freddie was married and called himself Sheila’s confidant and friend to whom she turned to for help and advice. Freddie said that Sheila had a “deep dislike” for her mother, June. [13] He described Sheila as having “a very quick and violent temper which she would lose over the simplest things.”

    ….

    “Whenever she returned from staying at White House Farm, she would be even more depressed because of June preaching to her about her lifestyle. Colin Caffell also said that Sheila had a quick temper and that Sheila’s condition always deteriorated rapidly after visiting her parents.”

    ….

    “During the call the phone went dead. Sheila suddenly became hysterical, mumbling about the phone being bugged. She became like someone possessed ranting and raving. She was striking herself and beating the wall with her fists. I tried to calm her but she did not seem to hear me. I became extremely frightened not only for her but for myself. She kept talking about the Devil and God and stated that God was sitting opposite her and, unlike what her step mother said, he in fact loved her.“

    ….

    “Whilst the first doctor was there Tara’s husband called to collect his daughter who was staying with Sheila. I had arranged for this as I felt something nasty might happen. I was extremely scared for everyone’s safety. At that time I felt that Sheila may use violence towards someone.”

    ….

    “Dr Ferguson had first diagnosed acute psychosis and later confirmed Schizophrenia. He described her as “a difficult patient to treat but once on medication and mending well became a completely different person.” Dr Ferguson also said that he was not happy about her leaving the hospital so soon and felt she needed follow up visits from a psychiatric nurse.”

    …..

    “In his statement of the 8th August 1985, he describes her treatment at St Andrews during 1983: “I found that Sheila had bizarre delusions about possession by the Devil and complex ideas about having sex with her twin sons. She thought the sons would seduce her and saw evil in both of them. In particular she thought Nicholas (her own son) was a woman hater and potential murderer. These feelings expressed were clear symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.”

    ….

    “I have been shown and have read the statement made by Helen Grimster in which Sheila is described on 30th March as having been “very strange,” talking of having contemplated suicide on more than one occasion and of her belief that she was a white witch and had to get rid of evil in the world.“

    ….

    “By 2002, Dr Ferguson had made a statement to the Defence, which included the issue of a letter written by Colin Caffell to Nevill Bamber prior to the tragedies in which he presented the scenario that he take over care of the children. Dr Ferguson said that if Nevill had pleaded Colin Caffell’s case to Sheila, this may have had a catastrophic effect, and that she “may have projected on her father a concept of evil.” Dr Ferguson also told the trial that Sheila had told him that she was afraid she would murder her children.

    …..

    And finally, a sum up paragraph:

    “Tragically, mentally ill women do kill their children and their families, and it has become more prevalent over the last three decades, particularly in the United States where a large portion of citizens own guns. This is a large area of research which I won’t develop any further here. Moreover, there are recent cases of mothers killing their children in the news in the UK, including mentally ill Sonia Bellfield, 29, who stabbed her two year old toddler to death having been seen two days previously by social workers. Paranoid schizophrenic Aisling Murray, 23, stabbed her daughter 52 times. In this case it was believed that Social Services were under-resourced and her social worker was inadequately supervised. 29-year-old Vivian Gamor killed her children in a psychotic episode and also had delusions about religion very similar to Sheila. Vivian thought that Jesus was her twin, but Social Services had granted her unsupervised access to her children when she killed them. It is apparent in all cases, including that of Sheila Caffell, that Social Services inadequately assessed the risk that these women posed to their children.”

    ……

    It’s one of the things that I find difficult about the case. We have no problem believing that Jeremy Bamber did this horrific act for money despite the fact that he had no history of violence and had no psychopathy although he gave the appearance of being a bit arrogant and had once broken in to a caravan park (also there was zero forensic evidence to connect him to the crime) and yet we think it unbelievable or even worse, reprehensible, that this very deeply disturbed young woman might indeed have done it. Deeply disturbed would be exactly how I’d describe the perpetrator of this crime.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    There’s way to much against that verdict for me. The police have been proven to have lied and lied. They illegally destroyed evidence. They withheld evidence that pointed away from their preferred version of events and look at those that provided evidence against him. A girlfriend that he split with and who completely made up a story about a hit man then changed her mind. And family members who stood to profit big-time from Bamber’s imprisonment mysteriously found a silencer that the police somehow missed.

    It’s difficult to see how breaking into a caravan park justifies spending the rest of your life in prison. Especially when there’s real evidence that Shiela had previously harmed her own children.
    well the polices first preferred version of events were that sheila did it, but changed as new evidence came in. so they might have been confused and somewhat inept, perhaps even lied to cover up mistakes, but of actually committing some sort of conspiracy/ cover up goes a little too far imho.

    and its a little too conveniant for me that the only one who was still alive was the one who profitted the most from the murders including hers, and then went on to enjoy the fruits of the murders. his behavior before of targeting his dad and staging it and then afterward profitting in their deaths point to him as being guilty as sin in my eyes. the police and court got it right in the end. theres no mystery in this one for me.
    Last edited by Abby Normal; 06-16-2021, 09:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Abby Normal View Post
    the son did it and framed his sister. its pretty obvious
    but even the slim chance she did it, who cares. what an effed up family, and he deserves prison for his behavior anyway. probably saving future people from his BS. I have zero sympathy for criminals whos crimes hurt other people-violent or other. ef him

    he earlier had broken into his dads other property and stole and made it look like a random burglary. he did it.
    There’s way to much against that verdict for me. The police have been proven to have lied and lied. They illegally destroyed evidence. They withheld evidence that pointed away from their preferred version of events and look at those that provided evidence against him. A girlfriend that he split with and who completely made up a story about a hit man then changed her mind. And family members who stood to profit big-time from Bamber’s imprisonment mysteriously found a silencer that the police somehow missed.

    It’s difficult to see how breaking into a caravan park justifies spending the rest of your life in prison. Especially when there’s real evidence that Shiela had previously harmed her own children.

    Leave a comment:


  • Yabs
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post

    I’ve always felt there was something very wrong with Bamber, psychologically, and his recall of what was on tv only makes him seem more cold and calculating to me.
    X
    Hi Caz.

    Out of interest i’ve checked the listings for Bambers choice of viewing for the evening of the 6th of August, going into the early hours of the 7th.
    Bear in mind that there were only four channels in 1985 and tv shut down not long after midnight.

    On ITV the last show of the evening was a repeat of the detective show Travelling Man starting at 11:30 for an hour.

    On CH4 was Ready Steady Go- finishing just after Midnight.

    BBC1’s last programme was ‘Recovery, followed by The Weather at 11:35

    And BBC2 had highlights of the day’s cricket, starting at 11:45.

    Leave a comment:


  • Abby Normal
    replied
    the son did it and framed his sister. its pretty obvious
    but even the slim chance she did it, who cares. what an effed up family, and he deserves prison for his behavior anyway. probably saving future people from his BS. I have zero sympathy for criminals whos crimes hurt other people-violent or other. ef him

    he earlier had broken into his dads other property and stole and made it look like a random burglary. he did it.
    Last edited by Abby Normal; 06-16-2021, 08:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by caz View Post
    If this was all arranged by Bamber, could he not have got the killer to call him from the house, pretending to be Nevill putting the blame on Sheila? He'd know that the police would check any calls made. Could it have been established that the voice was definitely Nevill's? Or was it a process of elimination?

    If a third party could have been involved, it might open up some fresh possibilities to explain the order of events.

    Love,

    Caz
    X
    There’s no way of identifying the voice on the phone as the tapes of the calls are ‘missing.’ Originally the Police had said that they were destroyed but there’s evidence that copies were made.

    I can’t see any reason to eliminate the possibility of a third party Caz unless the question is dealt with later in the book satisfactorily. I still find it difficult to dismiss - schizophrenic / recently released/ reduced meds/ cannabis use/ family argument that night/ history of volatility and violence/ husband concerned about her…etc.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X