White House Farm murders - ITV series
Discussion
Welshbeef said:
youngsyr said:
But due to nature of the killings, either Jeremy did it or Sheila did.
There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
How can you say that. There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
There is no cast iron proof just circumstantial.
There is a possibility someone else did it - though chances are slim but it’s not a binary situation
Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
I think you could put up an argument against all youngesy points except the phone call. That’s where it falls apart.
Flumpo said:
The problem is it is binary, as in my other post, if ASKED as bambers defence team I would come up with a defence. But the hardest bit would be the phone call from Neville to Jeremy. I can’t think of any explanation to explain it away.
Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If OJJ juice Simpson can get away with Nicole Brown and (sorry I forget the mans name) milling this case with similar similar levels of actual evidence and less circumstantial/background evidence (the 911 call Nicole Brown/Simpson made with OJ kicking the door down screaming like a madman). Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If he can get off Jeremy should never have been convicted. Unless OJ was a miscarriage of justice
Welshbeef said:
Flumpo said:
The problem is it is binary, as in my other post, if ASKED as bambers defence team I would come up with a defence. But the hardest bit would be the phone call from Neville to Jeremy. I can’t think of any explanation to explain it away.
Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If OJJ juice Simpson can get away with Nicole Brown and (sorry I forget the mans name) milling this case with similar similar levels of actual evidence and less circumstantial/background evidence (the 911 call Nicole Brown/Simpson made with OJ kicking the door down screaming like a madman). Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If he can get off Jeremy should never have been convicted. Unless OJ was a miscarriage of justice
But if you really want to compare it to that (which I don’t) then if the glove don’t fit you must acquit, in this case. Is if the phone call wasn’t made bambers A guilty little toe rag, mental, disgusting, scum bag.
Neville could not have made the call.
There is no fact that the Neville to Bamber call took place only Jeremy claiming it. Is that true or phone records?
The Jeremy call to the local police station is a matter of fact - but is it known if this was made from the farm or his house? Do phone records show that or is it an assumption he was at home fo make the call.
The Jeremy call to the local police station is a matter of fact - but is it known if this was made from the farm or his house? Do phone records show that or is it an assumption he was at home fo make the call.
Welshbeef said:
There is no fact that the Neville to Bamber call took place only Jeremy claiming it. Is that true or phone records?
The Jeremy call to the local police station is a matter of fact - but is it known if this was made from the farm or his house? Do phone records show that or is it an assumption he was at home fo make the call.
I believe, Bt phoned the farm house and confirmed the phone was off the hook, the operator could hear a dog barking.The Jeremy call to the local police station is a matter of fact - but is it known if this was made from the farm or his house? Do phone records show that or is it an assumption he was at home fo make the call.
Other than bambers account there is no proof a phone call was made from the farm to bambers cottage.
I think it is believed the call to the police was from bambers cottage. As originally he had demanded they pick him up there and was annoyed they wouldn’t.
Welshbeef said:
youngsyr said:
But due to nature of the killings, either Jeremy did it or Sheila did.
There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
How can you say that. There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
There is no cast iron proof just circumstantial.
There is a possibility someone else did it - though chances are slim but it’s not a binary situation
Before DNA, and other scientific evidence that has come to the fore over recent years, all evidence was circumstantial, with the exception of fingerprints and vague blood typing.DNA evidence is great, although not without its problems in the way it is presented to the court.
I'm not sure what you mean by cast iron proof. The requirement is for it to be beyond a reasonable doubt.
Read up on circumstantial evidence and you will see there's absolutely no reason to prefix circumstantial with just.
Welshbeef said:
Flumpo said:
The problem is it is binary, as in my other post, if ASKED as bambers defence team I would come up with a defence. But the hardest bit would be the phone call from Neville to Jeremy. I can’t think of any explanation to explain it away.
Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If OJJ juice Simpson can get away with Nicole Brown and (sorry I forget the mans name) milling this case with similar similar levels of actual evidence and less circumstantial/background evidence (the 911 call Nicole Brown/Simpson made with OJ kicking the door down screaming like a madman). Either the phone call never happened and Jeremy made it up, or the phone call did happen and Sheila did it.
But the evidence is overwhelming that Neville could not have made the phone call to Jeremy.
What is it that convinces you the phone call from Neville to Jeremy took place?
If he can get off Jeremy should never have been convicted. Unless OJ was a miscarriage of justice
Essentially the black community in LA had been subject to severe discrimination by the police and courts in LA for decades leading up to the trial and the resentment had been building to the point of riots in the immediate run up. The jury was majority black and saw OJ's trial as a very public way to voice their anger at the judicial system. One of the jurors literally gave a Black Power salute as he left the jury box! Another stated she would never have found OJ guilty, regardless of the evidence!
ETA: The male victim's name was Ron Goldman.
Edited by youngsyr on Thursday 20th February 09:02
Welshbeef said:
youngsyr said:
But due to nature of the killings, either Jeremy did it or Sheila did.
There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
How can you say that. There's no possibility that a 3rd person did.
So, any evidence that Sheila didn't do it is by default evidence that Jeremy did.
There is no cast iron proof just circumstantial.
There is a possibility someone else did it - though chances are slim but it’s not a binary situation
There is absolutely no evidence, anywhere, that anyone else was involved (i.e. no evidence to support your claim).
There is evidence that no-one else and only those two could have done it (i.e. evidence that supports that no-one else was involved).
Sure, aliens could have teleported in, carried out the murders, brainwashed Jeremy to make the call(s?) and carry out all the suspicious behaviour after the fact. That is a possibility. I cannot prove it didn't happen. BUT, there's no evidence it did happen either, so based on the evidence, we can reasonably ignore it.
Flumpo said:
For me I’m convinced he did it. That’s fine.
I can’t fathom what happened or how to Sheila. I’m starting to think she was drugged.
Has that ever been mentioned anywhere?
It also seems part of the girlfriend’s evidence was that she got prescription tranquillisers on bambers request in order to kill his family. She said he tested them on himself.
Just coming back to what happened to Sheila, it's very possible that she was already suicidal and it took relatively little convincing for her to decide to just give in and comply with Jeremy, especially if she knew he'd killed her boy or he threatened to do so, IMO.I can’t fathom what happened or how to Sheila. I’m starting to think she was drugged.
Has that ever been mentioned anywhere?
It also seems part of the girlfriend’s evidence was that she got prescription tranquillisers on bambers request in order to kill his family. She said he tested them on himself.
She had long term significant mental health issues, was variously described by friends as vulnerable, unhappy and easily led. She was generally accepted as not capable of looking after her own children, whom she variously adored, but in her psychotic moments considered possibly being made contaminated and possessed by the evil within her.
On top of that, she was extremely unhappy with her anti-psychotic drugs and had begged her ex-husband to speak to her parents (who were essentially deciding on her treatment) about changing them as she had tried and failed and was exasperated about the situation. Her ex agreed to do so on the way to the farm that day, but then decided not to bring the issue up. He described Shiela's expression as he left as something like being "very depressed".
The drugs themselves made her very "spaced out" and disconnected from reality. She had recently attended a dinner party and spent most of it staring into space.
Anyway, my point is, she wasn't in a position to fight against Jeremy and could easily have been manipulated, IMO.
Welshbeef said:
Tyre Smoke said:
I really wish Welshbeef would do a minimal amount of reading before asking his questions. The answers are readily available on even just Wikipedia.
But Wikipedia is editable by Joe Bloggs and not a source of utter factual truth (I could edit it / add to it). Every statement of fact on Wikipedia should be backed up by a source, which is linked to that statement in a footnote.
The idea being that anyone can fact check Wikipedia. So, yes, you could edit it, but your edit would very easily be shown to be unsubstantiated and would be flagged for removal.
Go ahead and try it, if you don't believe me...
Bottom line, Wikipedia shouldn't be dismissed out of hand as unreliable.
Off Topic - when I came across an interesting story about an English racing driver from the 50s who ended up living in a cave in Spain I edited his entry in Wikipedia. Within a day I had a very amiable email from someone at Wikipedia saying my entry had been removed as the information was heresay. It was true; I have a letter from another racing driver relating the story after he had spoken to the chap's ex-wife. Much as I would have liked the story to stand, it is an anecdote and Wikipedia were right to exclude it. A journalist might include it prefaced with, "It is understood that..."
DickyC said:
Off Topic - when I came across an interesting story about an English racing driver from the 50s who ended up living in a cave in Spain I edited his entry in Wikipedia. Within a day I had a very amiable email from someone at Wikipedia saying my entry had been removed as the information was heresay. It was true; I have a letter from another racing driver relating the story after he had spoken to the chap's ex-wife. Much as I would have liked the story to stand, it is an anecdote and Wikipedia were right to exclude it. A journalist might include it prefaced with, "It is understood that..."
On the off-topic, I have quite a library of history books. While I taken a lot of my read books on other subjects to a local charity, I can't bring myself to part with history books I've enjoyed and which have entertained and enlightened me. However, the older the book, the more likely it is that the content has been challenged and proved incorrect. Some books have an added frisson for being wrong from start to finish. The problem with history books is that there is no system for updating.
Further, I'd love to hear this story of the racing driver living in a cave. Any chance?
Ok, Welshbeef, if you won't accept Wiki, at least do a bit of research. In fact, regarding your phone records post, just a page ago on this thread it stated that BT didn't log local calls back then. You were even posting in and around that very post.
It's very annoying having to read you questioning something from only a few posts ago that was shown to be false/fact, etc.
It's very annoying having to read you questioning something from only a few posts ago that was shown to be false/fact, etc.
Unprecedented Levels of Off Topic:
My point in mentioning the story was to speak up for Wikipedia and their level headed judgement of contributions. As I am unable to prove the story, Wikipedia felt they were unable to include it.
Derek Smith said:
Further, I'd love to hear this story of the racing driver living in a cave. Any chance?
It was Lance Macklin. The story was told to me in a letter from Eric Thompson who knew both Macklin and his wife. Eric Thompson was a gentleman racer who was not only a contemporary of but I'm fairly sure also a team mate of Macklin at some time. But that's the story, Macklin, old Etonian racing driver caught up in the crash at Le Mans in 1955 who moved to Spain and became a recluse and, if his ex-wife is to be believed, lived for a while in a cave. I can't put my hand on Eric's letter, but when I find it I'll quote from it.My point in mentioning the story was to speak up for Wikipedia and their level headed judgement of contributions. As I am unable to prove the story, Wikipedia felt they were unable to include it.
DickyC said:
It was Lance Macklin. The story was told to me in a letter from Eric Thompson who knew both Macklin and his wife. Eric Thompson was a gentleman racer who was not only a contemporary of but I'm fairly sure also a team mate of Macklin at some time. But that's the story, Macklin, old Etonian racing driver caught up in the crash at Le Mans in 1955 who moved to Spain and became a recluse and, if his ex-wife is to be believed, lived for a while in a cave. I can't put my hand on Eric's letter, but when I find it I'll quote from it.
My point in mentioning the story was to speak up for Wikipedia and their level headed judgement of contributions. As I am unable to prove the story, Wikipedia felt they were unable to include it.
https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/july-2008/78/cowboy-sailor-racerMy point in mentioning the story was to speak up for Wikipedia and their level headed judgement of contributions. As I am unable to prove the story, Wikipedia felt they were unable to include it.
Quote
Lance then went to live in Spain where he built himself an underground house, which he described to Thompson as ‘a cave’. With his usual inventiveness Lance added a heating system using waste heat and solar, as well as a wind generator. He and Gill remained friends and she and Perry visited him in Spain. When his health deteriorated he was brought back to England by his daughter Miranda and lived his final days in a Kent nursing home. He died in August 2002 and is buried in the riverside churchyard at Bisham.
End quote
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff