White House Farm murders - ITV series
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
I followed this case at the time and it was fascinating. I knew a few Essex officers and was at courses in Chelmsford in the middle/late 80s, around the time of the trial and the criticisms. It was a matter of some embarrassment to the officers in the force and, one would hope, to the force itself. On one course, there was a defrocked detective sergeant (DS) who had just got his rank back and he had some strong opinions on the enquiry.
Essex, at that time, was very progressive in many ways. Their traffic department was highly professional, with high standards for their training. Their firearms unit was seen, at least in the early 80s, as the class of the home counties. They ran a lot of training courses at Chelmsford that were well regarded (and didn’t they like to tell you all about them).
The scene evidence was corrupted. This was unforgiveable. Rumours abounded that there was pressure brought on the senior investigating officer (SIO) to clear the matter up as discretely as possible. It was a possibility, but even so, there’s discrete and there’s sleeving.
I watched the first episode of the six of the ITV series last night. Some things stood out for me.
It was of vary high production quality, with a very good script (so far, it can be difficult to keep up as the plot and character develop), great acting and the locations were spot on. The twins were good.
The first discordant bit was the hardened, old style, do-it-his-way DS against the SIO. It was hardly breaking the mould. That said, I doubt there’s a bobby in the world who can’t put a name to the detective constable (DC) who just sort of hangs around awaiting being pointed somewhere.
The casual nature of actions at the scene seem to me to be all but impossible. Mistakes were made, any number of them, but the type and frequency seemed well over the top. The SIO was experienced and would have done things better, even if he was trying to deal with the matter speedily (unknown if true of course). If it had been the daughter who’d gone on a rampage, then the coroner would have wanted evidence of it at his hearing.
I’m not sure any female police officer would give multiple death messages to the NoK on a doorstep. Whilst the scene was highly emotional, and great TV, it would not have happened. In any case, if they were going to collapse, my experience is that they do it before you’ve said anything.
I get the feeling that I can predict the nature of the rest of the series, with the DS valiantly battling corporate indifference.
At the time, and certainly since, I’ve been convinced of Bramber’s guilt. Firstly, the jury found him so, albeit with a majority, helpfully explained on Wiki as: 10:2, only one more person to say not guilty and he’d be free. Secondly, there was lots of evidence to support the method he used.
Thirdly, and both unreasonably and illogically, the nature of those who call for his release because he’s obviously innocent. Pretty boy Galloway for one. The PR released by the defence team has been pretty crude at times.
A poor showing by Essex, for which they were heavily criticised, and quite rightly. The progress of such a major incident should have been supervised closely. However, they got their man in the end.
I’m looking forward to the next and subsequent episodes with interest.
Originals username - read the above it’s the original post. Essex, at that time, was very progressive in many ways. Their traffic department was highly professional, with high standards for their training. Their firearms unit was seen, at least in the early 80s, as the class of the home counties. They ran a lot of training courses at Chelmsford that were well regarded (and didn’t they like to tell you all about them).
The scene evidence was corrupted. This was unforgiveable. Rumours abounded that there was pressure brought on the senior investigating officer (SIO) to clear the matter up as discretely as possible. It was a possibility, but even so, there’s discrete and there’s sleeving.
I watched the first episode of the six of the ITV series last night. Some things stood out for me.
It was of vary high production quality, with a very good script (so far, it can be difficult to keep up as the plot and character develop), great acting and the locations were spot on. The twins were good.
The first discordant bit was the hardened, old style, do-it-his-way DS against the SIO. It was hardly breaking the mould. That said, I doubt there’s a bobby in the world who can’t put a name to the detective constable (DC) who just sort of hangs around awaiting being pointed somewhere.
The casual nature of actions at the scene seem to me to be all but impossible. Mistakes were made, any number of them, but the type and frequency seemed well over the top. The SIO was experienced and would have done things better, even if he was trying to deal with the matter speedily (unknown if true of course). If it had been the daughter who’d gone on a rampage, then the coroner would have wanted evidence of it at his hearing.
I’m not sure any female police officer would give multiple death messages to the NoK on a doorstep. Whilst the scene was highly emotional, and great TV, it would not have happened. In any case, if they were going to collapse, my experience is that they do it before you’ve said anything.
I get the feeling that I can predict the nature of the rest of the series, with the DS valiantly battling corporate indifference.
At the time, and certainly since, I’ve been convinced of Bramber’s guilt. Firstly, the jury found him so, albeit with a majority, helpfully explained on Wiki as: 10:2, only one more person to say not guilty and he’d be free. Secondly, there was lots of evidence to support the method he used.
Thirdly, and both unreasonably and illogically, the nature of those who call for his release because he’s obviously innocent. Pretty boy Galloway for one. The PR released by the defence team has been pretty crude at times.
A poor showing by Essex, for which they were heavily criticised, and quite rightly. The progress of such a major incident should have been supervised closely. However, they got their man in the end.
I’m looking forward to the next and subsequent episodes with interest.
Go watch the documentary job done.
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
She was suffering from serious mental health issues Bi polar too & it’s a point of fact in the days running up to the murders she was having an “event”. She was out of control. Sadly these days we see far too often killers who have serious mental health. Could she be another ? Maybe.
Please provide a source for this.It aired on ITV a number of years ago /cannot recall when.
How do you expect to be taken seriously if you can't even get that right?
You should read the appeal summary, where there is no mention at all of her "having an event", whatever that means.
In fact, farm workers etc say she was fine and in good spirits.
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
She was suffering from serious mental health issues Bi polar too & it’s a point of fact in the days running up to the murders she was having an “event”. She was out of control. Sadly these days we see far too often killers who have serious mental health. Could she be another ? Maybe.
Please provide a source for this.It aired on ITV a number of years ago /cannot recall when.
How do you expect to be taken seriously if you can't even get that right?
You should read the appeal summary, where there is no mention at all of her "having an event", whatever that means.
In fact, farm workers etc say she was fine and in good spirits.
This whole thread only exists due to the drama.
You didn’t know …. Oh dear.
If that is true re the sister - it’s a shame they are not sueing ITV as it shows her in a very different light.
I suggest you watch it. Then come back
Also watch the The Valkey murders about
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=6....
They have a forum with a wealth of information about this interesting case.
Bamber did it is the overwhelming opinion on a site dedicated to miscarriages of justice.
They have a forum with a wealth of information about this interesting case.
Bamber did it is the overwhelming opinion on a site dedicated to miscarriages of justice.
https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/sad-lif...
This is worth a quick read chives more background about her struggles.
The very difficult relationship she had with her foster mother
This is worth a quick read chives more background about her struggles.
The very difficult relationship she had with her foster mother
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
originals said:
Welshbeef said:
She was suffering from serious mental health issues Bi polar too & it’s a point of fact in the days running up to the murders she was having an “event”. She was out of control. Sadly these days we see far too often killers who have serious mental health. Could she be another ? Maybe.
Please provide a source for this.It aired on ITV a number of years ago /cannot recall when.
How do you expect to be taken seriously if you can't even get that right?
You should read the appeal summary, where there is no mention at all of her "having an event", whatever that means.
In fact, farm workers etc say she was fine and in good spirits.
This whole thread only exists due to the drama.
You didn’t know …. Oh dear.
Whereas you believed it to be a documentary.
This tells me all I need to know about your credibility on the subject.
And while you warn others not to make snide comments, you can't help be sarcastic yourself.
Hypocritical, no?
I'll remember not to engage with you in future.
originals said:
I knew full well, it was a drama.
Whereas you believed it to be a documentary.
This tells me all I need to know about your credibility on the subject.
And while you warn others not to make snide comments, you can't help be sarcastic yourself.
Hypocritical, no?
I'll remember not to engage with you in future.
https://www.sky.com/watch/title/series/88834c5f-a6ab-4ef3-9922-98f9cb4708b3/the-bambers-murder-at-the-farm-88834c5f-a6ab-4ef3-9922-98f9cb4708b3Whereas you believed it to be a documentary.
This tells me all I need to know about your credibility on the subject.
And while you warn others not to make snide comments, you can't help be sarcastic yourself.
Hypocritical, no?
I'll remember not to engage with you in future.
That’s a shame - oh well.
Above is a link to another documentary that was on at nearly the same time. Sorry appears I called one a drama the other a documentary.
Maybe you should retract
now clog and watch the documentary Welshbeef said:
https://www.sky.com/watch/title/series/88834c5f-a6...
That’s a shame - oh well.
Above is a link to another documentary that was on at nearly the same time. Sorry appears I called one a drama the other a documentary.
Maybe you should retract now clog and watch the documentary
You would argue with a stone wouldn’t you? You are the worst type of person. I would honestly rather go on holiday with Jeremy Bamber than meet you That’s a shame - oh well.
Above is a link to another documentary that was on at nearly the same time. Sorry appears I called one a drama the other a documentary.
Maybe you should retract
now clog and watch the documentary aponting389 said:
You would argue with a stone wouldn’t you? You are the worst type of person. I would honestly rather go on holiday with Jeremy Bamber than meet you
No one is arguing we are debating Clearly no one here has any skin in the game (unlike Brexit or Bojo or SKS or Indy Scot) threads.
However your post I feel very sad for you - but clearly you believe Bamber is innocent otherwise you bizarrely would rather go on a holiday with a brutal murderer and child killer vs a law abiding citizen….. doesn’t get more crazy than that. Social media at its most bizarre.
There’s another possible explanation for the murders, that both Sheila and Jeremy did it:
Sheila really did go berserk with a gun. But she failed to kill Neville, who although injured was able to call Jeremy.
Jeremy realises the opportunity, but needs to make sure Neville and everyone else is dead to secure his inheritance. He immediately goes to the farm, finds Neville injured, and finds Sheila dead or disarms her.
Jeremy has to finish off Neville and anyone else still alive, he then realises the Sheila silencer suicide problem so removes the silencer and puts it in the cupboard before cycling back to his house.
Would explain a lot of the apparently strange sequence of events.
Sheila really did go berserk with a gun. But she failed to kill Neville, who although injured was able to call Jeremy.
Jeremy realises the opportunity, but needs to make sure Neville and everyone else is dead to secure his inheritance. He immediately goes to the farm, finds Neville injured, and finds Sheila dead or disarms her.
Jeremy has to finish off Neville and anyone else still alive, he then realises the Sheila silencer suicide problem so removes the silencer and puts it in the cupboard before cycling back to his house.
Would explain a lot of the apparently strange sequence of events.
There's another possibility - that aliens came from the sky and did it.
Neville was happily watching TV with his feet up, when E.T burst through the door and wrestled with him.
Meanwhile, A.L.F. was upstairs taking care of the rest of the family.
Seriously, give it up.......It was Jeremy.
Neville was happily watching TV with his feet up, when E.T burst through the door and wrestled with him.
Meanwhile, A.L.F. was upstairs taking care of the rest of the family.
Seriously, give it up.......It was Jeremy.
Muzzer79 said:
There's another possibility - that aliens came from the sky and did it.
Neville was happily watching TV with his feet up, when E.T burst through the door and wrestled with him.
Meanwhile, A.L.F. was upstairs taking care of the rest of the family.
Seriously, give it up.......It was Jeremy.
The sole purpose of this thread is to debate the ITV series White House farm murders. Neville was happily watching TV with his feet up, when E.T burst through the door and wrestled with him.
Meanwhile, A.L.F. was upstairs taking care of the rest of the family.
Seriously, give it up.......It was Jeremy.
If you 100% think it’s Jeremy then clearly people posting any views opposing that are going to irk.
The drama and the Sky documentary raise interesting challenges.
The Welsh valley documentary also raises questions.
The previous documentary about the Kent murders which oddly this week Bellfiled kind of meets the challenges raised.
If you genuinely don’t like the debate then possibly don’t respond or read as it might infuriate your view. Everyone is entitled to their view but your farcical and mocking response about aliens says it all your now adding nothing / making out anyone who doesn’t have your view is a bit dim / you. Just be thick to think it’s not Jeremy (and you must therefore believe the 2 jurors who saw all the evidence and found him not guilty are also thick?)
Welshbeef said:
you must therefore believe the 2 jurors who saw all the evidence and found him not guilty are also thick?
2 of the jurors not finding him guilty is not an indication of his innocence. I have already provided another example of this, which you avoided.
There's plenty of bona-fide killers who have been convicted without a unanimous verdict.
The issue is that people like you are intent on finding 'evidence' of a miscarriage of justice by inventing wildly creative scenarios and explanations of events when you actually need to look at what happened and acknowledge that if it looks, smells and sounds like a duck....it's a duck.
Muzzer79 said:
2 of the jurors not finding him guilty is not an indication of his innocence.
I have already provided another example of this, which you avoided.
There's plenty of bona-fide killers who have been convicted without a unanimous verdict.
The issue is that people like you are intent on finding 'evidence' of a miscarriage of justice by inventing wildly creative scenarios and explanations of events when you actually need to look at what happened and acknowledge that if it looks, smells and sounds like a duck....it's a duck.
But as we know there have been many miscarriages of justice modern times and back in the day I have already provided another example of this, which you avoided.
There's plenty of bona-fide killers who have been convicted without a unanimous verdict.
The issue is that people like you are intent on finding 'evidence' of a miscarriage of justice by inventing wildly creative scenarios and explanations of events when you actually need to look at what happened and acknowledge that if it looks, smells and sounds like a duck....it's a duck.
What we know
1. No eye witness
2. No DNA
3. A seriously mentally I’ll depressed Bi Polar sister who per the sky documentary stated via its witnesses she was on a high
4. Devout Christian parents / foster parents
5. The mum called her Devil child - or something similar (maybe that’s why the children were presented in angelic prays like position - they were not shot instantaneously so 2 shots in each one would have woken up /moved)
6. Jeremy tried to rip off one of the businesses
7. Jeremy was bloody weird - doesn’t make him a killer just an odd sort
8. His behaviour after the deaths strange - but again doesn’t make someone guilty
9. Jilted X changing her story
10. Jilted x selling her sensational story to the media for mega dosh and then vanishing to a Canada / changing her name etc
11. Cousins (specifically 1 of them) happens on the silencer picks it up takes it home and then they ponder for a few days about what to do with it.
12. Cousins end up inheriting the whole farm cerching - especially as they stated they never liked Jeremy / he wasn’t a blood relative after all.
13. Botched police investigation / loss of evidence by burning it. Loving the bodies before SOCO had fully investigated
14. The two things that got Jeremy arrested was the Jilted X change of story and the cousins finding a silencer in the house after the police search. Both of the sources of that evidence had a vested interest though - the inheritance and the cash for her story / wrath of a jilted x
Or course he likely did it but there is plenty of uncertainties and it’s not possible to 100% say it was him. I guess in the minds of those who feel the conviction isn’t a safe one that 100% is way way down as the proof doesn’t merit it.
This will be debated forever / in our lifetimes. A bit like Possibly the ripper murders who really did it.
There is no malice at all in this thread nor should there be. There is nothing wrong with speculation. People can simply agree to disagree with their thoughts.
Welshbeef said:
Muzzer79 said:
2 of the jurors not finding him guilty is not an indication of his innocence.
I have already provided another example of this, which you avoided.
There's plenty of bona-fide killers who have been convicted without a unanimous verdict.
The issue is that people like you are intent on finding 'evidence' of a miscarriage of justice by inventing wildly creative scenarios and explanations of events when you actually need to look at what happened and acknowledge that if it looks, smells and sounds like a duck....it's a duck.
But as we know there have been many miscarriages of justice modern times and back in the day I have already provided another example of this, which you avoided.
There's plenty of bona-fide killers who have been convicted without a unanimous verdict.
The issue is that people like you are intent on finding 'evidence' of a miscarriage of justice by inventing wildly creative scenarios and explanations of events when you actually need to look at what happened and acknowledge that if it looks, smells and sounds like a duck....it's a duck.
What we know
1. No eye witness
2. No DNA
3. A seriously mentally I’ll depressed Bi Polar sister who per the sky documentary stated via its witnesses she was on a high
4. Devout Christian parents / foster parents
5. The mum called her Devil child - or something similar (maybe that’s why the children were presented in angelic prays like position - they were not shot instantaneously so 2 shots in each one would have woken up /moved)
6. Jeremy tried to rip off one of the businesses
7. Jeremy was bloody weird - doesn’t make him a killer just an odd sort
8. His behaviour after the deaths strange - but again doesn’t make someone guilty
9. Jilted X changing her story
10. Jilted x selling her sensational story to the media for mega dosh and then vanishing to a Canada / changing her name etc
11. Cousins (specifically 1 of them) happens on the silencer picks it up takes it home and then they ponder for a few days about what to do with it.
12. Cousins end up inheriting the whole farm cerching - especially as they stated they never liked Jeremy / he wasn’t a blood relative after all.
13. Botched police investigation / loss of evidence by burning it. Loving the bodies before SOCO had fully investigated
14. The two things that got Jeremy arrested was the Jilted X change of story and the cousins finding a silencer in the house after the police search. Both of the sources of that evidence had a vested interest though - the inheritance and the cash for her story / wrath of a jilted x
Or course he likely did it but there is plenty of uncertainties and it’s not possible to 100% say it was him. I guess in the minds of those who feel the conviction isn’t a safe one that 100% is way way down as the proof doesn’t merit it.
This will be debated forever / in our lifetimes. A bit like Possibly the ripper murders who really did it.
There is no malice at all in this thread nor should there be. There is nothing wrong with speculation. People can simply agree to disagree with their thoughts.
youngsyr said:
The fact that Welshbeef is citing a lack of DNA evidence as being the second most important element of doubt in a case from 1985 tells you all you need to know: he has no idea what he's talking about.
You misreadHe was only arrested due to 2 things
1. Jilted x change of statement
2. The silencer found by a cousin who then took it home to decide what to do with it for a few days.
Before that it was a murder suicide
What DNA is these that implicated Jeremy Bamber?
youngsyr said:
As for eliminating persons unknown: basically motive and knowledge of the farmhouse, gun, ammo and no forced entry.
The killer got into the closed up house, while everyone was asleep, without breaking anything or forcing any entry points, then located a gun on the premises and a box of ammo, intentionally shot dead 5 family members in cold blood, staged a suicide, then left without stealing anything, gaining precisely nothing from the effort.
Then Neville Bamber somehow telephoned Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone mad with a gun.
Seem likely?
“A closed up house”The killer got into the closed up house, while everyone was asleep, without breaking anything or forcing any entry points, then located a gun on the premises and a box of ammo, intentionally shot dead 5 family members in cold blood, staged a suicide, then left without stealing anything, gaining precisely nothing from the effort.
Then Neville Bamber somehow telephoned Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone mad with a gun.
Seem likely?
It’s a big house right in the middle of several large farm buildings. They employed farm workers who almost certainly had access, or at least would have known the layout, and we know that the cousins had access. Kids and grandkids coming and going. Guns and ammo in the first room you come to downstairs.
Largechris said:
youngsyr said:
As for eliminating persons unknown: basically motive and knowledge of the farmhouse, gun, ammo and no forced entry.
The killer got into the closed up house, while everyone was asleep, without breaking anything or forcing any entry points, then located a gun on the premises and a box of ammo, intentionally shot dead 5 family members in cold blood, staged a suicide, then left without stealing anything, gaining precisely nothing from the effort.
Then Neville Bamber somehow telephoned Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone mad with a gun.
Seem likely?
“A closed up house”The killer got into the closed up house, while everyone was asleep, without breaking anything or forcing any entry points, then located a gun on the premises and a box of ammo, intentionally shot dead 5 family members in cold blood, staged a suicide, then left without stealing anything, gaining precisely nothing from the effort.
Then Neville Bamber somehow telephoned Jeremy to tell him Sheila had gone mad with a gun.
Seem likely?
It’s a big house right in the middle of several large farm buildings. They employed farm workers who almost certainly had access, or at least would have known the layout, and we know that the cousins had access. Kids and grandkids coming and going. Guns and ammo in the first room you come to downstairs.
For cousins and workers:
The house was locked up from the inside.
Jeremy claims Nevill phoned him and told him it was Sheila.
And you're assuming that the cousins and workers had access to keys and no alibis. I know the police botched the investigation, but that would be a serious miscarriage of justice to overlook if they didn't.
It's telling that Jeremy has never claimed it was the cousins or a worker.
He is adamant it was Sheila.
Further, for cousins specifically:
Why kill everyone in the will ahead of them, except Jeremy? Especially when Jeremy was in the same house with them all just a few hours earlier. It doesn't make any sense.
Edited by youngsyr on Friday 11th February 11:33
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff