Donate SIGN UP

Jeremy Bamber Is Innocent

Avatar Image
mushroom25 | 20:25 Sun 13th Oct 2013 | News
15 Answers
Former MP Andrew Hunter claims the existence of fresh evidence will prove Jeremy Bamber innocent.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2456759/Jeremy-Bamber-Do-macabre-pictures-prove-innocent.html

I was living in Colchester at the time of the original trial, and there was a feeling that, despite the police doing their best to bungle the case, the right result was the outcome.

And yet.......

If Mr Bamber really is innocent, this will have been one of the longest-enduring miscarriages in British legal history. With the spotlight very firmly on police integrity in the wake of Hillsborough, is it time for a retrial?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 15 of 15rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by mushroom25. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
there's always been some doubt about this case, only partly because, by refusing to admit guilt, Bamber is sentencing himself to spend longer behind bars. I don't have any opinion on the verdict but yes, it would be a very long-lasting miscarriage of justice.
did they not turn down an appeal just recently?
Question Author
yes baza, but that was against his whole-life tariff, not his conviction.
And where has the photograph of a foot been all these years ? And what is the proof of its provenance or that it shows what it is claimed to show ?

At his trial, Bamber came across as a cold, psychopathic individual, who had concocted a scheme in which he could blame his sister and collect the family money

That Bamber refuses to accept guilt proves nothing; plenty of killers don't, and, as he's serving a full life term, there's no advantage in his doing so
I recently read the book by Scott Lomax on this case and he made a case for Bamber's innocence which I certainly found discomforting.

Having said that, I guess you had to have been at the trial to get a more complete picture.

More info available at his website http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/
good question about where the photo has been (and also if it shows any blood at all).

But as for people being found guilty because they appear cold... I keep thinking of Lindy Chamberlain.
All of these cases cast a long shadow over the integrity of the police service in the past and what seems to have been an ability,in some cases,to make the evidence fit the situation.
Its totally off the subject, and probably wildly inappropriate too, but - anyone else think that his adoptive sister, Sheila was an exceptionally good looking woman?

I do not have enough detailed knowledge of the case to speculate really, but it is my understanding that the forensic evidence relating to Sheilas bullet wounds, the amount of the blood and the state of the blood means that she could not be the killer, as Jeremy Bamber claims.
Question Author
//the state of the blood means that she could not be the killer..//

and yet crime scene photos indicate that the blood was still wet when the photos were taken, strongly implying that she was still alive at the time Jeremy Bamber and the police were waiting outside for daybreak.
There does appear to be a consensus that the police investigation was piss-poor, which itself hampers any discussion of the case.

Based upon what I have read though, the impression I get after reading all the different points of evidence, as well as the background issues of professed hatred of family and burglary etc is that he was guilty.
I am afraid that this was one of those cases that defence counsel hate. Circumstantial evidence is always harder than direct evidence. You can always hope to discredit the eye witness who says he saw the client shoot the victim. You can explain total confessions away. With circumstantial evidence, all you can do is demolish bits of it; knocking bricks off the building; but it is rare to remove enough of it ; the building is damaged but still stands. And here, belatedly, is the defence trying to remove odd bricks. And, in the end, whatever bricks you remove, you usually have to call he client. That can do for you and commonly does. The jury see him, and they see he is a liar and psychopathic, with a motive, and must have done it
There's a petition here: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/55107 retrial or pardon....let him go I say.
Question Author
not sure he'd welcome a pardon since, by implication, he'd be guilty, which he's always denied.
Miscarriage of Justice victims too often do have to continue the fight to clear their name long after release. I'm not sure if a re-trial is even possible but something needs to be done, he's been locked up for nearly 30 years and who can be certain he's done it, nobody.
Julie Mugford said that he had confided to her in the previous period that he had plans to do this. I don't believe that a young woman would lie about something so serious. Also at the very least the guilty verdict would have been found to be unsafe if all the evidence had been revealed.

1 to 15 of 15rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Jeremy Bamber Is Innocent

Answer Question >>