Misplaced Pages

White House Farm murders: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:13, 13 February 2012 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsm Nevill and June Bamber← Previous edit Latest revision as of 01:22, 23 December 2024 edit undoXTheBedrockX (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users81,911 edits removed Category:Attacks on farmhouses; added Category:Attacks on farmhouses in the United Kingdom using HotCat 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Murders in England in 1985}}
{{infobox
{{Good article}}
| above =
{{Use Oxford spelling|date=January 2015}}
| above-style = background-color: #99BADD
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2014}}
| image1 = ]
{{Infobox event
| caption1 = White House Farm, scene of the murders, in 2007
| title = White House Farm murders
| headerstyle = background-color: #99BADD
| image = White House Farm, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, 2007 (brightened).jpg
| label2 = Location
| data2 = Near ], Essex | image_upright = 1.4
| image_alt = Large red-brick farmhouse, seen through trees
| label3 = Coordinates
| caption = White House Farm, 2007
| data3 ={{coord|51.7591|0.8032}}
| label4 = Date | date = 7 August 1985
| location = White House Farm, near ], ], England
| data4 = 7 August 1985
| coordinates = {{Coord|51.7591|0.8032|type:event_region:GB-ESS|display=inline,title}}
| label5 = Victims
| participants =
| data5 = Nevill Bamber (aged 61), June Bamber (aged 61), Sheila Caffell (aged 28), Nicholas and Daniel Caffell (aged 6)
|map={{Location map|United Kingdom Essex|lat_deg=51.7591|lon_deg= 0.8032|width=300|float=center|caption=White House Farm, Essex}}
| label6 = Convictions
| outcome =
| data6 = Jeremy Bamber (aged 24 at the time of the murders), convicted of murder on 28 October 1986.
| label7 = Sentence | reported deaths = {{Plain list|
* June Bamber (61)
| data7 = Life imprisonment with a minimum of 25 years; told in 1994 that he would never be released.
* Nevill Bamber (61)
* Sheila Caffell (28)
* Daniel Caffell (6)
* Nicholas Caffell (6)
}} }}
| coroner =
The '''White House Farm murders''' took place near the English village of ], Essex, on 7 August 1985, when five members of the same family died from gunshot wounds in the early hours of the morning inside the parental home. Nevill Bamber, a farmer and magistrate, and his wife June, died alongside their adoptive daughter, Sheila Caffell, and her six-year-old twin sons. The only surviving member of the immediate family, '''Jeremy Bamber'''—Nevill and June's adoptive son—was convicted of the murders in October 1986. Branded by the judge as "evil almost beyond belief" for shooting the family to secure his inheritance, he was sentenced to five life terms, with a recommendation that he serve at least 25 years. He was told in 1994 that he must spend the rest of his life in jail.<ref>Hutchison, Peter. , ''The Daily Telegraph'', 11 February 2011.
| convicted = ] (then 24), convicted on 28{{nbsp}}October 1986 of five counts of murder
*For "evil almost beyond belief," see Hall, Sarah. , ''The Guardian'', 13 December 2002.</ref>
| sentence = ]
}}
The '''White House Farm murders''' took place near the village of ], ], England, during the night of 6–7 August 1985. Nevill and June Bamber were shot and killed inside their farmhouse at White House Farm along with their adopted daughter, Sheila Caffell, and Sheila's six-year-old twin sons, Daniel and Nicholas Caffell. The only surviving member of the immediate family was the adopted son, ], then aged 24, who said he had been at home a few miles away when the shooting took place.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|pp=xiii–xv}}.</ref>


Police initially believed that Sheila, who had been diagnosed with ], had fired the shots before turning the gun on herself, but weeks after the murders, Jeremy's ex-girlfriend told police that he had implicated himself. The ] argued that, motivated by a large inheritance, Jeremy had shot the family with his father's ], then placed the gun in Sheila's hands to make the deaths look like a ]. A ], the prosecution said, was on the rifle and would have made it too long, they argued, for Sheila's fingers to reach the trigger to shoot herself. Jeremy was convicted of five counts of ] in October 1986 by a 10–2 ], sentenced to a minimum of twenty-five years, and informed in 1994 that he would ]. The ] upheld the verdict in 2002.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912}}
Bamber has protested his innocence throughout, though his extended family remain convinced of his guilt.<ref name=Smith>Smith, David James. , ''The Sunday Times Magazine'', 11 July 2010; .
*For the position of his extended family, and a cousin moving into White House Farm, see pp. 19–20 of the magazine.
*For his being the only whole-life prisoner to protest his innocence, see p. 18.
*For the significance of the scratch marks, see p. 20.</ref> The brutality of the murders, the twists and turns of the investigation, and Bamber's efforts to secure his release have meant the case has rarely left the public eye. ''The Times'' wrote in 2001 that it had all the ingredients of a classic whodunit: a massacre in the English countryside, overbearing parents, an unstable daughter, a scheming son, a jilted girlfriend, and bungling police.<ref name=TimesMarch182001>, editorial, ''The Times'', 18 March 2001 (courtesy link to innocent.org).</ref>


Jeremy protested his innocence throughout, although his extended family remained convinced of his guilt. Between 2004 and 2012, his lawyers submitted several unsuccessful applications to the ], arguing that the silencer might not have been used during the killings, that the ] might have been damaged then reconstructed, that crime scene photographs were taken weeks after the murders and that the time of Sheila's death had been miscalculated.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|2010|loc=18–22}}; for extended family, 19–20.</ref><ref name=TimesMarch182001>{{cite web |url=http://innocent.org.uk/cases/jeremybamber/index.html#times18301 |title=Murder most foul, but did he do it? |work=] (editorial) |date=18 March 2001 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061003045252/http://innocent.org.uk/cases/jeremybamber/index.html#times18301 |access-date=5 August 2020|archive-date=3 October 2006 }}</ref>
The police at first believed that Sheila Caffell, who had been diagnosed with ], had shot her parents and children, then turned the gun on herself. She had told a psychiatrist the devil had taken her over, and according to Bamber feared she would lose custody of her sons.<ref name=appeal84/> But when his ex-girlfriend stepped forward weeks after the murders to say Bamber had implicated himself, the police view swiftly changed, though by then much of the forensic evidence had been compromised. The prosecution argued that, motivated by a large inheritance, Bamber had killed the family and placed the gun in his unstable sister's hands to make it look like a murder-suicide. A silencer the prosecution said was on the rifle when it was fired would have made it too long, they argued, for her fingers to reach the trigger to shoot herself.<ref name=HallOct2002>Hall, Sarah. , ''The Guardian'', 18 October 2002.</ref> The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction in 2002.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 512.</ref>


A key issue was whether Jeremy had received a call from his father on the night of the murder to tell him Sheila had "gone berserk" with a gun. Jeremy said that he did, that he alerted police and that Sheila fired the final shot while he and the officers were standing outside the house. It became a central plank of the prosecution's case that the father had made no such call and that the only reason Jeremy would have lied about it — indeed, the only way he could have known about the shootings when he alerted the police — was that he was the killer himself.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=153}}
Bamber's lawyers continued to submit what they said was new evidence to the ]; the latest submission was provisionally rejected in February 2011, though Bamber was granted indefinite leave to respond.<ref name=AllisonFebruary112011>Allison, Eric and Walker, Peter. , ''The Guardian'', 11 February 2011.
*, BBC News, 13 May 2011.
*, BBC News, 19 July 2011.
*, BBC News, 2 September 2011.</ref> Their evidence included expert opinion that the silencer might not have been used during the killings, that key crime-scene photographs were taken weeks after the murders, and that the police miscalculated the timing of Sheila's death. One crucial issue is whether Bamber's father telephoned him that night to say Sheila had gone "berserk" with a gun. Bamber said he did receive that call, that he alerted the police, and that Sheila fired the final shot while he and the police were standing outside the house.<ref>For the silencer, see Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark. , ''The Observer'', 4 February 2012.
*For the timing of Sheila's death and other issues, see , Studio Legale Internazionale, 3 August 2005, accessed 13 August 2010.</ref> It became a central plank of the prosecution's case that the father had made no such call, and that the only reason Bamber would have lied about it—and the only way he could have known about the shootings—was that he was the killer himself.<ref name=BBCOct232002/>


{{toc limit|3}}
==The Bambers==
===Nevill and June Bamber===
]
Ralph Nevill Bamber (known as Nevill), aged 61 when he was killed, was a farmer, local magistrate, and former RAF pilot. He and his wife, June Bamber, also aged 61, had married in 1949 and moved into White House Farm, a ] house in Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex. Unable to have biological children, they adopted two, first Jeremy, then Sheila a few years later; the two children were not related to each other.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/> Nevill was described in court as 6' 4" tall and in good physical health, a point that became significant because Bamber's defence was that Sheila, a slim woman of 28, was able to beat and subdue her father, something the prosecution contested.<ref>, 12 December 2002, paras 12, 151.</ref>


==Bamber family==
''The Times'' wrote in 2001 that the couple was wealthy and gave the children a private education, but that they took their Christian beliefs to the point of zealotry.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/> June had called Sheila the "devil's child" when she found her with a boyfriend, possibly helping to trigger her delusions, and had called Bamber's girlfriend, Julie Mugford, a "whore."<ref>D'Cruze, Shani; Walklate, Sandra L.; and Pegg, Samantha. "The White House Farm murders," in ''Murder: Social and Historical Approaches to Understanding Murder and Murderers''. Willan, 2006, p. 121.</ref> June suffered from depression and was treated in a psychiatric hospital in 1982 by the same psychiatrist who later saw Sheila. The court heard that June's interest in religion had become obsessive, and Sheila's ex-husband was concerned about the effect it was having on his sons.<ref name=appeal370/> She apparently made the boys kneel and pray with her, which upset him.<ref name=Smith/>
===June and Nevill Bamber===
]
Ralph Nevill Bamber (known as 'Nevill', born 8 June 1924) was a farmer, former ] (RAF) pilot and magistrate at the local ] ]. He and his wife, June (] Speakman, born 3 June 1924), had married in 1949 and moved into the ] White House Farm on Pages Lane, ], ], set among {{cvt|300|acres}} of tenant farmland that had belonged to June's father.<ref>For dates of birth, {{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=15}}; for the other biographical details, {{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=18, 21–22, 25}}.</ref> The ] described Nevill as "a well-built man, {{cvt|6|ft|4|in|cm}} tall and in good physical health." This became significant because Jeremy's ] later suggested that Sheila, a slim woman aged 28, had been able to beat and subdue her father, something the ] contested.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=12, 151.v(c)}}


Unable to have biological children, the Bambers adopted Sheila and Jeremy as infants; the children were not related to each other. June suffered from ] and had been admitted to a psychiatric hospital in the 1950s, including in 1958 after Sheila's adoption, where she was given ] at least six times.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=20, 23–24}} In 1982 she was treated by Hugh Ferguson, a psychiatrist who later saw Sheila.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=71}}
===Sheila, Nicholas, and Daniel Caffell===
Sheila Jean Caffell (born 1957, aged 28 when she died) attended secretarial college, then worked in London as a model, living in a flat in the city's ] area that Nevill and June paid for. She married Colin Caffell in May 1977, and their twins, Nicholas and Daniel, were born on 22 June 1979. The couple divorced in May 1982. Because Sheila had mental-health problems, the boys lived with their father, but the couple had joint custody and Sheila continued to see them.<ref>, 12 December 2002, paras 16, 17.</ref>


The Bambers were financially secure, owning property that included the farmhouse, a flat in ], 300 acres of land and a ].{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=338}} The couple gave the children a good home and private education, but June was intensely religious and tried to force her children and grandchildren to adopt the same ideas. She had a poor relationship with Sheila, who felt June disapproved of her, and June's relationship with Jeremy was so troubled that he had apparently stopped speaking to her.<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=34, 52–53, 230}}; for religion, also see {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=150}}.</ref> Sheila's ex-husband was concerned about the effect June was having on his sons; she made them kneel and pray with her, which upset him and the boys.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|2010|loc=18}}; {{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=29, 151}}.</ref>
]
Like June, Sheila was intensely religious. Her GP had referred her, on 3 August 1983, to Dr Hugh Ferguson, a psychiatrist at ] in Northampton. Ferguson said she was in an agitated and ] state. He admitted her, eventually diagnosing schizophrenia. He said she was ], struggling with the concept of good and evil, and believed the devil had taken her over and had given her the power to project evil onto others. The delusion included a belief that she could make her sons have sex and cause violence with her. She also believed she was capable of murdering them, or of getting them to kill others. She spoke about suicide, though Ferguson did not regard her as a suicide risk. She was discharged on 10 September 1983 and treated with ], an anti-psychotic drug.<ref name=appeal84>, 12 December 2002, para 84ff.</ref>


===Daniel and Nicholas Caffell===
She was re-admitted to St Andrew's on 3 March 1985, a few months before the murders, apparently very disturbed. She again spoke about good and evil, but this time with reference to religious ideas, rather than about her children or parents. She was discharged on 29 March 1985, and thereafter received monthly injections of ], an anti-psychotic that also has a sedative effect. After the killings, her psychiatrist said the kind of violence necessary to commit the murders was not consistent with his view of her, though he also said she had expressed disturbed feelings towards her mother.<ref name=appeal30/>
Daniel and Nicholas Caffell (born 22 June 1979) were born to Sheila and Colin Caffell, who married in 1977 and divorced in 1982. Colin was an art student when he met Sheila. Both parents were involved in the children's upbringing after the divorce,<ref>{{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=139–141}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=16–17}}</ref> although the boys were briefly placed in ] in 1982{{ndash}}83 because of Sheila's health problems.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=373}} For several months before the murders they had been living with Colin in his home in ], ], not far from Sheila's residence in ].<ref>{{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=25}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=17}}.</ref>


A week-long visit to White House Farm had been arranged for August 1985 at the Bambers' request; the plan was that the boys would visit their grandparents with Sheila before going on holiday to Norway with their father. Daniel and Nicholas were reluctant to stay at the farm. They disliked that June made them pray, and in the car on the way asked Colin to speak to her about it. In addition Daniel had become a vegetarian and was worried about being forced to eat meat.<ref>{{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=29–30, 151}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=371–372}}.</ref> When their father dropped them off at the house on 4 August, it was the last time he saw them. The boys are buried together in ]. Sheila was cremated, and the urn with her ashes was placed in their coffin.<ref>{{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=79–82}}.</ref>
Her ex-husband said she had been prone to outbursts that had involved throwing pots and pans, and occasionally hitting him, but to his knowledge she had never harmed the children.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 83.</ref> Before the murders, he had complained that her mental health was affecting her ability to look after the boys, and that he was doing 95 percent of the work. The boys had been briefly placed in foster care in 1982 and 1983 in Camden, London, near Sheila's home, an arrangement the court heard had caused no problems. According to Bamber, the family discussed doing the same thing again during their evening meal on the night of the murders, with little response from Sheila.<ref name=appeal370>, 12 December 2002, paras 370–377.</ref>


===Sheila Caffell===
June Bamber's sister, Pamela Boutflour, testified that Sheila was not a violent person, and said she had never known her to use a gun. June's niece, Ann Eaton, told the court that Sheila did not know how to use a gun. Bamber disputed this, telling police that he and Sheila had gone target shooting together, though he acknowledged in court that he had not seen her fire a gun as an adult.<ref name=appeal30>, 12 December 2002, paras 30, 143.</ref>
====Background====
]
Sheila Jean "Bambi" Caffell (born 18 July 1957) <ref>For "Bambi", {{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=55}}; for the date of birth, {{harvnb|Wilkes|1994|loc=35}}.</ref> was born to the 18-year-old daughter of ], a senior chaplain to the ]. At his insistence, the baby was placed for adoption. Her mother gave Sheila up to the ] ] two weeks after the birth, and the Bambers adopted her in October 1957. The chaplain had known Nevill in the RAF and selected the Bambers from a list of prospective adopters.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=20–21}}

After school Sheila attended secretarial college in ], ].<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=21–22, 29, 32}}; {{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=128, 131}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=27}}.</ref> In 1974, when she was aged 17, she discovered she was pregnant by Colin Caffell. The Bambers arranged an ]. Her relationship with her mother deteriorated significantly that summer after June found Sheila and Colin sunbathing naked in a field. June reportedly started calling Sheila the "devil's child."<ref>{{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=135–137}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=41}}.</ref>

Sheila continued with her secretarial course, then trained as a hairdresser, and briefly worked as a model with the ], including two months' work in ].<!--move Tokyo--><ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=36–37}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=46}}.</ref> After she became pregnant again, she married Colin at ] Register Office in May 1977, but ] in the sixth month.{{sfn|Caffell|1994|loc=139}} The Bambers bought the couple a garden flat in Carlingford Road, ], to help Sheila recuperate.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=46}} Sheila suffered another miscarriage, then on 22 June 1979, after four months of bed rest in hospital, she gave birth to Daniel and Nicholas. Colin, apparently having begun an affair just before the birth, left Sheila for five months. Sheila became increasingly upset; on one occasion, when Colin left her 21st birthday party with another woman, she required hospital treatment after breaking a window with her fist.<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=49}}; {{harvnb|Caffell|1994|loc=1994, 139–142, 144}}.</ref> The couple divorced in May 1982.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=70}}

After the divorce, Nevill bought Sheila a flat in Morshead Mansions, Maida Vale, and Colin helped raise the children from his home in nearby Kilburn. Sheila decided to trace her birth mother, then living in Canada. They met at ] in 1982 for a brief reunion, but a relationship did not develop.{{sfn|Powell|1994|loc=51–52}} At around this time Sheila became friendly with a group of young women who nicknamed her "Bambi", and who later told reporters that she often complained about her poor relationship with her adoptive mother. The group partook in drugs, particularly ], and fraternisations with older men.<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=59–65}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=111}}.</ref> As her brief modelling career had ended after the birth of the boys, Sheila lived on ] and took low-paying jobs, including as a waitress for one week at School Dinners, a London restaurant in which dinner was served by young women in school uniform, stockings and suspenders. There were also cleaning jobs and one episode of nude photography that she later regretted.<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=74–79}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=111}}.</ref>

====Health====
Sheila's mental health continued to decline, with episodes of banging her head against walls.{{sfn|Powell|1994|loc=80}} In 1983 her family doctor referred her to Hugh Ferguson, the psychiatrist who had treated June. Ferguson said Sheila was in an agitated state, ] and ]. She was admitted to ], a private psychiatric facility, where Ferguson diagnosed a ]. After Sheila was discharged in September 1983, he continued seeing her as an out-patient and concluded that his first diagnosis had been mistaken. Ferguson now believed that she had ] and began treating her with ], an ] drug.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=84–85}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=82}}.</ref>

Ferguson wrote that Sheila believed the devil had given her the power to project evil onto others, and that she could make her sons have sex and cause violence with her. She called them the "devil's children", the phrase June had used of Sheila, and said she believed she was capable of murdering them or of getting them to kill others. She spoke about suicide, although the court heard that Ferguson did not regard her as a suicide risk.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=84}}

Sheila was readmitted to St Andrew's in March 1985, five months before the murders, after a psychotic episode in which she believed herself to be in direct communication with God and that certain people, including her boyfriend, were trying to hurt or kill her.<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=230}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=85}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=81, 111–115}}.</ref> She was discharged four weeks later, and as an out-patient received a monthly injection of ], an antipsychotic drug that has a sedative effect.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=86–87}} From that point, the twins lived all or most of the time with Colin in Kilburn. According to Jeremy, the family discussed placing the boys in daytime foster care over dinner on the night of the murders, with little response from Sheila.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=370}}

Despite Sheila's erratic mental state, Ferguson told the court that the kind of violence necessary to commit the murders was not consistent with his view of her. In particular, he said he did not believe she would have killed her father or children, because her difficult relationship was confined to her mother.<ref>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=231}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=88–89}}</ref> Colin said the same: that, despite her tendency to throw things and sometimes hit him, she had never harmed the children.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=83}} June's sister, Pamela Boutflour, testified that Sheila was not a violent person and that she had never known her to use a gun; June's niece, Ann Eaton, told the court that Sheila did not know how to use one.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=82}} Jeremy disputed this, telling police on the night of the shooting, as they stood outside the house, that he and Sheila had gone ] together. He acknowledged later that he had not seen her fire a gun as an adult.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=30, 143}}


===Jeremy Bamber=== ===Jeremy Bamber===
{{Main|Jeremy Bamber}}
{{Infobox person
]
| name = Jeremy Bamber
Jeremy Nevill Bamber was born on 13 January 1961 to a student midwife who, after an affair with a married ] sergeant, gave her baby to the Church of England Children's Society when he was six weeks old. His biological parents later married and had other children; his father became a senior staff member in ].<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=25, 59–60}}; {{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=265}}.</ref> The Bambers adopted Jeremy when he was six months old. They sent him to St Nicholas Primary, then along with Sheila to Maldon Court ]. This was followed when he was aged 9, in September 1970, by ], a boarding school in ], ],{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=31}} where he joined the ].<ref>"Parents tormented by private anguish over flawed children". ''The Times''. 29 October 1986.</ref> Jeremy was apparently unhappy at Gresham's because of bullying and other factors.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=31}}
| image = Jeremy Bamber.jpg
| image_size = 140px
| alt = photograph
| caption = Bamber in 1986
| birth_date = <!-- {{Birth date and age|1961|01|13}} -->
| residence = ], York
| education = ], Norfolk
| criminal_charge = Murder
| criminal_penalty = Five life terms
| website = <br/>
| box_width = 180px
}}
Jeremy Nevill Bamber (born 13 January 1961) was the son of a vicar's daughter who had an affair with a married army sergeant, and subsequently gave her baby up for adoption when he was six weeks old. Nevill and June sent him to ], a boarding school in Norfolk, then college in Colchester. He spent time in Australia and New Zealand, then returned to England to work on his father's farm for £170 a week. The Bambers also ran a lucrative caravan site, but according to ''The Times'' they would not let Bamber work there, saying he had no business sense.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>


After leaving Gresham's with no qualifications, Jeremy attended ] college, and in 1978 achieved seven ]. Nevill paid for him to visit Australia, where he took a scuba-diving course, before travelling to New Zealand. Former friends alleged that Jeremy had broken into a jeweller's shop while in New Zealand and had stolen an expensive watch. He had also boasted, they said, of being involved in smuggling ].{{sfn|Powell|1994|loc=40, 47–48}} Jeremy returned to England in 1982<ref>{{cite news |last1=Keel |first1=Paul |title=Unhappy family caught in tragedy at White House Farm |work=The Guardian |date=29 October 1986|at=27}}</ref> to work on his adoptive parents' farm for £170 a week,<ref name=TimesMarch182001/> and set up home in a cottage Nevill owned at 9 Head Street, ].{{efn|Cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger: {{Coord|51.745857|N|0.755881|E|type:event_region:GB-ESS|name=Cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger}} }} The cottage lay 3–3.5 miles (5.6&nbsp;km) from White House Farm,{{efn|White House Farm farmhouse: {{Coord|51.7591|N|0.8032|E|type:event_region:GB-ESS |name=White House Farm farmhouse}} }} a five-minute drive by car and at least fifteen minutes by bicycle.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=18}} Nevill also gave Jeremy a car to use, and eight percent of a family company, Osea Road Camp Sites Ltd, which ran the Bambers' caravan site.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=80}}
He set up home in a cottage at 9 Head Street, ] ({{coord|51.745857|0.755881}}), three to three-and-a-half miles from his parents' farmhouse ({{coord|51.7591|0.8032}}). Nevill owned the cottage and Bamber lived there rent-free. It took five minutes to drive by car from the cottage to his parents' home, and by bicycle 15 minutes at least.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 18.</ref>


], Essex]]
===Extended family and financial considerations===
To ], who over the years have included ] and journalists, Jeremy is a victim of one of Britain's worst ].<ref>Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark (30 January 2011). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228201119/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-appeal-murders-evidence |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Observer''.</ref> '']'' took up his case in the early 1990s; one or more ''Guardian'' journalists began corresponding with him in 2006, and two interviewed him in 2011. Describing Jeremy as "clever and strategic", they wrote that there was something about him that made the public unsympathetic toward him. He was "handsome in a rather cruel, caddish way—he seemed to exude arrogance and indifference.&nbsp;... Like Meursault in the ] novel '']'', he did not seem to display the appropriate emotions."<ref name=Allison10Feb2011>Allison, Eric and Hattenstone, Simon (10 February 2011). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228034953/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/10/jeremy-bamber-innocent-of-murder-appeal |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Guardian''.</ref> He is reported to have passed a ] in 2007.<ref>Galloway, George (15 May 2007). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171004135928/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070515/text/70515w0017.htm#0705162001473 |date=4 October 2017 }}. House of Commons.</ref>
The Bamber family was wealthy, and the financial ties and the issue of inheritance within the immediate and extended family caused further complications. The prosecution's case was that Bamber had killed his family to inherit their estate, which included £436,000, the farmhouse where the murders took place, {{convert|300|acre|km2}} of land, and a caravan site in ], called Osea Road Camp Sites Ltd. Because of his conviction, the estate passed instead to his cousins, some of whom were involved in finding the crucial evidence against him&mdash;the gun's silencer in the farm's gun cupboard with a fleck of blood on it. The prosecution used the blood to show that the silencer was on the gun during the attack, and argued that Sheila's arms were not long enough to reach the trigger to kill herself with the silencer on it (see ]).<ref name=Moore/>


Jeremy's detractors include his extended family and his father's former secretary, Barbara Wilson. She told reporters that Jeremy used to provoke his parents, riding in circles around his mother on a bicycle, wearing make-up to upset his father and once hiding a bag of live rats in Wilson's car. Whenever Jeremy visited the farm there were arguments, she claimed.<ref name=Countdown2013> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200812035951/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OFTW_1mDHk&t=10m40s |date=12 August 2020 }}. ''Countdown to Murder''. Channel 5, 13 November 2013, from 00:10:40.</ref> Tension had apparently increased in the weeks before the murders; Wilson said Nevill had remarked to her about foreseeing a "shooting accident."<ref>Kennedy, Dominic (8 November 2013). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140110152611/http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article3915976.ece |date=10 January 2014 }}. ''The Times''.</ref> Jeremy's ex-girlfriend, ], alleged that he had talked about killing his family.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=278–282}} A farm worker testified that Jeremy had once said of Sheila: "I'm not going to share my money with my sister."<ref name=appeal116>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=116–118}}</ref> The court heard that, in March that year, while discussing security at the family's caravan site, he had told his uncle: "I could kill anybody. I could even kill my parents."<ref>{{cite news |last1=Keel |first1=Paul |title=Bamber had no qualms about killing, uncle says |work=The Guardian |date=8 October 1986 |at=2}}</ref> Jeremy denied having said this.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=119, 423}}
After Bamber's conviction, one cousin on his mother's side, Ann Eaton, moved into White House Farm, and she and several others&mdash;Sarah Jane Eaton, Pamela Boutflour, and Robert Woodwiss Boutflour&mdash;own and manage the caravan site.<ref name=BBCOct62004>, BBC News, 6 October 2004.</ref> Bamber alleged that these financial considerations meant the extended family, specifically two of the cousins, wanted to see him convicted, and may have set him up.<ref name=Moore>Moore, Matthew. , ''The Daily Telegraph'', 12 July 2010.</ref> The cousins responded that Bamber was a psychopath, and that his allegations against them were part of an attempt to harass and vilify them.<ref name=BBCOct62004/> One of them said the allegation that they set him up was "an absolute load of piffle."<ref name=Moore/>


===Extended family, inheritance===
==The murder weapon==
The financial ties and inheritance issues within the immediate and extended family provided a motive and added a layer of complexity to the case. The Bambers' company, N.&nbsp;and J.&nbsp;Bamber Ltd, was worth £400,000 in 1985 (c.&nbsp;£1,061,016 in 2021). In their ]s, June left £230,000 (c.&nbsp;£608,000) and Nevill £380,000 (c.&nbsp;£1,004,000).{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=338}}{{inflation-fn|UK}} During the trial, the court heard that the Bambers had left their ] to both Jeremy and Sheila, to be divided equally. In addition, Nevill's will had said that, to inherit, Jeremy had to be working on the farm at the time of his father's death. The court also heard, from Mugford's mother, that he had been saying June wanted to change her will to bypass him and Sheila and leave her estate to Sheila's twins instead.<ref name=Keel29Oct1986p27/>
Nevill kept several guns at the farm. He was reportedly careful with them, cleaning them after use, and made sure not to leave them lying around.<ref name=appeal2002>, 12 December 2002.</ref> The murder weapon was a .22 ], model 525, which Nevill purchased on 30 November 1984, along with a ] ] (a "silencer"), telescopic sights, and 500 rounds of ammunition. The rifle used ], which were loaded into a ] that held ten cartridges. Twenty-five shots were fired during the killing, so if it was fully loaded to begin with it would have been reloaded at least twice. The court heard that it became progressively harder to load as the number of cartridges increases; loading the tenth was described as exceptionally hard. The rifle was used to shoot rabbits with the silencer and telescopic sights attached. The court heard that a screwdriver was needed to remove the sights, but they were normally left in place because it was time-consuming to realign them. Nevill's nephew, Anthony Pargeter, visited the farmhouse around 26 July 1985, and told the court he had seen the rifle, with the sights and silencer attached, in the gun cupboard in the ground floor office. Bamber testified that he visited the farmhouse on the evening of 6 August, and loaded the gun, thinking he heard rabbits outside, then left it with a full magazine and a box of ammunition on the kitchen table.<ref>, 12 December 2002, paras 21, 30.</ref>


The parents' estate included land and buildings occupied by Jeremy's cousins, who were made aware, after the murders, that he intended to sell them.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=266}} It was one of those cousins who ] in the gun cupboard, with the flecks of blood and paint that proved pivotal to the prosecution.<ref name=appeal73-74/> Because of Jeremy's conviction, the estate passed instead to the cousins.<ref name=appeal73-74>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=73–74}}.</ref> One moved into White House Farm, while that cousin and several others acquired full ownership of the caravan site and other buildings.<ref name=Smith2010p19>{{harvnb|Smith|2010|loc=19–20}}.</ref><ref name=Moore>Moore, Matthew (12 July 2010). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180807185903/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7884046/Jeremy-Bamber-claims-he-was-framed-for-murder-by-cousins.html |date=7 August 2018 }}, ''The Daily Telegraph''.</ref> This conflict of interest became a bone of contention, as did the apparent failure of the police to ]. Jeremy argues that the family set him up, a claim that one of the group dismissed in 2010 as "an absolute load of piffle."<ref name=Smith2010p19/>
==White House Farm, 7 August 1985==
===Sheila's visit and proposed fostering of the boys===
On 4 August, three days before the murders, Sheila took the boys to spend a week at the Bambers' farm. The farm's housekeeper saw Sheila on 4 August and noticed nothing unusual, and she was seen the next day with her children by two farm workers, Julie and Leonard Foakes, who said she seemed happy.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 22.</ref> One of the photographs taken by police&mdash;but which the defence said in the December 2002 appeal that it could not recall seeing&mdash;shows that someone carved "I hate this place" into the cupboard doors of the room the twins were sleeping in. Authorship was not established, but the Court of Appeal accepted that it was probably Sheila who wrote it.<ref name=appeal392/>


Jeremy has launched two legal actions while in prison, claiming a share of the estate, which the cousins said was part of an attempt to harass and vilify them.<ref name=BBC6Oct2004> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131203120722/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/essex/3721220.stm |date=3 December 2013 }}, BBC News, 6 October 2004.</ref> In 2003 he began a ] action to recover £1.2&nbsp;million from the estate of his maternal grandmother, arguing that he should have inherited her home at Carbonnells Farm, ], which went instead to June's sister—the grandmother had cut Jeremy out of her will when he was arrested—and that he was owed seventeen years' rent from his cousins who lived there.<ref name=BBCAug182003> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170304171338/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/essex/3159397.stm |date=4 March 2017 }}. BBC News, 18 August 2003; Ezard, John (19 August 2003). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161230092219/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/aug/19/ukcrime.johnezard |date=30 December 2016 }}. ''The Guardian''.</ref> In 2004 he went to the High Court again to claim a £326,000 share of the profit from the caravan site. The court ruled against him in both cases.<ref name=BBC6Oct2004/>
Bamber visited the farm on the evening of 6 August, and told the court his parents had suggested to Sheila that the boys be placed in foster care, because of her mental-health problems. The idea was to do this temporarily, perhaps with a local family near the farm who could help with the children. Bamber said Sheila did not seem too bothered by the suggestion, and had simply said she would rather stay in London.<ref name=appeal370/> Her psychiatrist, Dr. Ferguson, told the Court of Appeal in 2002 that the suggestion would have provoked a strong reaction from her, though he added that, had the fostering suggestion been confined to day-time help, she might have welcomed it. The boys had been in temporary foster care before in London, which had not appeared to cause a problem.<ref name=appeal370/>


==Jeremy's visit to the farm==
Barbara Wilson, the farm's secretary, telephoned the farmhouse at 9.30 pm that evening and spoke to Nevill. She said he was short with her, and Wilson was left with the impression that she had interrupted an argument. Pamela Boutflour, June Bamber's sister, also telephoned the house that evening at about 10 pm. She spoke to Sheila, who she said was quiet, then to June, who seemed normal.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 23.</ref>
===Atmosphere in the house===
On Sunday, 4 August 1985, three days before the murders, Sheila and the boys arrived at White House Farm to spend the week with Nevill and June. The housekeeper saw Sheila that day and noticed nothing unusual. Two farm workers saw her the following day with her children and said she seemed happy.<ref name=appeal22>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=22}}.</ref> One of the crime scene photographs showed that someone had carved "I hate this place" into the cupboard doors of the bedroom in which the twins were sleeping.<ref name=appeal392/>


Jeremy visited the farm on the evening of Tuesday, 6 August. He told the court that during his visit his parents suggested to Sheila that the boys be placed in daytime foster care with a local family; he said Sheila did not seem bothered by the suggestion and had simply said she would rather stay in London.<ref name=appeal370>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=370}}</ref> The boys had been in foster care before, although in London rather than near White House Farm, and it had not appeared to cause a problem for Sheila. Ferguson told the Court of Appeal in 2002 that any suggestion that the children be removed from her care would have provoked a strong reaction from Sheila, but that she might have welcomed daytime help.<ref name=appeal373>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=373–377}}.</ref>
===Telephone calls===
There was one telephone line and four telephones at the farm, including two in the kitchen: a cordless phone that had a memory recall feature, and a digital phone. The cordless had been sent away for repair, and a phone that was normally in the bedroom had been moved into the kitchen. This was the one found with its receiver off the hook, the implication being that someone&mdash;Nevill, according to Bamber&mdash;had been interrupted mid-call.<ref name=appeal66>, 12 December 2002, paras 66&ndash;68.</ref>


A farmworker heard Jeremy leave around 9:30&nbsp;pm.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=156, 412}} Barbara Wilson, the farm's secretary, telephoned Nevill at around that time and was left with the impression that she had interrupted an argument. She said Nevill was short with her and seemed to hang up in irritation, something he had never done before; he was by all accounts an even-tempered man.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=157}} June's sister, Pamela Boutflour, telephoned around 10&nbsp;pm. She spoke to Sheila, who she said was quiet, then to June, who seemed normal.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=23}}
A central issue is whether Nevill telephoned Bamber before the murders to say Sheila had gone crazy and had a gun. Bamber said he did receive such a call, and that the line went dead in the middle of it, which would be consistent with the phone being found off the hook. The prosecution said he did not receive such a call, and that his claim to have done so was part of his setting the scene to blame Sheila. This was one of three key points the jury was asked to consider by the trial judge during his summing up.<ref name=BBCOct232002>, BBC News, 23 October 2002.</ref> Bamber's lawyers have highlighted two police phone logs (see below) in support of Bamber's application to have his case referred back to the Court of Appeal. The question is whether these logs describe one call to the police, from Bamber alone, or two separate calls, one from Bamber and another from his father.<ref name=ClementsAug52010/>


====Telephone log 1==== ===Murder weapon===
Jeremy told the court that, hours before the murders on 6 August, he had loaded the rifle, thinking he heard rabbits outside, but had not used it. He left the rifle on the kitchen table, with a full ] and a box of ammunition, before leaving the house.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=21, 30}}.</ref> It did not at that point have the ] or ] attached, he claimed. Both had been on the rifle in late July, according to a nephew, but Jeremy said his father must have removed them.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=218}} The prosecution disputed this, maintaining that the silencer was on the rifle when the family was murdered.<ref name=appeal146>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=146}}.</ref>
, ''The Daily Telegraph'', 5 August 2010.</ref>]]
A police log timed at 3:26 am on 7 August (see image, right) was entered as evidence at the trial, but it was not shown to the jury, or seen by Bamber's lawyers until at least 2004. It discusses a telephone call made that night to a local police station. According to the prosecution, the log discusses a call known to have made by Bamber (see ]). According to Bamber's defence team, it may show that a separate call was made by Nevill.<ref name=ClementsAug52010/>


Nevill kept several guns at the farm. He was reportedly careful with them, cleaning them after use and securing them.<ref name=appeal12>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=12}}.</ref> He had bought the gun, a ] ] model 525 ], on 30 November 1984, along with a ] silencer, telescopic sight and 500 rounds of ammunition.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=13}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=104}}.</ref> It used ], which were loaded into a magazine that held ten rounds. Twenty-five shots were fired during the killing, so if the rifle was fully loaded to begin with, it would have been reloaded at least twice. The court heard that the magazine became harder to load with each cartridge; loading the tenth was described as "exceptionally hard".<ref name=appeal69>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=69}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=318}}.</ref>
The log is headed "daughter gone berserk," and says: "Mr Bamber, White House Farm, Tolleshunt d’Arcy&mdash;daughter Sheila Bamber, aged 26 years, has got hold of one of my guns." It adds (referring to a call to police known to have been made by Bamber (see ]): "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after phone went dead." It goes on to say: "Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and .410s," and it includes the telephone number 860209, the number at the time for White House Farm. The final entry says: "0356 GPO have checked phone line to farmhouse and confirm phone left off hook." The log shows that a patrol car, Charlie Alpha 7 (CA7), was sent to the scene at 3.35 am.<ref name=ClementsAug52010/>


The rifle had normally been used to shoot rabbits with the silencer and telescopic sight attached. The court heard that the sight had to be removed with a screwdriver, but it was usually left in place because it was time-consuming to realign it.<ref name=appeal13>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=13}}.</ref> Nevill's nephew visited the farmhouse on the weekend of 26–28 July 1985 and told the court that he had seen the rifle, in the gun cupboard in the ground-floor office, with the sight and silencer attached. He had taken the gun out and used it for target shooting.<ref name=appeal21>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=21}}.</ref>
====Telephone log 2====
A different police log shows that at 3:36 am a caller rang Chelmsford Police Station using a direct line, rather than the emergency number (999), and spoke to PC West. The court accepted that the officer who recorded the log misread a digital clock, and that it probably came in at around 3:26 am. The caller said: "You've got to help me. My father has just rung me and said, 'Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun.' Then the line went dead."<ref name=appeal24/> The log says the caller was Mr. Bamber, and gave the address in Goldhanger of Jeremy Bamber's house.<ref name=ClementsAug52010/> The caller apparently said he had tried to ring his father back, but there was no reply.<ref name=appeal24/> The log continues: "Father Mr. Bamber, White House Farm, Tolleshunt D'Arcy ... Sister Sheila Bamber age 27. Has history of mental illness. ... Dispatched CA5 to scene ... Informant requested to attend scene."<ref name=ClementsAug52010>See an image of the second police log , accessed May 2, 2011.
*Clements, Jon. , ''The Daily Mirror'', 5 August 2010.</ref>


==Police logs, 7 August 1985{{anchor|Telephone logs|Police logs, 7 August 1985}}==
====Police and Bamber's response====
===Telephones in the farmhouse===
PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room using a radio link; this conversation was recorded as having taken place at 3.26 am. PC West then spoke to the caller again, who apparently complained at the length of time West was taking, and said: "When my father rang he sounded terrified." The caller was told to go to the farm and wait for the police. At 3.35 am, Malcolm Bonnet sent a police car to White House Farm. A ] operator checked the line to the farm at 4:30 am. The phone was off the hook, the line was open, and a dog could be heard barking.<ref name=appeal24>, 12 December 2002, paras 7, 24&ndash;27.</ref>
There were three telephones at White House Farm on the night of the shooting, all on the same ].<ref name=appealp66/> There was usually a cream ] in the main bedroom on Nevill's bedside table; a beige Statesman phone in the kitchen; and a blue Sceptre 100 phone in the office on the first floor. (There was a fourth phone too, an Envoy ] in the kitchen, but it had been picked up for repair on 5 August.) The rotary phone had at some point been moved out of the main bedroom and into the kitchen, where the police found it with its receiver off the hook. They found the Statesman phone still in the kitchen but hidden in a pile of magazines.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=249–250}}<ref name=appealp66>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=66–67}}.</ref>{{efn| EWCA Crim 2912, 430: "At trial the evidence was that when the kitchen was entered the telephone in the kitchen was off the hook as can be seen in a number of photographs particularly photographs 13 and 14. The defence contended that the telephone off the hook was entirely consistent with Nevill having phoned the Appellant. The Prosecution countered this by alleging that the Appellant had set the scene. They drew attention to the fact that Nevill was severely bloodied and that the telephone had no visible blood upon it although no swabs were taken from it."<ref name=appeal430>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=430}}.</ref>}}


===Jeremy's call to police===
Explaining why he had called a local police station and not 999, Bamber told police that night that he had not thought it would make a difference in terms of how fast they arrived.<ref name=appeal29/> He said he had spent time looking up the number, and even though his father had asked him to come quickly, he had first telephoned his girlfriend Julie Mugford in London, then had driven slowly to the farmhouse. He also said he could have called one of the farm workers, but had not at the time considered it.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 141.</ref> In his early witness statements, Bamber said he had telephoned the police immediately after receiving his father's call, then telephoned Mugford. During later police interviews, he said he had called Mugford first. He said he was confused about the sequence of events.<ref name=appeal29>, 12 December 2002, para 29, 134.</ref>
Jeremy telephoned ] police station (and not the ]) from his home in the early hours of 7 August to raise the alarm. He told them he had received a telephone call from his father—from the landline at White House Farm to the landline at Bamber's home—to say that Sheila had "gone berserk" with a gun. Jeremy said the line went dead in the middle of the call.<ref name=appeal29>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=24}}; for "gone berserk", "Jury told of Bamber's 'fatal mistake'", ''The Guardian'', 22 October 1986, p.&nbsp;2, and {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=xiii}}.</ref>


The prosecution argued that Jeremy had received no such call, and that his claim to have done so was part of his setting the scene to blame Sheila.<ref name=appeal153>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=153}}</ref> Nevill was "severely bloodied" at that point, according to the Court of Appeal, but the telephone had "no visible blood" on it when police examined the scene, although it was acknowledged that no swabs had been taken.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=430}} It was Jeremy, the prosecution said, who had left the kitchen telephone off the hook after calling his home from White House Farm to establish that part of his alibi.{{efn| EWCA Crim 2912, 149: "The appellant returned the ] to the gun cupboard and before leaving the address called his home at Goldhanger, leaving the receiver off the hook, thus lending support to the alibi he would later rely upon. He then left the premises, one available route being to climb out of the kitchen window, banging it from the outside to drop the catch back into position and then cycled home."{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=149}}}}
===Scene outside the farmhouse===
]
After the telephone calls, Bamber made his way to the farmhouse, as did several police officers. PS Bews, PC Myall, and PC Saxby drove from Witham Police Station, and passed Bamber in their car. They told the court that, in their view, he was driving much more slowly than them, though Bamber's cousin, Ann Eaton, testified that Bamber was normally a fast driver.<ref name=appeal8/>


After Jeremy telephoned the police, a ] operator checked the White House Farm line—at 3:56&nbsp;am according to the police log, and at 4:30{{nbsp}}am according to the Court of Appeal—and found that the line was open. The operator could hear a dog barking.<ref>], Essex police log, 7 August 1985; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=27}}.</ref> British Telecom did not at the time keep records of local calls. According to experts who testified at the trial, if Nevill had telephoned Jeremy without replacing the receiver, the line between them would have remained open for one or two minutes. During this time, Jeremy would not have been able to use his telephone.<ref name=appeal68>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=68}}.</ref><ref name=Lee2015p309>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=309–310}}.</ref>
Bamber arrived at the farmhouse one or two minutes after the police, then they waited for a tactical firearms group to arrive, which turned up at 5 am. Police determined that all the doors and windows to the house were shut, except for the window in the main bedroom on the first floor. They decided to wait until daylight before entering at 7:54 am through the back door, which had been locked from the inside. The only sound they reported from the house was a dog barking.<ref name=appeal8>, 12 December 2002, para 8.</ref>


Explaining why he had called a local police station and not 999, Jeremy told police on the night that he had not thought it would make a difference to how soon they would arrive.<ref name=appeal29/> He said he had spent time looking up the number, and even though his father had asked him to come quickly, he had first telephoned his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, in London, then had driven slowly to the farmhouse. Jeremy acknowledged that he could have called one of the farm workers but had not considered it.<ref name=appeal141>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=144}}.</ref> In his early witness statements, Jeremy said he had telephoned the police immediately after receiving his father's call, then telephoned Mugford. During later police interviews, he said he had called Mugford first. Jeremy said he was confused about the sequence of events.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=29, 134}}.</ref>
While waiting outside, the police questioned Bamber, who they said seemed calm. He told them about the phone call from his father, and that it sounded as though someone had cut him off. He said he did not get along with his sister, and asked whether she might have gone berserk with the gun, the police said he replied: "I don't really know. She is a nutter. She's been having treatment." The police asked why Nevill had called Bamber and not the police; Bamber replied that his father was the sort of person who might want to keep things within the family.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 29.</ref>


===Logs===
Bamber told them Sheila was familiar with guns and that they had gone target shooting together. He said he had been at the farmhouse himself the night before and had loaded the rifle because he thought he had heard rabbits outside. He left it on the kitchen table fully loaded, with a box of ammunition nearby.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 30.</ref> After the bodies were discovered, a doctor, Dr. Craig, was called to the house to certify the deaths, which he testified could have occurred at any time during the night. He said Bamber appeared to be in a state of shock, broke down, cried, and seemed to vomit. The doctor said Bamber told him at that point about the discussion the family had had about possibly having Sheila's sons placed in foster care.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 39.</ref>
====Event log====
In 2010 Jeremy's lawyers highlighted two police logs in support of his application to have his case referred back to the Court of Appeal. The question was whether these logs support the prosecution position that there was one call that night to the police, from Jeremy alone, or the defence position that there were two calls, one from Nevill followed by a second from Jeremy.<ref name=Collins5Aug2010/>


One log shows that Jeremy rang the local police station and spoke to ] Michael West in the information room.<ref name=appeal24/> As a result, West began an "event log".<ref name=Lee2015p164>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=164}}.</ref> This states that Jeremy's call came in at 3:36&nbsp;am on 7 August 1985. Jeremy maintains that he telephoned ten minutes after his father phoned him. But at trial it was accepted that West had misread a digital clock and that the call had probably come in just before 3:26&nbsp;am, because that was when West asked a civilian dispatcher, Malcolm Bonnett, to send a car to the scene. The car, Charlie Alpha 5, was dispatched at 3:35{{nbsp}}am.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=344}}{{efn|name=policelogs| EWCA Crim 2912, 24–27: "In the early hours of Wednesday, 7 August the appellant telephoned Chelmsford Police Station on a direct line number as opposed to the 999 emergency call system and spoke to PC West. He said, 'You've got to help me. My father has just rung me and said, "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun." Then the line went dead'. He explained that he had tried to ring his father back at White House Farm but he could not get a reply.{{pb}} "Using a radio link PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room. PC West then spoke to the appellant again, who complained at the time the officer was taking. He said, "When my father rang he sounded terrified". The appellant was told to go to the farm and to wait there for the police. PC West described the appellant as sounding 'very laconic' and calm during the first part of their conversation and said that there was no sense of urgency. When he spoke to him again the appellant appeared 'more urgent and distressed in his manner'.{{pb}} "PC West recorded the time of the appellant's call as 3.36&nbsp;a.m. At trial it was accepted that the officer had misread a digital clock. The officer's contact with Mr Bonnett was recorded as being at 3.26 a.m. and it seems clear that the appellant's call must have been at 3.26&nbsp;a.m. or very shortly before.{{pb}} "At 3.35&nbsp;am, Mr Bonnet arranged for a police car to go to White House Farm. A check made by a British Telecom operator of the telephone line to the farm was made at 4.30&nbsp;am. The receiver was off the hook and all the operator could hear was a dog barking."<ref name=appeal24>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=24}}.</ref>}} The event log noted a call from:
==The bodies==
When police entered the house, they found five bodies with multiple gunshot wounds. Twenty-five shots had been fired, mostly at close range. They said they found Nevill downstairs, and the other four upstairs. Years later, Bamber's defence team cast doubt on the position the police say they found the bodies, using photographs obtained from the police, and suggested the photographs indicate that Sheila died later than the rest of the family; see ].<ref>Townsend, Mark. , ''The Observer'', 15 March 2009.</ref>


{{blockquote|1=Mr. Bamber, 9 Head Street, Goldhanger&nbsp;... . Father phoned (age 62). "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy + has the gun." Phone went dead. Father Mr. Bamber H/A White House Farm&nbsp;... Sister Sheila Bamber age 27. Has history of mental illness.&nbsp;... Despatched CA5 to scene&nbsp;... Informant requested to attend scene."<ref name=Collins5Aug2010/>}}
===Nevill===
The police said they found Nevill downstairs in the kitchen, dressed in pyjamas, amid a scene that suggested there had been a struggle, though Bamber's lawyers suggested at appeal that some or all of the mayhem in the kitchen may have been caused by the armed police when they broke into the house.<ref name=appeal233/> Nevill's body was slumped forward over an overturned chair next to the fireplace, his head resting just above a coal scuttle. The police said chairs and stools were overturned, and there was broken crockery, a broken sugar basin, and what looked like blood on the floor. A ceiling light lampshade had been broken. A telephone was lying on one of the surfaces with its receiver off the hook, and several .22 shells beside it. He had been shot eight times, six times to the head and face, fired when the rifle was a few inches from his skin. The remaining shots to his body had occurred from at least two feet away. Based on where the empty cartridges were found&mdash;three were in the kitchen, and one on the stairs&mdash;the police concluded he had been shot four times upstairs, but had managed to get downstairs where a struggle took place, during which he was hit several times with the rifle and shot again, this time fatally.<ref name=appeal33>, 12 December 2002, paras 33, 41, 42.</ref>


. ''The Daily Telegraph''.</ref>]]
There were two wounds to his right side, and two to the top of his head, which would probably have resulted in unconsciousness. The left side of his lip was wounded, his jaw was fractured, and his teeth, neck, and larynx were damaged. The pathologist said he would have had difficulty talking. There were gunshot wounds to his left shoulder and left elbow. He also had black eyes, a broken nose, bruising to the cheeks, cuts on the head, bruising to the right forearm, and circular burn-type marks on his back, consistent with his having been hit with the rifle.<ref name=appeal33/> One of the pillars of the prosecution case was that Sheila would not have been strong enough to inflict this beating on Nevill, who was {{convert|6|ft|4|in|m|abbr=on}} tall and by all accounts in good health.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>


The Court of Appeal noted that Jeremy said he had "tried to ring his father back at White House Farm but he could not get a reply".<ref name=appeal24/> During the trial, the court heard that Jeremy said his father had not hung up after speaking and that he could hear noise in the background.<ref name=Connett/> At some point PC West spoke to Jeremy again on the telephone; Jeremy apparently complained about the time the police were taking, saying: "When my father rang he sounded terrified." He was told to go to the farm and wait for the police.{{efn|name=policelogs}}
===June===
The police said they found the other four bodies upstairs. June's body was heavily bloodstained. She was found lying on the floor in the master bedroom by the doorway, wearing her nightdress and bare-footed. She had been shot seven times; one shot to her forehead between her eyes, and another to the right side of her head, would have caused her death quickly. There were also shots to the right side of her lower neck, her right forearm, and two injuries on the right side of her chest and her right knee. The police believed she had been sitting up during part of the attack, based on the pattern of blood on her clothing. Five of the shots occurred when the gun was at least a foot from her body. The shot between her eyes was from less than one foot.<ref>, 12 December 2002, paras 43.</ref>


===Daniel and Nicholas=== ====Radio log====
Michael Bonnett, a civilian dispatcher in Chelmsford police station's information room, began a "radio log" which kept track of messages about the situation. The radio log discusses a telephone call made at 3:26&nbsp;am on 7 August.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=164, 345}} According to the prosecution, this is the call known to have been made by Jeremy, the same call entered in the event log.<ref name=Collins5Aug2010/> According to the defence, the radio log is not simply a duplicate log of Jeremy's call but a log of a separate call to the police by Nevill.<ref name=Allisonlogs20Jan2011>{{harvnb|Allison et al.|2011|loc=00:02:00}}.</ref>
The boys were found in their beds, shot through the head. They appeared to have been shot while in bed. Daniel had been shot five times, four times with the gun held within one foot of his head, and once from over two feet away. Nicholas was shot three times, all contact or close-proximity shots.<ref>, 12 December 2002, paras 36, 44, 57.</ref>


The radio log is headed, "Daughter gone berserk": "Mr Bamber, White House Farm, Tolleshunt d’Arcy—daughter Sheila Bamber, aged 26 years, has got hold of one of my guns." It adds: "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after phone went dead." It goes on to say: "Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and ]", and it includes White House Farm's telephone number:&nbsp;860209. The final entry says: "0356&nbsp;GPO have checked phone line to farmhouse and confirm phone left off hook." The radio log shows that a patrol car, Charlie Alpha 7 (CA7)—not Charlie Alpha 5, as mentioned in the event log—was sent to the scene at 3:35&nbsp;am.<ref name=Collins5Aug2010/>
===Sheila===
Police say they found Sheila on the floor of the master bedroom with her mother. She was in her nightdress and bare-footed, with two bullet wounds one to her throat. The pathologist, Dr. Peter Vanezis&mdash;who in 1993 became Regius Professor of Forensic Medicine at Glasgow University&mdash;said the lower of the injuries occurred from three inches (76 mm) away, and the higher one was a contact injury. The higher of the two would have killed her immediately. The lower injury would have killed her too, he said, but not necessarily straightaway; the court heard it would be possible for a person with such an injury to stand up and walk around, but the lack of blood on her nightdress suggested to Vanezis that she had not done this. He believed the lower of her injuries happened first, because it caused bleeding inside the neck, which would not have happened to the same extent if the higher, immediately fatal, wound had occurred first. Vanesiz said the blood stains on her nightdress suggested she was sitting up when she received both injuries.<ref name=appeal45/>


==Scene at White House Farm==
According to documents found by Bamber's defence team in or around 2005&mdash;they say they are unsure whether the papers were part of the original trial bundle, but say they were not seen by the defence&mdash;the first officer to enter the house at 7.34 am, PC Peter Woodcock, said of Sheila in his witness statement on 20 September 1985: "She had what appeared to be two bullet holes under her chin and blood leaking from both sides of her mouth down her cheeks." Bamber's lawyers say this is significant because, in their view, had she been shot before 3:30 am as the prosecution says, the blood would have dried by 7:30 am; because the blood was still wet, they argue she was probably shot no more than two hours earlier; see ].<ref name=Sheilaevidence>, jeremybamber.org, accessed 10 August 2010; , from Paul Martin & Co for Jeremy Bamber, Studio Legale Internazionale, 28 July 2005, accessed 13 August 2010 (); , Studio Legale Internazionale, undated, accessed 13 August 2010 ().</ref>
===Events outside===
]
After the telephone calls, Jeremy drove to the farmhouse, as did three officers from ] police station who later testified that he had been driving much more slowly than them; they passed him on Pages Lane and arrived at the farmhouse one or two minutes before him. Jeremy's cousin, Ann Eaton, testified that he was normally a fast driver.<ref name=appeal8/>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=163}} The group waited outside the house for a tactical ] to arrive, which turned up at 5&nbsp;am and decided to wait until daylight before trying to enter. Police determined that all the doors and windows to the house were shut except for the window in the main bedroom on the first floor. Using a ], they spent two hours trying to communicate with Sheila. The only sound they reported from the house was a dog barking.<ref name=appeal8>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=8}}.</ref>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=168}}


While waiting outside, the police questioned Jeremy, who they said seemed calm. According to the Court of Appeal, Jeremy told them about the phone call from his father and that it had sounded as though someone had cut off the call. He also said he did not get along with his sister. When asked whether she might have "gone berserk with a gun", the police said he replied: "I don't really know. She is a nutter. She's been having treatment." When asked why Nevill would have called Jeremy and not the police, he replied that his father was the sort of person who might want to keep things within the family. Jeremy claimed to have called Chelmsford police station, rather than 999, because he did not think it would affect the police's response time.<ref name=appeal29/> Over the next few hours he talked about cars in general with one of the officers, saying that the Osea Road caravan site "would be able to stand him a ]" soon.<ref name=appeal30/>
There were no marks on her body suggestive of a struggle. The firearms officer who first saw her said her feet and hands were clean, her fingernails manicured and not broken; and her fingertips free of blood, dirt, or powder. There was no trace of lead dust, which the court heard is usually the case when handling .22 ammunition. The rifle magazine would have been loaded at least twice during the killings, and this would usually leave lubricant and material from the bullets on the hands. A scenes-of-crimes officer, DC Hammersley, said there were blood stains on the back of her right hand, but that otherwise they were clean. There was no blood on the feet (this was disputed in 2005 by the defence) or other debris such as sugar, which was lying on the floor downstairs, possibly as a result of the struggle. At postmortem, low traces of lead were found on her hands and forehead, but the levels were consistent with the everyday handling of things around the house. A scientist, Mr Elliott, testified that if she had loaded 18 cartridges into a magazine he would expect to see more lead on her hands. On her nightdress, the blood was consistent with her own, and no trace of firearm discharge residue was on it. Her urine indicated she had taken cannabis some days before, and the anti-psychotic drug haloperidol.<ref name=appeal45/>


Jeremy told the police that Sheila was familiar with guns and that they had gone target shooting together. He said he had been at the farmhouse himself a few hours earlier, and that he had loaded the rifle because he thought he had heard rabbits outside. Jeremy had left the rifle on the kitchen table fully loaded, with a box of ammunition nearby.<ref name=appeal30>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=30}}.</ref> A doctor who was called to the house testified the deaths could have occurred at any time during the night. He said Jeremy appeared to be in a state of ]: he broke down, cried and seemed to vomit. The doctor said Jeremy told him about the discussion the family had had about possibly placing Sheila's sons in foster care.<ref name=appeal39>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=39}}.</ref>
The rifle&mdash;without the silencer or sights attached&mdash;was lying across her chest, pointing up at her neck, with her right hand resting lightly on it. June's bible lay on the floor beside Sheila, partly resting on her upper right arm. It was normally kept in a bedside cupboard. June's fingerprints were on it, as were others that could not be identified, except for one made by a child.<ref name=appeal45>, 12 December 2002, paras 45&ndash;53.</ref>

===Scene inside===
====Apparent struggle====
The police entered the farmhouse at 7:54&nbsp;am, using a ] to break the back door. The door had been locked from the inside, with the key still in the lock.<ref name=appeal8/>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=171}} They found five bodies with multiple gunshot wounds, Nevill downstairs in the kitchen and the rest upstairs.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=8, 33–36}}.</ref> Twenty-five shots had been fired, mostly at close range.<ref name=appeal58>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=58}}.</ref> In what order the family was killed is not known.<ref name=Smith2010p19/> A telephone was lying on one of the kitchen surfaces with its receiver off the hook, next to empty .22 cartridge cases. The police said chairs and stools were overturned, and there was broken ], a broken sugar basin, a broken ceiling light, and what looked like blood on the floor.<ref name=appeal33/>

====Nevill====
{{multiple image | direction = vertical | width = 220
| image1 = St Nicholas Church, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex.jpg
| caption1 = The lantern outside St. Nicholas's Church, ], was given in memory of Nevill and June Bamber, who had been ]s there.
| alt1 = photograph
| image2 = Nevill and June Bamber plaque (cropped).JPG
| alt2 = photograph
}}
Nevill was found in the kitchen, dressed in pyjamas, lying over an overturned chair next to the fireplace, amid a scene suggestive of a struggle.<ref name=appeal33>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=33}}.</ref> He had been shot eight times, six times to the head and face, fired when the rifle was a few inches from his skin. The remaining shots to his body had occurred from at least two feet away. Based on where the empty cartridge cases were found—three in the kitchen and one on the stairs—the police concluded that he had been shot four times upstairs, but had managed to get downstairs where a struggle took place, and during which he was hit several times with the rifle and shot again, this time fatally.<ref name=appeal41>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=41}}.</ref>

There were two wounds to Nevill's right side, and two to the top of his head which would probably have resulted in unconsciousness. The left side of his lip was wounded, his jaw was fractured, and his teeth, neck and larynx were damaged. The pathologist said he "would not have been able to engage in purposeful talk", according to the Court of Appeal. There were gunshot wounds to his left shoulder and left elbow.<ref name=appeal41/> The court heard that he had "black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun."<ref name=appeal42>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=42}}.</ref> One of the pillars of the prosecution case was that Sheila would not have been strong enough to inflict this beating on Nevill, who was 6&nbsp;ft 4&nbsp;in (1.93 m) tall and by all accounts in good health.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>

====June====
June's body and clothing were heavily bloodstained; she was found in her nightdress with bare feet. The police believe she had been sitting up during part of the attack, based on the pattern of blood on her clothing. She was found lying on the floor by the door of the master bedroom. June had been shot seven times. One shot to her forehead, between her eyes, was fired from under {{convert|1|ft|cm|0|spell=in}} away. That and another shot to the right side of her head would both have caused her death quickly, the court heard. There were also shots to the right side of her lower neck and to her right forearm, and two injuries on the right side of her chest and right knee.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=43, 63}}.</ref>

====Daniel and Nicholas====
The boys were found in their beds in their own room (formerly Sheila's room). They appeared to have been shot while in bed. The court heard that Daniel had been shot five times in the back of the head, four times with the gun held within {{convert|1|ft|cm|0|spell=in}} of his head, and once from over {{convert|2|ft|cm|-1|spell=in}} away. Nicholas had been shot three times, all contact or close-proximity shots.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=36, 44, 65}}.</ref>

====Sheila====
Sheila was found on the floor of the master bedroom with her mother. She was in her nightdress, her feet were bare, and she had two bullet wounds under her chin, one of them on her throat. The pathologist, Peter Vanezis, said that the lower of the injuries had occurred from three inches (76&nbsp;mm) away and that the higher one was a contact injury. The higher of the two would have killed her immediately. The lower injury would have killed her too, he said, but not necessarily straight away. Vanezis testified that it would be possible for a person with such an injury to stand up and walk around, but the lack of blood on her nightdress suggested to him that she had not done this. He believed that the lower of her injuries had happened first because it had caused bleeding inside the neck; the court heard that if the immediately fatal wound had happened first, the bleeding would not have occurred to the same extent. The pattern of bloodstains on her nightdress suggested she had been sitting up when she received both injuries, Vanezis said.<ref name=appeal45>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=45–53}}.</ref>

Blood and urine samples indicated that Sheila had taken haloperidol and, several days earlier, had used ]. There were no marks on her body suggestive of a struggle. The firearms officer who first saw her said her feet and hands were clean, her fingernails manicured and not broken, and her fingertips free of blood, dirt or powder. There was no trace of lead dust. The rifle magazine would have been loaded at least twice during the killings; this would usually leave lubricant and material from the bullets on the hands. A scenes-of-crimes officer, ] Hammersley, said there were bloodstains on the back of her right hand but that otherwise her hands were clean.<ref name=appeal45/>

There was no blood on Sheila's feet or other debris, such as the sugar that was on the downstairs floor. Low traces of lead were found on her hands and forehead at ], but the levels were consistent with the everyday handling of things around the house. A forensic scientist, Brian Elliott, testified that if Sheila had loaded eighteen cartridges into a magazine he would expect to see more lead on her hands. The blood on her nightdress was consistent with her own, and no trace of firearm-discharge residue was on it.<ref name=appeal45/><ref>For the forensic scientist's name, see {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=362}}.</ref> Given that Sheila was wearing just a nightdress, it was hard to see how she could have carried the cartridges.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=337}} The rifle, without the silencer or sights attached, was lying on her body pointing up at her neck. June's Bible lay on the floor to the right of Sheila. It was normally kept in a bedside cupboard. June's fingerprints were on it, as were others that could not be identified, including one made by a child.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=52}}.</ref>


==Police investigation== ==Police investigation==
===Murder-suicide theory, crime scene{{anchor|Crime scene}}===
===Criticism of the investigation===
{{further|#Alleged crime-scene damage}}
]
]'', 8 August 1985<ref name=Lee2015pxiii>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|p=xiii}}.</ref>]]
Journalist David Connett, who attended the trial, writes that it was by common consent a truly awful investigation. He asked one Scotland Yard officer to describe it; the officer pinched his nose and screwed up his face.<ref name=Connett/> The trial judge, Mr Justice Drake, expressed concern about what he called a "less than thorough investigation,"<ref name=appealMay2009>, before Mr Justice David Clarke and Mr Justice Wyn Williams, EWCA Crim 962, Case No: 2008/03986/A5, Royal Courts of Justice, 14 May 2009.</ref> and Claire Powell wrote that "doing a Bamber" briefly became police slang for making a mess of a case.<ref name=Powell91>Powell, Claire. ''Murder at White House Farm: Story of Jeremy Bamber''. Headline Book Publishing, 1994, p. 91, cited in D'Cruze, Shani; Walklate, Sandra L.; and Pegg, Samantha. "The White House Farm murders," ''Murder: Social and Historical Approaches to Understanding Murder and Murderers''. Willan, 2006, p. 120.</ref> In 1989, Home Secretary Douglas Hurd tightened police procedures because of the failings of the Bamber investigation.<ref name=Herald1989>"Hurd acts after police errors", ''The Glasgow Herald'', 24 March 1989.</ref>
The police and media were initially convinced by the ] theory. ] Thomas Jones, deputy head of ], was so sure Sheila had killed her family that he ordered Jeremy's cousins out of his office when they asked him to consider whether Jeremy had set the whole thing up.<ref name=Connett/>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=215–216}} The '']'' reported on 8 August 1985, the day after the murders:


<blockquote>A farming family affectionately dubbed "The Archers" was slaughtered in a bloodbath yesterday. Brandishing a gun taken from her father's collection, deranged divorcee Sheila Bamber, 28, first shot her twin six-year-old sons. She gunned down her father as he tried to phone for help. Then she murdered her mother before turning the automatic .22 rifle on herself.<ref name=Lee2015pxiii/></blockquote>
Connett writes that the officer in charge, DCI "Taff" Jones, deputy head of CID, was told it was a "]" and went off to play golf. He became convinced of the murder-suicide theory, to the point where he ordered Bamber's cousins out of his office when they asked him to consider whether Bamber had set the whole thing up. Evidence was not recorded or preserved, and three days after the killings the police burned bloodstained bedding and a carpet, apparently to spare Bamber's feelings.<ref name=Connett/>


<!--say more about the coverage of Sheila-->The result of this certainty was that the investigation was poorly conducted. The murder scene was not secured or searched thoroughly, and evidence was not recorded or preserved. Within a couple of days, the police had burned the bloodstained bedding and carpets, apparently to spare Jeremy's feelings. The ] moved the murder weapon without wearing gloves, and it was not examined for fingerprints until weeks later. Three days after the killings, Bamber and the extended family were given back the keys to the house.<ref name=Connett/>
The scenes-of-crime officer did not find the silencer in the cupboard. It was eventually found by one of Bamber's cousins, and even then it took the police three days to collect it; see ]. The same officer moved the rifle without wearing gloves, and it was not examined for fingerprints until weeks later. The bible found with Sheila was not examined at all. Connett writes that a hacksaw blade that might have been used to gain entry to the house lay in the garden for months. Officers did not take contemporaneous notes: those who had dealt with Bamber wrote down their statements weeks later. Bamber's clothes were not examined until one month later, the bodies were cremated, and all blood samples were destroyed 10 years later.<ref name=Connett/>


Police did not find the silencer in the cupboard. One of Jeremy's cousins found it on 10 August, with what appeared to be flecks of red paint and blood, and took it to another of the cousin's homes; it took the police a further three days to collect it. A few days after that, the cousins found a scratch on the red ] that the prosecution said was caused by the silencer during a struggle for the gun; that accounted for the fleck of red paint. The Bible found near Sheila was not examined at all. Journalist David Connett writes that a ] blade that might have been used to gain entry to the house lay in the garden for months. Officers did not take contemporaneous notes; those who had dealt with Jeremy wrote down their statements weeks later. The bodies were released days after the murders, and three of them (Nevill, June and Sheila) were cremated. Jeremy's clothes were not examined until one month later. Ten years later, all blood samples were destroyed.<ref name=Connett/>
Unlike DCI Jones, his junior officers were suspicious of Bamber, and when Jones was removed from the case, they began to look more closely at him. (Jones died before the case came to court after falling from a ladder at his home.) Bamber's behaviour after the funeral increased suspicion that he had been involved. ''The Times'' reported that, immediately after the bodies were found, he broke down and was offered tea and whisky by police, and apparently managed to persuade them to burn bedding and carpets inside the house. He wept openly at the funerals, supported by his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, after which he flew to Amsterdam, where he apparently tried to buy a consignment of drugs and offered to sell soft-porn photographs of Sheila to tabloid newspapers. He also entertained friends to expensive champagne and lobster dinners. It was this behaviour that served, in part, to draw police attention to him.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>


After Jeremy was convicted, the trial judge, Mr Justice ], expressed concern about the "less than thorough investigation",<ref name=case962para11>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 962|loc=11}}.</ref> while '']'' wrote about "blunders, omissions and ineptitude".<ref>Horsnell, Michael (29 October 1986). "Detectives' blunders let Bamber roam free". ''The Times''. Issue 62601, p.&nbsp;3; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=383–384}}.</ref> ] ] requested a report on the investigation from Essex Chief Constable Robert Bunyard and in March 1989 issued a statement in the ]: "It is clear that errors were made in the early stages of the police investigation contrary to existing force practice."<ref name=Hurd>Douglas Hurd, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171004190319/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm198889/cmhansrd/1989-03-23/Writtens-13.html |date=4 October 2017 }}, ''Hansard'', 23 March 1989, column 804.</ref>
===Fingerprints on the rifle===
A print from Sheila's right ring finger was found on the right side of the butt, pointing downwards. A print from Bamber's right forefinger was on the breech end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun. He said he had used the gun to shoot rabbits. There were three further prints of insufficient detail to be identified.<ref>, 12 December 2002, para 72.</ref>


===The silencer=== ===Funeral, Bamber's behaviour===
{{External media
On the day of the murders, the police searched the gun cupboard in the ground floor office, but did not examine it or search for the silencer or sights for the rifle. Three days later, members of Bamber's extended family visited the farm with Basil Cock, the estate's executor, and during that visit, one of his cousins, David Boutflour, found the silencer and the sights in the cupboard. The court heard that several people had witnessed this discovery: Boutflour's father, Robert Boutflour; his sister, Ann Eaton; the farm secretary; and Basil Cock. The family took the silencer to Ann Eaton's home to examine it, and later said they found the surface had been damaged, and there seemed to be red paint and blood on it. They told the police, who collected the silencer on 12 August, at which point they reportedly noticed an inch-long grey hair attached to it, but this was lost before the silencer arrived at the ] at Huntingdon.<ref name=appeal73>, 12 December 2002, paras 73&ndash;80.</ref>
|width=220px
|float=right
| image1 = at the funeral of June, Nevill and Sheila, 16 August 1985.
|video1= , ], 16 August 1985.
}}
The ] into the murders was opened on 14 August 1985. The police gave evidence that the killings constituted a murder–suicide,<ref name=Connett/> and the bodies were released. Nevill, June and Sheila were cremated; the boys were buried. Jeremy's behaviour before and after the funeral increased suspicion among his family that he had been involved; they alleged that he sobbed during the funeral service for his parents and sister, and at one point seemed to buckle and had to be supported by Mugford, but that he was smiling and joking later at the ].{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=243–245}}


Shortly after the funerals, Jeremy travelled to ] with Mugford and a friend, where he bought a large quantity of cannabis; the travel agent who sold the tickets said the group had been in high spirits.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=248}} Jeremy also began selling his family's belongings; Mugford's mother was offered June's car and an ad was placed in a local newspaper asking £900 for Nevill's.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=251}} Just after his first arrest and release in September, Jeremy tried to sell twenty nude photographs of Sheila for £20,000 to '']'' and went on another overseas trip with a friend, this time to ].{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=319–320}}
The family returned to the farmhouse to search for the source of the red paint, and found what they said was recent damage to the underside of the red-painted mantel above the ] in the kitchen. A scenes-of-crime officer, DI Cook, took a paint sample on 14 August, and it contained the same 15 layers of paint and varnish found in the paint flake on the silencer. On 1 October, casts were taken of the marks on the mantel, and the marks were deemed consistent with the silencer having come into contact with the mantel more than once.<ref name=appeal73/> In February 2010, Bamber's legal team submitted evidence that they said showed the marks had been created after the crime-scene photographs were taken; see ].<ref name=Smith/>


===Fingerprints on rifle===
A scientist at Huntingdon, a Mr Hayward, found blood on the inside and outside surface of the silencer, the latter not enough to permit analysis. The blood inside was found to be the same blood group as Sheila's, though possibly a mixture of Nevill's and June's. A firearms expert, a Mr. Fletcher, said the blood was backspatter, caused by a close-contact shooting. Tests at the lab indicated it would have been physically impossible for Sheila to have reached the trigger to shoot herself with the silencer attached.<ref name=appeal73/>
A print from Sheila's right ring finger was found on the right side of the butt of the rifle, pointing downwards. A print from Jeremy's right forefinger was on the rear end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun. He said he had used the gun to shoot rabbits. There were three other prints that could not be identified.<ref>
{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=72}}.</ref>


===Silencer{{anchor|Silencer}}===
According to Bob Woffinden, a second firearms expert testified that the .22 Anschütz was unlikely to produce backspatter, especially when fitted with a silencer, and a third, Major Freddy Mead, who appeared for the defence, said there was no reason to believe the silencer had been used. Woffinden writes that it was not clear that the blood was Sheila's, only that it was the same blood group. It was also the same blood group as Robert Boutflour's&mdash;the father of the cousin who found the silencer&mdash;who was in the house when the discovery was made.<ref name=WoffindenMay192007>Woffinden, Bob. , ''The Daily Mail'', 19 May 2007.</ref> In February 2012, ''The Observer'' reported that gun experts commissioned by the defence in the US and UK concluded that the silencer may not have been used in the killings; see ].<ref name=Allison4Feb2012/>
{{further|#Arguments about the silencer}}
The silencer was not on the gun when the bodies were discovered. It was found by one of Jeremy's cousins, three days after the murders, in the ground-floor office gun cupboard.<ref name=appeal74/> Whether it was on the gun during the murders became a pivotal issue. The prosecution maintained that the silencer had indeed been on the gun, and that this meant Sheila could not have shot herself. Forensic tests indicated that her arms were not long enough to turn the gun on herself with the silencer attached.{{efn|R v Bamber, EWCA Crim 2912,&nbsp;79: "Exercises and tests conducted at the laboratory established that it would have been physically impossible for a woman of Sheila Caffell's height and reach to have operated the trigger and shot herself with the sound moderator attached to the weapon. She simply could not have reached it. Thus she could only have committed suicide if the sound moderator had been removed from the rifle."<ref name=appeal79>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=79}}.</ref>}} If she had shot the others with the silencer, then realized the gun was too long for her to shoot herself, the silencer would have been found next to her body; she had no reason to return it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to shoot herself. If Sheila was not the killer, it meant Jeremy had lied about the telephone call from his father saying Sheila had "gone berserk" with the gun.<ref name=Smith2010p20>{{harvnb|Smith|2010|loc=20}}.</ref>


The police searched the gun cupboard on the day of the murders but found nothing. Three days later, on 10 August, Bamber's extended family visited the farm with Basil Cock, the estate's ]. During that visit, one of the cousins, David Boutflour, found the silencer and rifle sights in the gun cupboard. The court heard that this was witnessed by Boutflour's father and sister, as well as by Basil Cock and the farm secretary.<ref name=appeal73>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=73}}.</ref>
Part of Bamber's defence is that the cousins who discovered the crucial evidence were beneficiaries of the estate, which his defence team say taints any discovery they say they made. Ann Eaton, who was present on the day the silencer was found, moved into White House Farm after the murders, and continued to live there with her family as of 2010.<ref name=Smith/>


Instead of alerting the police, the family took the silencer to Boutflour's sister's home.<ref name=appeal74/> Boutflour said it felt sticky.<ref name=Smith2010p20/> They found red paint and blood on the silencer, and its surface had been damaged. When the police collected the silencer on 12 August, five days after the murders, an officer reportedly noticed an inch-long grey hair attached to it, but this had disappeared by the time the silencer arrived at the ] (FSS) at ], ].<ref name=appeal74>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=74}}.</ref><ref name=Keel29Oct1986p27/> A scientist at the FSS, John Hayward, found blood on the inside and outside surface of the silencer, the latter not enough to permit analysis. The blood inside was found to be the same blood group as Sheila's, although it could have been a mixture of Nevill's and June's.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=75–79}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=319, 323–324}}.</ref> A firearms expert, Malcolm Fletcher, said the blood was backspatter caused by a close-contact shooting.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=78}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=318, 319}}.</ref>
===Julie Mugford's allegations===
It was because of Julie Mugford's statement to police a month after the case that Bamber was arrested. They had started dating in 1983 when she was a 19-year-old student at Goldsmith's College in London; she was still studying there when the killings occurred. She admitted to a brief background of dishonesty. She had been cautioned in 1985 for using a friend's chequebook, to obtain goods worth £700, after it had been reported stolen; she said she and the friend had repaid the money to the bank. She also acknowledged helping Bamber in March or April 1985 to steal just under £1,000 from the office of the Osea Road caravan site his family owned; she said he had staged a break-in to make it appear that strangers were responsible. The admission added to the picture of her own and Bamber's lack of credibility.<ref name=appeal2002/>


===Scratch marks on mantelpiece{{anchor|Scratch marks on mantelpiece}}===
She was supportive of Bamber after the murders; newspaper photographs of the funeral show him weeping and hanging onto her arm. On the day after the killings, she told police that she had received a telephone call from him at about 3:30 am on 7 August, during which he sounded worried and said, "There's something wrong at home." She said she had been tired and had not asked what it was. Her position toward Bamber changed on 3 September 1985 when they rowed about his involvement with another woman. She threw something at him, slapped him, and he twisted her arm up her back. She went to the police four days later and changed her statement.<ref name=appeal2002/>
{{further|#Arguments about the scratch marks}}
Jeremy's cousins returned to the farmhouse to search for the source of the red paint on the silencer. In the kitchen they found marks in the red paint on the underside of the mantelpiece above an ]. A sample taken by a scenes-of-crime officer was found to contain the same fifteen layers of paint and varnish that were in the paint flake found on the silencer. Casts of the marks on the mantelpiece were deemed consistent with the silencer having come into contact with the mantel several times.<ref name=appeal80>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=80}}.</ref>


===Julie Mugford's statements{{anchor|Julie Mugford}}===
In her second statement to police, she said he had talked disparagingly about his "old" father, his "mad" mother, his sister who he said had nothing to live for, and the twins who he said were disturbed. Bamber denied this, saying she was motivated by jealousy, but other witnesses offered similar testimony. Mugford's mother said Bamber had told her he hated his adoptive mother, and that he had described her as mad. A friend of Mugford's testified that Bamber had said around February 1985 that his parents kept him short of money, his mother was a religious freak, and "I fucking hate my parents." A farm worker testified that Bamber seemed not to get on with Sheila and had once said: "I'm not going to share my money with my sister."<ref name=appeal94>, 12 December 2002, paras 94&ndash;120.</ref>
====Background====
On 7 September 1985, a month after the murders, Mugford changed her statement to police, now alleging that Jeremy had been planning to kill his family. As a result of her second statement, he was arrested the following day.<ref name=appeal127>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=127–136}}.</ref>


Jeremy and Mugford had started dating in 1983, when she was aged 19 and studying for a degree in education at ] in London. She had taken a holiday job in Sloppy Joe's, a pizzeria in ], where Jeremy had a bar job in the evenings.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=86, 89}} During police interviews, Mugford admitted to a brief background of dishonesty: in 1985 she had been ] for using a friend's chequebook after it had been reported stolen to obtain goods worth around £700; she said that she and the friend had repaid the money to the bank. Mugford also acknowledged having helped Jeremy, in March 1985, to steal just under £1,000 from the office of the Osea Road caravan site his family owned. She said that he had staged a break-in to make it appear that strangers were responsible.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=114–115}}.</ref>
In discussions Mugford said she had dismissed as fantasies, she alleged that Bamber had said he wanted to sedate his parents and set fire to the farmhouse. He reportedly said Sheila would make a good scapegoat. Mugford alleged he had discussed entering the house through the kitchen window because the catch was broken, and leaving it via a different window that latched when it was shut from the outside.<ref name=appeal94/>


====Statements to police====
She said she had spent the weekend before the murders with him in his cottage in Goldhanger, where he dyed his hair black, and that she saw his mother's bicycle there. This was significant because the prosecution later alleged he had used the bicycle to cycle between his cottage and the farmhouse on the night of the murders. She told police Bamber had telephoned her at 9:50 pm on 6 August to say he had been thinking about the crime all day, was pissed off, and that it was "tonight or never." A few hours later, at 3:00&ndash;3:30 am, she said he phoned her again to say: "Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I haven't had any sleep all night ... bye honey and I love you lots." Her flatmates' evidence suggested that call came through closer to 3 am. He called her later during the morning of 7 August to tell her that Sheila had gone mad, and that a police car was coming to pick her up and bring her to the farmhouse. When she arrived there, she said he pulled her to one side and said: "I should have been an actor."<ref name=appeal94/>
Mugford was initially supportive of Jeremy. Photographs of his parents' and Sheila's funeral show him weeping and hanging onto her arm. During an interview with the police on the day after the murders, she said that Jeremy had telephoned her at home in the early hours of 7 August, between 3:00 and 3:30 am, and said, "There's something wrong at home," and sounded worried. She said she had been tired and had not asked what was wrong.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=94–95}}.</ref>


Mugford's position changed the following month after she'd had a series of rows with Jeremy. He seemed to want to end the relationship, and they had argued about his involvement in the murders. Mugford told Jeremy he was a psychopath and at one point tried to smother him with a pillow.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=261–264}} During one argument on 4 September, another woman telephoned Jeremy in Mugford's presence. As it became clear to Mugford that he had been seeing the woman, she smashed a mirror and slapped him; he then twisted her arm up her back.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=268–271}} Three days later, she went to the police and changed her statement.<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=275}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=96}}.</ref>
Later that evening she asked him whether he had done it. He said no, but that a friend of his had, whom he named; the man was a plumber the family had used in the past. He allegedly said he had told this friend how he could enter and leave the farmhouse undetected, and that one of his instructions had been for the friend to telephone him from the farm on one of the phones in the house that had a memory redial facility, so that if the police checked it, it would give him an alibi. Everything had gone as planned, he said, except that Nevill had put up a fight, and the friend had become angry and shot him seven times. The friend had allegedly told Sheila to lie down and shoot herself last, Bamber said. The friend then placed the bible on her chest so she appeared to have killed herself in a religious frenzy. The children were shot in their sleep, he said. Mugford said Bamber claimed to have paid the friend £2,000.<ref name=appeal94/>

In the second statement, Mugford alleged that between July and October 1984, Jeremy had said he wished he could "get rid of them all".<ref name=appeal97/>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=278}} He had talked disparagingly about his "old" father and "mad" mother, she claimed, who were trying to "run his life". Jeremy was also alleged to have said that his sister had nothing to live for and that the twins were disturbed. That the Bambers were paying for Sheila's expensive flat in Maida Vale annoyed him, she said.<ref name=appeal97>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=97}}.</ref>

In discussions she said she had dismissed as "idle talk", Jeremy had talked about sedating his parents with sleeping pills, shooting them, then setting fire to the farmhouse. He reportedly said Sheila would make a good scapegoat. Mugford alleged he had discussed cycling along the back roads to the house, entering through the kitchen window because the catch was broken, and leaving it via a different window that latched when it was shut from the outside.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=279}}<ref name=appeal98ff>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=98–115}}.</ref> A telephone call would be made from White House Farm to his home in Goldhanger "because the last phone call made would be recorded". Jeremy claimed to have killed rats with his bare hands to test whether he was able to kill but he said it had taught him that he would not be able to kill his family, although he allegedly continued to talk about doing so.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=281–282}}

===="Tonight or never" allegation====
Mugford said she had spent the weekend before the murders with Jeremy in his cottage in Goldhanger, where he had dyed his hair black. She had seen his mother's bicycle there, she said; the prosecution later alleged that he had used this bicycle to cycle between his cottage and White House Farm on the night of the murders to avoid being seen in his car on the road. Mugford told police that Jeremy had telephoned her at 9:50&nbsp;pm on 6 August to say he had been thinking about the crime all day, was "pissed off", and that it was "tonight or never". A few hours later, at 3:00–3:30&nbsp;am on 7 August, Mugford said he phoned her again to say: "Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I haven't had any sleep all night&nbsp;... bye honey and I love you lots." Her flatmates' evidence suggested that call had come through closer to 3:00&nbsp;am. Jeremy called later in the morning to tell Mugford that Sheila had gone mad and that a police car was coming to pick her up. When she arrived with the police at Jeremy's cottage, she said he had pulled her to one side and said: "I should have been an actor."<ref name=appeal98ff/>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=282}}

Later on the evening of 7 August, Mugford asked Jeremy whether he had done it. He said no, but that a friend of his had, whom he named; the man was a plumber the family had used in the past. Jeremy allegedly said he had told this friend how he could enter and leave the farmhouse undetected, and that one of his instructions had been for the friend to telephone him from one of the phones in the farmhouse that had a ], so that if the police checked it he would have an alibi. Everything had gone as planned, he said, except that Nevill had put up a fight, and the friend had become angry and shot him seven times. The friend had allegedly told Sheila to lie down and shoot herself last, Jeremy said. The friend then placed the Bible on her chest so she appeared to have killed herself in a religious frenzy. The children were shot in their sleep, he said. Mugford said Jeremy claimed to have paid the friend £2,000.<ref name=appeal98ff/>

====Letter about Mugford{{anchor|Letter about Mugford}}====
A letter dated 26 September 1985 from the assistant director of public prosecutions who prepared the case against Jeremy suggests that Mugford not be prosecuted for the burglary, the ], and a further offence of selling cannabis. Mugford subsequently testified against Jeremy during his trial in October 1986. The judge told the jury that they could convict Jeremy on Mugford's testimony alone.<ref name=Allison29March2012>Eric Allison, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160927191228/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/mar/29/jeremy-bamber-appeal-evidence-itv |date=27 September 2016 }}, ''The Guardian'', 29 March 2012.</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161231080635/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/interactive/2012/mar/29/jeremy-bamber-prosecutor-police-documents |date=31 December 2016 }}, ''The Guardian'', 29 March 2012.</ref> Immediately after the verdict was announced, Mugford sold her story to the '']'' for £25,000 ({{formatnum:{{inflation|UK|25,000|1986|fmt=eq|r=-3|cursign=£}}}}).<ref name=Lee2015p381>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=381}}.</ref>{{inflation-fn|UK}}


===Bamber's arrest=== ===Bamber's arrest===
As a result of Mugford's statement Bamber was arrested on 8 September, as was the friend Mugford said he had implicated, though the latter had a solid alibi and was released. Bamber told police Mugford was lying because he had jilted her. He said he loved his parents and sister, and denied they had kept him short of money; he said the only reason he had broken into the caravan site with Mugford was to prove that security was poor. He said he had occasionally gained entry to the farmhouse through downstairs windows, and had used a knife to move the catches from the outside. He also said he had seen his parents' wills, and that they had left the estate to be shared between him and Sheila. As for the rifle, he told police the gun was used mostly with the silencer off because it would otherwise not fit in its case.<ref name=appeal127/> As a result of Mugford's statement, Jeremy was arrested on 8 September 1985, as was the friend Mugford said he had implicated, although the latter had a solid alibi and was released. Jeremy told police Mugford was lying because he had jilted her. He said he loved his parents and sister, and denied that they had kept him short of money; he claimed the only reason he had broken into the caravan site with Mugford was to prove that security was poor. He further claimed he had occasionally gained entry to the farmhouse through a downstairs window and had used a knife to move the catches from the outside. He also claimed he had seen his parents' wills, and that they had left the estate to be shared between him and Sheila. As for the rifle, Jeremy told police the gun was used mostly with the silencer off because it would otherwise not fit in its case.<ref name=appeal127/>


He was bailed from the police station on 13 September, after which he went on holiday to Saint-Tropez. Before leaving England, he returned to the farmhouse, gaining entry by the downstairs bathroom window. He said he did this because he had left his keys in London and needed some papers for the trip to France; he did not borrow keys from the housekeeper who lived nearby. When he returned to England on 29 September, he was re-arrested and charged with the murders.<ref name=appeal127>, 12 December 2002, paras 127&ndash;136, 141. Charged on 9 September with breaking into the Osea Bay caravan site on 25 March 1985 and stealing £980, Jeremy was released on bail on 13 September,<ref>{{cite news |title=Model's brother remanded on bail |work=The Guardian |date=14 September 1985|at=3}}</ref> after which he went on holiday to Saint-Tropez with a friend. Shortly before this, he tried to sell his life story and nude photographs of Sheila to ''The Sun'' newspaper for £20,000.<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=319–320}}; {{cite news |last1=Lashmar |first1=Paul |title=Missing facts on a massacre |work=The Observer |date=22 September 1985 |at=5}}</ref> Before leaving England, Jeremy said that he returned to the farmhouse, gaining entry by the downstairs bathroom window. He claimed he did this because he had left his keys in London and needed papers from the house for the trip to France; he entered through the window rather than borrow keys from the farm's housekeeper who lived nearby. When he returned to England on 29 September, Jeremy was arrested at ] and charged with the murders.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=127–136}}; {{cite news |title=Murder charge |work=The Guardian |date=30 September 1985}}; {{cite news |title=Bamber killings: son remanded |url=https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=tMJAAAAAIBAJ&pg=2068,74408 |work=The Glasgow Herald |date=1 October 1985 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130124223852/http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=tMJAAAAAIBAJ&sjid=36UMAAAAIBAJ&pg=2068,74408 |archive-date=24 January 2013|url-status=live}}</ref>
*For Bamber's second arrest, and the holiday in Saint-Tropez, see , ''The Glasgow Herald'', 1 October 1985.</ref>


==Trial, October 1986== ==Trial, October 1986==
Bamber was tried before Mr Justice Drake (Sir Maurice Drake) and a jury at Chelmsford Crown Court in October 1986 during a case that lasted 19 days. The prosecution was led by Anthony Arlidge QC, and the defence by Geoffrey Rivlin QC, supported by Ed Lawson, QC.<ref name=Connett>Connett, David. , ''The Independent'', 8 August 2010.</ref> ''The Times'' wrote that Bamber cut an arrogant figure in the witness box; at one point when prosecutors accused him of lying, he replied: "That is what you have got to establish."<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>

===Prosecution case=== ===Prosecution case===
] {{coord|51.745857|0.755881}}<br />'''B''': White House Farm, Pages Lane, ]. {{coord|51.7591|0.8032}}]]
]
Jeremy's trial, which lasted eighteen days, opened on 3 October 1986 before ] and a jury of seven men and five women at ].<ref>{{cite news |last1=Keel |first1=Paul |title=Farmhouse killings by son who called police—QC |work=The Guardian |date=3 October 1986 |at=2}}</ref><ref name=Keel29Oct1986p1/> The prosecution was led by ] ], and the defence by Geoffrey Rivlin QC, supported by Ed Lawson QC.<ref name=Connett>Connett, David (8 August 2010). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170915032748/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/past-crimes-the-bamber-files-2046383.html |date=15 September 2017 }}. ''The Independent''.</ref> ''The Times'' wrote that Jeremy cut an arrogant figure in the witness box. At one point, when prosecutors accused him of lying, he replied: "That is what you have got to establish."<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>
The prosecution case was that Bamber was motivated by hatred and greed. They argued he had left the farm around 10 pm on 6 August and later returned by bicycle in the early hours of the morning, using a route that avoided the main roads. He entered the house through a downstairs bathroom window, took the rifle with the silencer attached, and went upstairs. He shot June in her bed, but she managed to get up and walk a few steps before collapsing and dying. He shot Nevill in the bedroom too, but he was able to get downstairs where he and Bamber fought in the kitchen, before he was shot several times in the head. Sheila was also shot in the main bedroom. The children were shot in their beds as they slept.<ref name=appeal145>, 12 December 2002, paras 145–150.</ref>

The prosecution case was that Jeremy, motivated by hatred and greed, had left White House Farm around 10&nbsp;pm on 6 August 1985, after dining with his family, to drive to his home in Goldhanger. Later, perhaps in the early hours of the morning of 7 August, he had returned to the farm on his mother's bicycle — which he had borrowed a few days earlier — cycling along a route that avoided the main roads and approaching the farmhouse from the back. He had entered the house through a downstairs bathroom window, taken the rifle with the silencer attached, and gone upstairs.<ref name=appeal145/><ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=413}}; for the prosecution's summary, {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=342–344}}.</ref> He had shot June in her bed; she had managed to walk a few steps before collapsing and dying. He had shot Nevill in the bedroom too, but Nevill was able to get downstairs where he and Jeremy fought in the kitchen before Jeremy shot him four times, twice in his temple and twice in the top of his head. He had shot Sheila in the main bedroom, next to her mother, and had shot the children in their beds as they slept.<ref name=appeal145>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=145–150}}.</ref>{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=410}}


They argued that Bamber then set about arranging the scene to make it appear that Sheila was the killer. He then discovered that she could not have reached the trigger with the silencer attached, so he removed it and placed it in the cupboard, then placed a bible next to her body to introduce a religious theme. He removed the kitchen phone from its hook, left the house via a kitchen window, and banged it from the outside so that the catch dropped back into position. He then cycled home. Shortly after 3 am, he telephoned Mugford, then called the police at 3.26 a.m to say he had just received a frantic call from his father. In order to create a delay before the bodies were discovered, he did not call 999, drove slowly to the farmhouse, and told police his sister was familiar with guns, so they would be reluctant to enter.<ref name=appeal145/> Jeremy had then arranged the scene to make it appear that Sheila was the killer, the prosecution argued. He discovered that she could not have reached the trigger with the silencer attached, so he removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard, then placed a Bible next to her body to introduce a religious theme. After removing the kitchen phone from its hook, he left the house via a kitchen window, perhaps after showering, and banged the window from the outside so that the catch dropped back into position. He had then cycled back to Goldhanger on his mother's bicycle. Shortly after 3&nbsp;am, he had telephoned Mugford, then the police at 3:26&nbsp;am to say he had just received a frantic call from his father. To create a delay before the bodies were discovered, he had not called 999, had driven slowly to the farmhouse, and had told police that his sister was familiar with guns so that they would be reluctant to enter.<ref name=appeal145/>


They argued that Bamber did not receive a call from his father&mdash;that Nevill was too badly injured after the first shots to have spoken to anyone; that there was no blood on the kitchen phone that had been left dangling; and that Nevill would have called the police before calling Bamber.<ref name=appeal151>, 12 December 2002, para 151.</ref> The prosecution position was that, if the call to Bamber really was the last thing the father did before shots were fired, and if he thereafter dropped the receiver, the line to Bamber's home would have been left open for one to two minutes, and Bamber would not have been able to telephone the police immediately to let them know about his father's call, as he said he did.<ref name=appeal66/> That the line would not have cleared in time for him to call the police is one of several disputed points.<ref name=Green>Green, Andrew. , review of Scott Lomax's ''Jeremy Bamber'', by Andrew Green, founder of ''Innocent'', accessed 8 August 2010.</ref> The prosecution further argued that Jeremy had not received a telephone call from his father, that Nevill was too badly injured after the first shots to have spoken to anyone, that there was no blood on the kitchen phone that had been left off the hook, and that Nevill would have called the police before calling Jeremy. They also argued that, had Jeremy really received such a call, he would have dialled 999, alerted the farm workers, then made his way quickly to White House Farm himself.<ref name=appeal151>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=151}}.</ref>


The silencer played a central role. It was deemed to have been on the rifle when it was fired, because of the blood found inside it. The prosecution said the blood was Sheila's, and that it had come from her head when the silencer was pointed at her. Expert evidence was submitted that, given her injuries after the first shot, Sheila could not have shot herself, placed the silencer in the downstairs cupboard, then run back upstairs to where her body was found. There was also expert testimony that there were no traces of gun oil on her nightdress, despite 25 shots having been fired and the gun having been reloaded at least twice. Prosecutors argued that, had Sheila killed her family then discovered she could not commit suicide with the silencer fitted, it would have been found next to her; there was no reason for her to have returned it to the gun cupboard. The possibility that she had carried out the killings was further discounted because, it was argued, she was mentally well at the time; had no interest in or knowledge of guns; lacked the strength to overcome her father; and there was no evidence on her clothes or body that she had moved around the crime scene, or had been involved in a struggle.<ref name=appeal151/> The silencer played a central role in the prosecution's case. It was deemed to have been on the rifle when it was fired because of the blood found inside it. The prosecution said the blood had come from Sheila's head when the silencer was pointed at her. Had she discovered that she could not shoot herself with the silencer attached, the court heard, it would have been found next to her body; she had no reason to return it to the gun cupboard. That she had carried out the killings was further discounted because, it was argued, she had not recently expressed ]; the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or father; she had no interest in or knowledge of guns; she lacked the strength to overcome her father; and there was no evidence on her clothes or body that she had moved around the crime scene or been involved in a struggle. In particular, her long fingernails had remained intact.<ref name=appeal151/>


===Defence case=== ===Defence case===
The defence responded that the witnesses who said Bamber disliked his family were lying or had misinterpreted his words. Mugford had further lied about Bamber's confession, they said, because he had betrayed her, and she wanted to stop him from being with anyone else. No one had seen him cycle to and from the farm. There were no marks on him on the night that suggested he had been in a fight, and no blood-stained clothing of his was recovered. The reason he had not gone to the farm as quickly as he should have when his father phoned was that he was afraid.<ref name=appeal152>, 12 December 2002, para 152.</ref> The defence maintained that the witnesses who said Jeremy disliked his family were lying or had misinterpreted his words. Mugford had lied about his confession, they said, because he had betrayed her. No one had seen Jeremy cycle to and from the farm. There were no marks on him on the night in question that suggested he had been in a fight. No blood-stained clothing of his was recovered. He had not driven to the farm as quickly as he could have after his father telephoned because he was afraid, they said. There was no ] in the finding of a hacksaw in the garden, because Jeremy had entered the house via the windows many times, before the killings and since.<ref name=appeal152/>


They argued that Sheila was the killer, and that she did know how to handle guns because she had been raised on a farm, and had attended shoots when she was younger. She had a very serious mental illness, had said she felt she was capable of killing her children, and the loaded rifle had been left on the kitchen table by Bamber. There had been a recent family argument about placing the children in foster care. The defence also argued that people who have carried out so-called "altruistic" killings have been known to engage in ritualistic behaviour before killing themselves, and that Sheila might have placed the silencer in the cupboard, changed her clothes, and washed herself, which would explain why there was little lead on her hands, or sugar from the floor on her feet. There was also a possibility that the blood in the silencer was not hers, the defence said, but was a mixture of Nevill's and June's.<ref name=appeal152/> The defence argued that Sheila was the killer and that she did know how to handle guns, having been raised on a farm and had attended shoots when she was younger. She had a very serious mental illness, had told a psychiatrist she felt capable of killing her children, and the loaded rifle and cartridges had been left on the kitchen table by Jeremy. There had been a recent family argument about placing her children in foster care.<ref name=appeal152>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=152}}; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=364}}.</ref> A former boyfriend of Sheila's gave a written statement to the court that she had had some kind of breakdown in March 1985, in his presence, when she began beating the wall with her fists because the telephone line had gone dead during a call; she had said the phone was bugged and talked about God and the devil, and how the latter loved her. This former boyfriend said he had feared for the safety of people around Sheila, who had a "deep and intense dislike" of June, her adoptive mother.<ref>{{cite news |title=Friend tells of Bambi's 'temper' |work=The Guardian |date=21 October 1986 |at=2}}</ref> The defence argued that people who have carried out so-called "altruistic" killings have been known to engage in ritualistic behaviour before killing themselves, and that Sheila might have placed the silencer in the cupboard, changed her clothes and washed herself, which would explain why there was little lead on her hands, or why sugar from the floor was not found on her feet. There was also a possibility that the blood in the silencer was not hers, but was a mixture of Nevill's and June's.<ref name=appeal152/>


===Summing up and verdict=== ===Summing up, verdict===
] (pictured in 2013) decided in 1988 that Bamber should never be released.<ref name=appeal2008p1/>]]
The judge said there were three crucial points, in no particular order. Did the jury believe Julie Mugford or Jeremy Bamber? Were they sure that Sheila was not the killer who then committed suicide? He said this question involved another: was the second, fatal, shot fired at Sheila with the silencer on? If yes, she could not have fired it. Finally, did Nevill call Bamber in the middle of the night? If there was no such call, it undermined the entirety of Bamber's story, and the only reason he would have had to invent the phone call was that he was responsible for the murders.<ref name=appeal153>, 12 December 2002, paras 153–154.</ref> The jury found Bamber guilty on 28 October by a majority of 10 to two; had one more juror supported him, he would not have been convicted. The judge told him he was "evil, almost beyond belief" and sentenced him to five life terms, with a recommendation that he serve at least 25 years.<ref name=Burrell>Burrell, Ian. , ''The Independent'', 13 March 2001; courtesy link to innocent.org, scroll down to see the article.</ref>
The judge told the jury that there were three crucial points, in no particular order. Did they believe Mugford or Jeremy? Were they sure that Sheila was not the killer who then committed suicide? He said this question involved another: was the second, fatal, shot fired at Sheila with the silencer on? If yes, she could not have fired it. Finally, did Nevill call Jeremy in the middle of the night? If there was no such call, it undermined the entirety of Jeremy's story; the only reason he would have had to invent the phone call was that he was responsible for the murders.<ref name=appeal153/>


On 28 October, after deliberating for more than nine hours, the jury found Jeremy guilty by a ] of 10–2 (the minimum required for conviction). Sentencing him to five ], with a recommendation that he serve a minimum of twenty-five years,<ref name=Keel29Oct1986p1>{{cite news |last1=Keel |first1=Paul |title=Bamber's perfect crime brings 25-year sentence |work=The Guardian |date=29 October 1986|at=1}}</ref> the judge told Jeremy: "Your conduct in planning and carrying out the killing of five members of your family was evil, almost beyond belief."{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=377–379}}<ref name=Keel29Oct1986p27>{{cite news |last1=Keel |first1=Paul |title=The trail that led to Bamber |work=The Guardian |date=29 October 1986|at=27}}</ref> In December 1994, Home Secretary ] told Jeremy that he would ], following a decision in 1988 by the Home Secretary of the day, Douglas Hurd.<ref name=appeal2008p1>{{harvnb| EWHC 862 (QB)|loc=1}}; for Hurd, also see {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=387}}; for Howard, also see Campbell, Duncan (29 April 1985). "Bamber loses plea over life term ruling", ''The Guardian''.</ref>
==Bamber in jail==
===Jail conditions===
Bamber said in 2001 he had had 17 jail moves and 89 cell moves since he was first arrested.<ref>Morris, Steven. , ''The Guardian'', 13 March 2001; courtesy link to innocent.org, scroll down to see the article.</ref> ''The Times'' alleges that he has been treated with a degree of indulgence. At ], Worcestershire, he was reportedly given the key to his cell, studied for his GCSE in sociology and media studies, had a daily badminton lesson, and drew pictures of supermodels in art class that he sold through an outside agent. He has received compensation twice, once after suffering whiplash injuries when a van moving him between prisons crashed, and once when a Gameboy was stolen from his cell.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/>

An attractive man who was clearly comfortable with women, he says he has had three relationships with women inside, one of them with a trainee policewoman, and that he receives 50 letters a week from women. He has been involved in some trouble too. He once attacked a prisoner with a broken bottle, and had to be placed in solitary confinement when inmates were angered by his stories to journalists about the comfortable lifestyle he said prisoners have.<ref name=TimesMarch182001/> In May 2004, he was attacked by another inmate while making a telephone call from ], near York, and was given 28 stitches for cuts to his neck.<ref name=Wainwright>Wainwright, Martin. , ''The Guardian'', 1 June 2004.</ref> As a prisoner alleging a miscarriage of justice, he is allowed access to the media and once called a radio station from Whitemoor jail to protest his innocence.<ref>, ''The Times'', 18 March 2001.
*For Woffinden's role in establishing prisoners' access to the media, see Dyer, Clare. , ''The Guardian'', 9 July 1999.</ref>

===Lawsuits===
He has launched several unsuccessful lawsuits while in prison to recover some of the money from his family's estate. In 2003, he began a High Court action to recover £1.2m from his adoptive grandmother's estate. He told the court he should have inherited her home at Carbonnells Farm, Wix, near Clacton, and that he was owed 17 years back rent from his cousins who were living there.<ref name=BBCAug182003>, BBC News, 18 August 2003.
*Also see Ezard, John. , ''The Guardian'', 19 August 2003.</ref> His grandmother, Mabel Speakman, cut Bamber out of her will when he was arrested, and most of the inheritance went to Pamela Boutflour, June Bamber's sister.<ref name=TimesOct291986>, ''The Times'', 29 October 1986.</ref> Boutflour subsequently moved into Carbonnells Farm with her husband Robert.<ref name=BBCAug182003/> In 2004, Bamber went back to the High Court to argue he had been unfairly frozen out of the profits made by the caravan site. Although at that point no longer a shareholder, he had retained shares after his conviction, but had sold them to pay legal costs during his claim on his grandmother's estate. The High Court ruled that he was not entitled to any profit from the caravan site because of his conviction.<ref name=BBCOct62004/>


==Appeals== ==Appeals==
===Leave to appeal refused, 1989 and 1994=== ===Leave to appeal refused, 1989 and 1994===
Jeremy first sought leave to ] in November 1986, arguing that the judge had misdirected the jury. The application was heard and refused by ] in April 1988.<ref name=appeal155/> During a full hearing in March 1989 before three Appeal Court judges—], the ]; ]; and Mr Justice Henry<ref name=Appeal21March1989>{{cite news |title=Bamber refused appeal over farmhouse murders |work=The Guardian |date=21 March 1989 |at=4}}</ref>—Jeremy's lawyer, Geoffrey Rivlin QC, argued that the trial judge's summing up had been biased against his client, that his language had been too forceful, and that he had undermined the defence by advancing his own theory. Rivlin also argued that the defence had not pressed Mugford about her dealings with the media but should have, because as soon as the trial was over her story began to appear in newspapers.<ref name=appeal155>{{harvnb|Powell|1994|loc=276, 283–285}}; {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=155–158}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Judge ridiculed Bamber's defence, says QC |work=The Guardian |date=15 March 1989 |at=8}}</ref> On 20 March 1989 the judges refused Jeremy leave to appeal, ruling that there was nothing unsafe or unsatisfactory about the verdicts.<ref name=Appeal21March1989/>
Bamber first sought leave to appeal in June 1987, arguing that the judge's summing up had omitted material important to the defence, and that the judge had himself expressed strong views. The application was heard and dismissed by a single judge, then heard again by a full court. Leave to appeal was refused on 20 March 1989 by Lord Chief Justice, ].<ref name=appeal155>, 12 December 2002, paras 155&ndash;158.</ref>


Because of the criticism of the police investigation by the trial judge, Essex police held an internal inquiry, conducted by Detective Chief Superintendent Dickinson. Bamber alleged this report confirmed that evidence had been suppressed by the police, so he made a formal complaint, which was investigated in 1991 by the City of London Police at the request of the Home Office. This process uncovered more documentation, which Bamber used to petition the Home Secretary in September 1993 for a referral back to the Court of Appeal, refused in July 1994. During this process, the Home Office declined to give Bamber expert evidence that it had obtained, so Bamber applied for judicial review of that decision in November 1994; this resulted in the Home Office handing over its expert evidence, but at that point Bamber made no further petition. In February 1996, the Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits without informing Bamber or his lawyers. The officer who did it said he had not been aware that the case was on-going.<ref name=appeal159>, 12 December 2002, para 159ff.</ref> Because the trial judge had criticized the police investigation, ] held an internal inquiry. Jeremy alleged this report confirmed that evidence had been withheld by the police so he made a formal complaint, which was investigated in 1991 by the ]. This investigation uncovered more material, which Jeremy used to petition the Home Secretary in September 1993 for a referral back to the Court of Appeal,<ref>{{cite news |title=Bamber appeal plea |work=The Guardian |date=28 September 1993 |at=3}}</ref><ref name=Shelley13Nov1993/> refused in July 1994. During this process, the ] declined to give Jeremy the expert evidence it had obtained, so he applied for judicial review of their decision in November 1994, which resulted in the Home Office handing over the evidence.<ref name=appeal159>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=159ff}}</ref> In 1996 a police officer destroyed many of the trial exhibits, saying later he had not been aware that the case was ongoing.<ref name=appeal165>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=165}}</ref><ref name=Connett/> Jeremy's defence team referred to the destruction of blood samples as a "disgrace".<ref name=Foster12March2001/>


===Criminal Cases Review Commission, 1997–2001; Court of Appeal, 2002=== ===Court of Appeal, 2002===
{{see|Criminal Cases Review Commission}} ====Criminal Cases Review Commission referral====
In 1997 the Home Office passed Jeremy's case to the ] (CCRC), which had just been established to review alleged miscarriages of justice. In March 2001 the CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal because of the discovery of ] inside the silencer; this was found as a result of a test not available in 1986 and constituted fresh evidence.<ref>{{cite web |title=Commission refers conviction of Jeremy Bamber to Court of Appeal |url=http://www.ccrc.gov.uk/NewsArchive/news_166.htm |publisher=Criminal Cases Review Commission |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041223130435/http://www.ccrc.gov.uk/NewsArchive/news_166.htm |archive-date=23 December 2004 |date=12 March 2001|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name=CCRCreferralMarch2001>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=166ff}}</ref> Jeremy's conviction rested in part on evidence that Sheila's blood had been found inside the silencer, suggesting that it had been on the gun when she died; but her arms were not long enough to point the gun back at herself and pull the trigger with the silencer attached.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Morris |first1=Steven |title=Bamber relies on 'forensic issue' to overturn 1986 conviction |work=The Guardian |date=13 March 2001 |at=2}}</ref> The appeal was heard from 17 October to 1 November 2002, at the ], by ], Mr Justice Wright and ], who published their decision on 12 December 2002.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912}} The prosecution was represented by Victor Temple QC and Jeremy by Michael Turner QC.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=170}} In a 522-paragraph judgment, the judges concluded that there was no conduct on the part of investigators that threatened the integrity of the trial, and that the more they examined the case, the more they thought the jury had been right.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=511–513}}<ref name=HallDec132002>Sarah Hall, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170102173935/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/dec/13/ukcrime.sarahhall |date=2 January 2017 }}, ''The Guardian'', 13 December 2002.</ref>
] was dismissed in December 2002.]]
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was established in April 1997 to review allegations of miscarriage of justice, and Bamber's case was passed to them at that time.<ref>, Criminal Cases Review Commission, 12 March 2001.</ref> The CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal in March 2001 on the grounds that new DNA testing on the silencer constituted fresh evidence.<ref name=CCRCreferralMarch2001>, 12 December 2002, para 166ff.</ref> The appeal was heard by ], Mr Justice Wright, and Mr Justice Henriques from 17 October to 1 November 2002, and the decision published on 12 December.<ref name=appeal2002/> The prosecution was represented by Victor Temple QC and Bamber by Michael Turner QC. Bamber brought 16 issues to the attention of the court, 14 of them about failure to disclose evidence or the fabrication of evidence, and two (grounds 14 and 15) related to the silencer and DNA testing:<ref name=appeal169>, 12 December 2002, paras 169–174.</ref>


====Grounds====
{{colbegin}}
Jeremy initially brought sixteen issues to the attention of the court.<ref name=appeal174>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=174}}</ref> Two (grounds 14 and 15) related to the silencer and DNA testing; the rest were about failure to disclose evidence or the fabrication of evidence.<ref name=appeal169>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=169–174}}</ref> The defence withdrew ground 11 ("the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant") before the hearing.<ref name=appeal428>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=428}}</ref><ref name=Kennedy18Oct2002>{{cite news |last1=Kennedy |first1=Dominic |title=15 reasons by Bamber says he is innocent |work=The Times |issue=67585 |date=18 October 2002 |page=3}}</ref>
#Hand swabs from Sheila<ref name=appeal175>, 12 December 2002, paras 175–213.</ref>
#Testing of hand swabs from Sheila<ref name=appeal214>, 12 December 2002, paras 214–232.</ref>
#Disturbance of the crime scene<ref name=appeal233>, 12 December 2002, paras 233–260.</ref>
#Evidence relating to windows<ref name=appeal261>, 12 December 2002, paras 261–288.</ref>
#Timing of phone call to Julie Mugford<ref name=appeal289>, 12 December 2002, paras 289–330.</ref>
#Credibility of Julie Mugford<ref name=appeal331>, 12 December 2002, paras 331–366.</ref>
#Letter from Colin Caffell<ref name=appeal367>, 12 December 2002, paras 367–377.</ref>
#Statement of Colin Caffell<ref name=appeal378>, 12 December 2002, paras 378–391.</ref>
#Photograph showing the words "I hate this place"<ref name=appeal392>, 12 December 2002, paras 392–404.</ref>
#The bible<ref name=appeal405>, 12 December 2002, paras 405–427.</ref>
#Proposed purchase by Bamber of a Porsche<ref name=appeal428>, 12 December 2002, para 428.</ref>
#Telephone in the kitchen<ref name=appeal429>, 12 December 2002, paras 429–443.</ref>
#Scars on Bamber's hands<ref name=appeal444>, 12 December 2002, paras 444–451.</ref>
#Blood in the silencer<ref name=appeal452>, 12 December 2002, paras 452–475.</ref>
#DNA evidence<ref name=appeal476>, 12 December 2002, paras 476–508.</ref>
#Police misconduct<ref name=appeal509>, 12 December 2002, paras 509–511.</ref>
{{colend}}


<blockquote>{{div col|colwidth=18em|rules=yes|small=}}
Although all the issues were reviewed by the court (except point 11, withdrawn by the defence before adjudication), the reason for the referral was point 15, the discovery of DNA on the silencer, the result of a test not available in 1986. The evidence from the original trial being challenged was from a Mr Hayward, a biologist at the Forensic Science Laboratory. He had found human blood inside the silencer, and had asserted that its blood group was consistent with it coming from Sheila, but not from any of the other victims&mdash;though he also said there was a remote possibility that it was a mixture of blood from Nevill and June. Mark Webster, an expert instructed by Bamber's defence team for the appeal, argued that Hayward's tests had been inadequate, and that there was a real possibility, not a remote one, that the blood came from Nevill and June.<ref name=appeal452/>
*Ground 1a&nbsp;– "hand swabs from Sheila Caffell"<ref name=appeal175>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=175–213}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*1b&nbsp;– "the testing of the hand swabs from Sheila Caffell"<ref name=appeal214>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=214–232}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*2&nbsp;– "disturbance of the crime scene"<ref name=appeal233>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=233–260}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*3&nbsp;– "evidence relating to windows"<ref name=appeal261>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=261–288}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*4&nbsp;– "timing of phone call to Julie Mugford"<ref name=appeal289>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=289–330}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*5&nbsp;– "evidence relevant to the credibility of Julie Mugford"<ref name=appeal331>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=331–366}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*6&nbsp;– "letter from Colin Caffell"<ref name=appeal367>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=367–377}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*7&nbsp;– "the statement of Colin Caffell"<ref name=appeal378>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=378–391}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*8&nbsp;– "photograph showing carving of the words 'I hate this place'"<ref name=appeal392>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=392–404}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*9&nbsp;– "the Bible"<ref name=appeal405>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=405–421}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*10&nbsp;– "the question of inheritance"<ref name=appeal422>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=422–427}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*11&nbsp;– "the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant"<ref name=appeal428/>
*12&nbsp;– "the telephone in the office"<ref name=appeal429>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=429–443}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*13&nbsp;– "scars on the appellant's hands"<ref name=appeal444>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=444–451}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*14 and 15&nbsp;– "blood in the ]"<ref name=appeal452>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=452–475}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*15&nbsp;– "DNA evidence"<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=476–508}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
*16&nbsp;– "police misconduct"<ref name=appeal509>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=509–511}}; {{harvnb|Kennedy|2002}}.</ref>
{{div col end}}</blockquote>


====New silencer evidence====
The defence further argued that new tests comparing DNA discovered in the moderator to a sample from Sheila's biological mother suggested that the "major component" of the DNA in the silencer did not come from Sheila.<ref name=Foster>Foster, Peter and Penny, Thomas. , ''The Daily Telegraph'', 12 March 2001.</ref> A DNA sample from June's sister, Pamela Boutflour, suggested the major component came from her. The court concluded that June's DNA was in the silencer; Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer; and that there was evidence of DNA from at least one male. The judges' conclusion was that the results were complex, incomplete, and meaningless since they did not establish how June's DNA came to be on the silencer years after the trial, did not establish that Sheila's was not on it, and did not lead to a conclusion that Bamber's conviction was unsafe.<ref name=appeal476/>
] was dismissed in December 2002.]]
Although all the grounds (except 11) were reviewed by the court, the CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal on the basis of ground 15, the discovery of DNA on the silencer, the result of a test not available in 1986.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=452; also see 75–80}} The silencer evidence during the trial had come from John Hayward, a biologist in private practice, formerly of the FSS. He had found a "considerable amount of blood" inside the silencer; he had stated that it was human blood and that the blood group was consistent with it having come from Sheila. He said there was a "remote possibility" that it was a mixture of blood from Nevill and June.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=453–454}}; for Hayward, {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=259, 319, 323–324}}.</ref>


Mark Webster, an expert instructed by Jeremy's defence team, argued that Hayward's tests had been inadequate and that there was a real possibility, not a remote one, that the blood had come from Nevill and June.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=464, 467}} This was a critical point, because the prosecution case rested on the silencer having been on the gun when Sheila was shot, something she could not have done herself because of the length of her arms. If she was shot with the silencer on the gun, it meant that someone else had shot her. If her blood was inside the silencer, it supported the prosecution's position that she had been shot by another party, but if the blood inside the silencer belonged to someone else, that part of the prosecution case collapsed.<ref name=Foster12March2001/>
In a 522-point judgment dismissing the appeal, the judges said there was no conduct on the part of the police or prosecution that would have adversely affected the jury's verdict, and that the more they examined the details of the case, the more they thought the jury was right.<ref name=HallDec132002>Hall, Sarah. , ''The Guardian'', 13 December 2002.</ref>


The defence argued that new tests comparing DNA in the silencer to a sample from Sheila's biological mother suggested that the "major component" of the DNA in the silencer had not come from Sheila.<ref name=Foster12March2001>{{cite news |last1=Foster |first1=Peter |last2=Penny |first2=Thomas |title=Appeal Court reviews Bamber 'massacre' |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1326098/Appeal-Court-reviews-Bamber-massacre.html |work=The Daily Telegraph |date=12 March 2001 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20130505052516/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1326098/Appeal-Court-reviews-Bamber-massacre.html |archive-date=5 May 2013 |url-status=live |access-date=3 April 2018 }}</ref> A DNA sample from June's sister suggested that the major component had come from June, the defence argued. The court concluded that June's DNA was in the silencer, that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer, and that there was evidence of DNA from at least one male. The judges' conclusion was that the results were complex, incomplete, and also meaningless because they did not establish how June's DNA came to be in the silencer years after the trial, did not establish that Sheila's was not in it, and did not lead to a conclusion that Jeremy's conviction was unsafe.<ref name=appeal476>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=476–508}}; Horsnell, Michael (13 December 2002). "Bamber loses appeal over five murders". ''The Times''. p. 14.</ref><ref name=Kennedy2Dec2013/>
===Appeals against whole-life tariff, 2008 and 2009===
{{see|List of prisoners with whole-life tariffs}}
The trial judge recommended a minimum term of 25 years, but in December 1994 Home Secretary ] ruled Bamber should remain in prison for the rest of his life.<ref name=appealMay2008>, before ], EWHC 862 (QB), Case No: 2005/52/MTR, Queen's Bench, 16 May 2008.</ref> In May 2008, he lost a High Court appeal against the ] in front of ], upheld by the Appeal Court in May 2009.<ref>, BBC News, 14 May 2009.
*For the case, see , before Mr Justice David Clarke and Mr Justice Wyn Williams, EWCA Crim 962, Case No: 2008/03986/A5, Royal Courts of Justice, 14 May 2009.</ref> In January 2012, Bamber and three other whole-life prisoners lost their appeal to the ] to have their sentences reduced.<ref>, Sky News, 17 January 2012.</ref>


===Against whole-life tariff===
==Campaign to overturn the conviction==
{{further|List of prisoners with whole-life tariffs}}
A campaign gathered pace over the years to secure his release, with several websites set up to examine the case: jeremybamber.com, which went live on 4 March 2001; jeremy-bamber.co.uk, jeremybamber.org, and jeremybamber.blogspot.com; and two Facebook pages: "Jeremy Bamber" and "Jeremy Bamber is innocent".<ref>; ; ; ; , Facebook; and , Facebook, accessed 11 August 2010.
In 2008 Jeremy lost a High Court appeal before ] against his whole-life tariff.<ref>{{harvnb| EWHC 862 (QB)|loc=7}}.</ref> This was upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2009.<ref>{{harvnb| EWCA Crim 962|loc=4, 40}}; {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090518034829/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/8050561.stm |date=18 May 2009 }}, BBC News, 14 May 2009.</ref> Jeremy and three other British whole-life prisoners appealed to the ], but the appeal was rejected in 2012.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181217174622/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16591164 |date=17 December 2018 }}, BBC News, 17 January 2012.</ref> Jeremy and two of the prisoners (one of them the ] ]) appealed that decision, and in 2013 the European Court's Grand Chamber ruled that keeping the prisoners in jail with no prospect of release or review may not have been compatible with ], which prohibits ] or punishment.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181216114130/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-23230419 |date=16 December 2018 }}, BBC News, 9 July 2013.</ref>
*Also see , ''Birmingham Evening Mail'', 5 March 2001.
*Douglas, Hilary and Murray, James. , ''The Daily Express'', 11 July 2010.</ref> Nine days after losing his appeal in December 2002, Bamber used one of the websites to offer a £1m reward for evidence that would overturn his conviction.<ref>, BBC News, 22 December 2002.</ref>


==Campaign==
His case was taken up by a number of public figures, including ], a journalist who specializes in miscarriages of justice; former Respect MP ]; crime writer ], author of ''Jeremy Bamber: Evil, Almost Beyond Belief?'' (2008); and ], former Independent Conservative MP for Basingstoke. Hunter argued that the case was one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in the last 20 years, and offered to stand bail for Bamber if there was an appeal.<ref>Waugh, Paul. , ''The Evening Standard'', 9 December 2004.
===Background{{anchor|campaign}}===
*, BBC News, 8 December 2004.</ref> He alleged in the House of Commons in February 2005 that evidence was being withheld from the defence, including access to the notebooks of Inspector Taff Jones, the first officer in charge of the investigation who believed Bamber was innocent, but who died before the case came to court; the findings of the coroner who looked into Jones's death; the audio recordings of all telephone and radio messages from White House farm that night; audio recordings describing the scene of the crime; video recordings of the scene of the crime; and the original radio and telephone messages log and incident report.<ref name=Hunter>Hunter, Andrew. , House of Commons, 9 February 2005, accessed 6 August 2010.</ref>
] appealed in 2015 for all evidence related to the case to be released to the defence.]]
A campaign, known from November 2015 as JB Campaign Ltd, gathered pace over the years to secure Jeremy's release.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161230163047/https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09883616 |date=30 December 2016 }}, Companies House.</ref> The ] group Justice for All took up his case in 1993 to prepare for his appeal that year, and ''The Guardian'' ran a long investigative piece by Jim Shelley in November 1993 that included a telephone interview with Jeremy from ], ]; Jeremy said he still could not understand why he had been convicted.<ref name=Shelley13Nov1993>{{cite news |last1=Shelley |first1=Jim |title=Who killed Bambi? |work=The Guardian |date=13 November 1993}}; {{cite news |last1=Shelley |first1=Jim |title=Jeremy Bamber interviewed |work=The Guardian |date=13 November 1993}}</ref> From March 2001 several websites were set up to discuss the evidence, and in 2002 Jeremy used one of the sites to offer a £1&nbsp;million reward for evidence that would overturn his conviction.<ref>. ''Birmingham Evening Mail''. 5 March 2001; {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110203164346/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2598293.stm |date=3 February 2011 }}. BBC News, 22 December 2002.</ref> Campaign events included a supporter reading a letter from Jeremy to his parents at their graveside, and a "Bamber bake-off" featuring his mother's favourite recipes.<ref>Boyle, Danny (2 March 2016). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171203141702/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12180372/Jeremy-Bamber-sends-campaigner-to-record-graveside-message-asserting-innocence.html |date=3 December 2017 }}, ''The Daily Telegraph''.{{pb}} Harley, Nicola (15 July 2015). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171203042233/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11742810/Killer-Jeremy-Bambers-supporters-defend-bake-off-event.html |date=3 December 2017 }}, ''The Daily Telegraph''.</ref>


Jeremy's case was taken up by MPs ] (]) and ] (]) and journalists ] and Eric Allison of ''The Guardian''. Allison became one of the campaign's patrons.<ref name=McKinstry7April2012/><ref>Hunter, Andrew (9 February 2005). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201033142/https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmhansrd/vo050209/halltext/50209h05.htm |date=1 December 2017 }}, House of Commons.</ref><ref name=BBC8Dec2004> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714235857/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/essex/4080507.stm |date=14 July 2014 }}. BBC News. 8 December 2004; {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180928183924/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20J-xZrhArs&gl=US&hl=en |date=28 September 2018 }}. JB Campaign Ltd, courtesy of YouTube, 15 December 2016.</ref> Woffinden argued between 2007 and 2011 that Sheila had shot her family, then watched as police gathered outside before shooting herself. He changed his mind in 2011 and said he believed Jeremy was guilty.<ref name=McKinstry7April2012>McKinstry, Leo (7 April 2012). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140105204142/http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/7764238/lack-of-appeal/ |date=5 January 2014 }}, ''The Spectator''; {{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=400}}.</ref> In 2015 the human-rights campaigner ] appealed to the Chief Constable of Essex Police to disclose all evidence related to the case.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170103002257/http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/update/2015-09-29/human-rights-campaigner-joins-fight-for-disclosure-of-jeremy-bamber-evidence/ |date=3 January 2017 }}. ITV News, 29 September 2015.</ref>
In August 2005, in a letter to the Home Secretary, Bamber's lawyers wrote that there were four million documents in the case, one quarter of which had not been disclosed to the defence. Thirty-eight boxes of papers were provided to the new defence team, including photographs that were not part of the defence papers during the trial or appeal.<ref name=pardon>, Studio Legale Internazionale, 3 August 2005, accessed 13 August 2010.</ref> ''The Sunday Times'' said in 2010 that Bamber kept two floor-to-ceiling piles of boxes in his cell.<ref name=Smith/>


===Campaign's arguments===
] took up Bamber's case, but changed his mind in 2011.]]
====Location of Sheila's body, time of death====
Bob Woffinden argued in several articles between 2007 and 2011 that Sheila shot her family, and was watching from an upstairs window as police gathered outside the house, which explains why they thought they saw someone inside. At some point, he argued, she went down to the kitchen where her father lay dead, and shot herself once, intending to take her own life; the shot was not fatal, but she lost consciousness. The police looked through the kitchen window and saw two bodies. As they broke down the back door, she regained consciousness, and slipped upstairs using one of the back staircases. One of the officers said he heard a sound upstairs, and shouted to Sheila, assuming it was her. Woffinden argued that, hearing this, Sheila went into her mother's bedroom and shot herself a second time, this time fatally. Because the muzzle was pressed again her skin, Woffinden wrote that it may have muffled the sound enough to explain why none of the officers heard it.<ref name=WoffindenJan112008>Woffinden, Bob. , ''The Guardian'', several of Woffinden's ''Guardian'' articles, accessed 2 May 2011.
The defence disputed the location of Sheila's body. The police said they had found her upstairs with her mother. According to early police logs, one officer reported seeing through a window what he thought was the body of a woman near the kitchen door, but he later radioed that it was a man.<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=172}}; also see {{harvnb| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=33, 35, 36}}.</ref> A retired police officer who worked on the case said in 2011 that the first police logs were simply mistaken in reporting that a woman's body had been found downstairs.<ref name=ChronicleAug122010> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100818061539/http://www.thisistotalessex.co.uk/news/Detective-rejects-new-evidence-Bambi-went-berserk-farcical/article-2515617-detail/article.html |date=18 August 2010 }}, ''Essex Chronicle'', 12 August 2010.</ref> Jeremy's lawyers argued that images of Sheila taken by a police photographer at around 9&nbsp;am on 7 August 1985 showed that her blood was still wet. According to the defence team, had she been killed before 3:30&nbsp;am, as the prosecution said, the blood would have congealed by 9&nbsp;am. They argued that she was alive when Jeremy was standing outside the house with the police, shot herself in the kitchen just as the police entered, then ran up one of the staircases to the bedroom, where she shot herself again, this time fatally.<ref name=McDevitt27Jan2011>{{cite news |last1=McDevitt |first1=John |title=Jeremy Bamber: 'New evidence proves unfair trial' |url=https://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-will-set-me-free |publisher=Channel 4 News |date=27 January 2011 |access-date=16 December 2018 |archive-date=16 December 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181216074332/https://www.channel4.com/news/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-will-set-me-free |url-status=live }}</ref>
*Also see Woffinden, Bob. , ''The Daily Mail'', 11 January 2008.
*Woffinden, Bob. , ''Daily Mail'', 19 May 2007.</ref> He changed his mind about Bamber's guilt in May 2011, writing that he had come to believe Bamber was the killer.<ref>Woffinden, Bob. , ''Daily Mail'', 16 May 2011.</ref>


====Alleged crime-scene damage{{anchor|Alleged crime-scene damage}}====
===Evidence gathered for Criminal Cases Review Commission, 2004 onwards===
The defence argued that the first officers to enter the farmhouse had inadvertently disturbed the crime scene, then reconstructed it. Crime-scene photographs not made available to the original defence show Sheila's right arm and hand in slightly different positions in relation to the gun, which is lying across her body. The gun itself also appears to have moved. Former ] Mick Gradwell of ], shown the photographs by ''The Guardian'', said in 2011: "The evidence shows, or portrays, Essex police having damaged the scene, and then having staged it again to make it look like it was originally. And if that has happened, and that hasn't been disclosed, that is really, really serious."<ref>{{harvnb|Allison et al.|2011|loc=00:06:36 for the detective's name; from 00:08:00 for the quote}}; Gradwell, Mick (10 February 2011). ''Lancashire Evening Post''.</ref>
] in ], Birmingham]]
Bamber launched a fresh attempt in 2004 to obtain another appeal, with a new defence team that included Italian legal adviser ], and solicitor Barry Woods of Chivers Solicitors in West Yorkshire.<ref name=TownsendFeb2010>Townsend, Mark and Allison, Eric. , ''The Observer'', 21 February 2010.
*Also see Townsend, Mark; Allison, Eric; Fernando, Shehani; and Kane, Maggie. , ''The Observer, 21 February 2010.</ref> Di Stefano wrote to the Criminal Cases Review Commission in March 2004 asking them to look at the case again, based in part on photographs of the crime scene that had been made available during the trial, but which were not in the bundle of photographs shown to the jury.<ref>, BBC News, 2 August 2005.
*See Di Stefano's submission at , Studio Legale Internazionale, 8 March 2004, accessed 13 August 2010.</ref> In 2007, the lawyers arranged for Bamber to undergo a ] test, which he passed.<ref>, ''The Daily Mail'', 10 April 2007.</ref>


====Arguments about the silencer{{anchor|Arguments about the silencer}}====
The CCRC rejected the 2004 request, but the defence team made a fresh submission in January 2009. The CCRC announced in February 2011 that it had also provisionally rejected this submission; it sent Bamber's lawyers an 89-page document setting out the reasons and invited them to respond within three months. It extended this deadline to July, then to September, to allow the defence time to study all 406 crime-scene photographs. In September 2011, the CCRC granted the defence an indefinite period in which to pursue an additional line of inquiry.<ref name=AllisonFebruary112011/>
{{further|#Silencer}}
The contention that the gun had a silencer on it during the murders was central to the prosecution's case; Jeremy and his lawyers have sought since 1987 to discredit the silencer evidence. With the silencer fitted, the gun was too long for Sheila to have turned it on herself. According to the prosecution, paint on the silencer could be matched to fresh scratch marks on the kitchen mantelpiece, assumed to have been made during a fight for the gun. That the silencer was found in the gun cupboard was important to the prosecution, because Sheila had no reason to return it to the cupboard before killing herself. But that it was found by one of the cousins who inherited part of the estate—days after the police had searched the house—blighted the prosecution's case, although it was accepted by a majority of the jury.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=394}}{{efn|According to Carol Ann Lee, in her book ''The Murders at White House Farm'' (2015), Jeremy said in April 1987 that DCI Jones had found the silencer under a bed on 7 August 1985, the day of the murders, and had placed it in the gun cupboard for safekeeping. Jeremy claimed to have seen a statement from Jones to that effect. The Essex police called this "total nonsense" in a letter to the Crown Prosecution Service, and Bamber was never able to produce the statement.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=394}}}}


Lee writes that the silencer evidence became confused because of the way the exhibit was named. It was first called "SBJ/1", because it was handed over by ] Stan Jones (SBJ). When it was learned that David Boutflour had found it, the silencer was renamed exhibit "DB/1". But because there was a Detective Constable David Bird, it was renamed again to "DRB/1". The name changes led to confusion in later documents, giving the impression that more than one silencer had been found.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=394}} In 2011, Lee writes, Jeremy's blog announced: "We can now prove 100% that there were two sound moderators obtained by police at different times." The CCRC responded that year that the claims were "not supported by the material that exists". Again in 2013 Jeremy's blog said: "I can now prove with 100% certainty that Essex police seized one Parker Hale (MM1 type) suppressor from the house on 7 August 1985" (the day of the murder, rather than the day the cousin found it).{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=396–397}} According to ''The Times'' in 2013, he aimed to show that the police had taken four silencers from his family members, including the one in the cupboard, and that evidence and paperwork from them—and from an additional laboratory silencer—had been mixed up.<ref>{{harvnb|Lee|2015|loc=396–397}}.</ref><ref name=Kennedy2Dec2013>Kennedy, Dominic (2 December 2013). "Bamber challenges murder conviction over gun evidence". ''The Times''. Issue 71057. p.&nbsp;23.</ref>
===Sheila: photographic evidence and time of death===
]
Some of the evidence reportedly not made available to the defence before 2005 were photographs of Sheila taken by a police photographer at around 9 am on 7 August. In a letter to the Home Secretary in August 2005, Bamber's lawyers said these photographs had only recently been passed to the defence, and showed that Sheila's blood was still wet. They argued that, had she been killed before 3:30 am as the prosecution said, her blood would have ] by 9 am.<ref name=pardon/>


In or around 2012, Jeremy's lawyers commissioned gun experts from the US and UK to examine photographs of the bodies and the silencer evidence.{{efn|The experts were David Fowler, chief medical examiner for the US state of ]; Ljubisa Dragovic, chief medical examiner of ], ]; ], former chief medical examiner for the US state of ]; Daniel Caruso, chief of burn services at the ] Burn Center; and John Manlove, a British forensic scientist.<ref name=Allison4Feb2012/>}} They argued that injuries on the bodies were consistent with the silencer not having been used, and that its absence would explain burn marks on Nevill's body.<ref name=Allison4Feb2012>Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark (4 February 2012). {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228034708/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/feb/04/jeremy-bamber-murders-ballistics-challenge |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Observer''.</ref> The court had heard that "three circular burn type marks" had been found on Nevill's back.{{sfn| EWCA Crim 2912|loc=42}} In November 1985 a police report submitted to the ] had argued that the burn marks were made with the hot end of the gun or with a poker from the AGA cooker.{{sfn|Lee|2015|loc=410}}
They also cited a statement from one of the first officers to enter the house at 7:34 am, PC Peter Woodcock, whose witness statement was first discovered by the defence in a box of papers in July 2005, though the defence team acknowledged the statement may have been part of the trial bundle. The statement was dated 20 September 1985 and said of Sheila: "She had what appeared to be two bullet holes under her chin and blood leaking from both sides of her mouth down her cheeks." In 2005, the defence obtained reports from two medical experts, a Professor Marco Meloni and a Professor Cavalli, who expressed the view, based on the photographs, that Sheila had died no more than two hours before the time of the photographs or PC Woodcock's description of the leaking blood; this would place her death during the period Bamber was standing outside the house with the police.<ref name=pardon/>


====Arguments about scratch marks{{anchor|Arguments about the scratch marks}}====
The location of Sheila's body was also disputed. A police log from the night showed that an officer said two bodies were seen at 7:37 am "on entry to the premises," one male and one female. The document said that just before the team entered the house, PC Collins reported seeing through a window what he thought was the body of a woman just inside the kitchen door. PC Woodcock then hit the door with a sledgehammer to force entry. The document also said that at 8:10 a further three bodies were reported to have been found, leaving it unclear which body was initially found in which location.<ref>, jeremybamber.com, accessed 13 August 2010.{{Dead link|date=March 2011}}</ref> Later police reports said only Nevill had been found in the kitchen and the other four bodies upstairs.<ref name=appeal33/> Bamber's defence team argues that it was Sheila's body that was initially seen in the kitchen alongside Nevill's; they said she may not have been dead at that point, and may have moved upstairs where she killed herself.<ref name=WoffindenJan112008/>
{{further|#Scratch marks on mantelpiece}}
The defence commissioned a report from Peter Sutherst, a British forensic photographic expert, who was asked in 2008 to examine negatives of the kitchen taken on the day of the murders and later. In his report, dated 17 January 2010, Sutherst argued that the scratch marks in the red paintwork on the kitchen mantelpiece had been created after the crime-scene photographs had been taken. The prosecution alleged that the marks had been made during the struggle in the kitchen between Bamber and his father, as the silencer, attached to the rifle, had scratched against the mantelpiece. The prosecution said that paint chips identical to the paint on the mantelpiece had been found on or inside the silencer.<ref name=TownsendFeb2010>Mark Townsend, Eric Allison, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228130709/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/feb/21/jeremy-bamber-murder-conviction-doubt |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Observer'', 21 February 2010.</ref><ref name=TownsendAllison21Feb2010>Mark Townsend, Eric Allison, Shehani Fernando, Maggie Kane, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228130854/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/video/2010/feb/21/jeremy-bamber-new-photographic-evidence |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Observer'', 21 February 2010.</ref><ref name=Smith2010p22>{{harvnb|Smith|2010|loc=22}}.</ref> Sutherst said the scratch marks appeared in photographs taken on 10 September 1985, 34 days after the murders, but were not visible in the original crime-scene photographs. He also said he had failed to find in the photographs any chipped paint on the carpet below the mantelpiece, where it might have been expected to fall had the mantelpiece been scratched during a struggle.<ref name=TownsendFeb2010/> Sutherst was asked by the CCRC to examine a red spot on the carpet visible in photographs underneath the scratches on the mantelpiece. He said the red spot matched a piece of nail varnish missing from one of Sheila's toes.<ref name=AllisonJan30>Eric Allison, Mark Townsend, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228201119/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-appeal-murders-evidence |date=28 December 2016 }}, ''The Observer'', 30 January 2011.</ref> Sutherst concluded that the scratch marks on the mantel had been created after the day of the murders.<ref name=TownsendFeb2010/>


====Arguments about police logs====
The only photographs of Sheila seen by the defence during the trial did not include her feet. Hunter said the new defence team had found photographs of her body that did include the feet, and showed she had blood on them. Hunter told MPs this was significant because, if she had walked through a house where four murders had just taken place, she would be expected to have blood on her feet, but it was part of the prosecution's case that her feet were clean. Hunter also said the photographs showed no ] and the skin was not discoloured. The photographs of the other victims did show rigor mortis, he said.<ref name=Hunter/>
{{further|#Radio log}}
Police telephone logs had been entered as evidence during the trial, but had not been noticed by Jeremy's lawyers. Jeremy's new defence team based their new CCRC submissions in part on these logs, particularly on the radio log that, they say, shows Nevill called police that night to say his daughter had "gone berserk" with one of his guns.<ref name=Collins5Aug2010/> A separate log of a police radio message shows there was an attempt to speak to someone inside the farmhouse that night, as police waited outside to enter, but there was no response. Police say the officers simply made a mistake.<ref>{{harvnb|Lomax|2008|loc=image 8, between 128 and 129}}.</ref>


====Arguments about Mugford letter====
===Radio messages and incident report===
{{further|#Letter about Mugford}}
Another piece of evidence found by Bamber's lawyers was exhibit 29, a one-page list of radio messages from the scene. The lawyers asked Essex police whether the list made available to the first lawyers was the entirety of the exhibit, and went to court in March 2004 to force the police to hand over anything else they still had. It transpired that exhibit 29 was 24 pages long. MP Andrew Hunter told the Commons that the first two pages had been written on different paper from the rest of the list, and had been edited. Comparing the list to police witness statements suggested that key radio messages from police had been left out. The lawyers therefore requested the original document so that it could be sent for analysis. The police refused, according to Hunter. In addition to providing the 24 pages, he said, the police inadvertently supplied material that had not been requested: pages from a telephone log made at the time, and a contemporaneous incident report. He gave two examples:<ref name=Hunter/>
Jeremy's lawyers argued that the 26 September 1985 letter to Mugford from John Walker, assistant director of public prosecutions, raised the possibility that she had been persuaded to testify in the hope that charges against her would not be pursued. In the letter, Walker had suggested to the Chief Constable of Essex Police, "with considerable hesitation", that Mugford not be prosecuted for drug offences, burglary and cheque fraud, offences to which she had confessed during her police interviews regarding Bamber.<ref name=Allison29March2012/> The defence team also highlighted that, as soon as the verdict was announced, Mugford sold her story to the ''News of the World'' for £25,000 (equivalent to £{{Inflation|UK|25000|1986|fmt=c}} in {{Inflation/year|UK}}).<ref name=Lee2015p381/>


==Criminal Cases Review Commission, 2004–2012==
*At 5:25 am, the police officers who met Bamber at White House farm and spent time outside with him&mdash;they were in a car with the call sign Charlie Alpha 7&mdash;relayed a message from the tactical firearms team. The team said they were in conversation with someone inside the farmhouse.<ref name=Hunter/> According to Bamber's website, the log said:
In 2004 Jeremy's defence team, which included ],<ref name=BBC8Dec2004/> applied unsuccessfully to have the CCRC refer the case back to the Court of Appeal.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060207155847/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/4739071.stm |date=7 February 2006 }}, BBC News, 2 August 2005.</ref> His lawyers made a fresh submission to the CCRC in 2009.<ref name=AllisonFebruary112011/> The CCRC provisionally rejected Jeremy's 2009 submission in February 2011 in an 89-page document. It invited his lawyers to respond within three months, extended the deadline to allow them to study all 406 crime-scene photographs,<ref name=AllisonFebruary112011>Eric Allison, Peter Walker, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161230162603/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2011/feb/11/jeremy-bamber-loses-chance-appeal |date=30 December 2016 }}, ''The Guardian'', 11 February 2011.</ref><ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200718073454/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14202760 |date=18 July 2020 }}, BBC News, 19 July 2011.</ref> and in September 2011 granted them an indefinite period in which to pursue an additional line of inquiry.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200718074415/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-14762107 |date=18 July 2020 }}, BBC News, 2 September 2011.</ref>


The CCRC finally rejected the application in April 2012 in a 109-page report, which said the submission had not identified any new evidence or legal argument that would raise the real possibility of the Court of Appeal overturning the conviction.<ref name=BBC26April2012> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180920084216/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-17851314 |date=20 September 2018 }}, BBC News, 26 April 2012.</ref> In November 2012 the High Court turned down Bamber's application for a judicial review of that decision.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180920084113/https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-essex-20538663 |date=20 September 2018 }}, BBC News, 29 November 2012.</ref> The next year, di Stefano was sentenced in the UK to 14 years in prison for having fraudulently presented himself as a lawyer.<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181103061526/https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21957686 |date=3 November 2018 }}, BBC News, 27 March 2013.</ref> {{as of|2013|December}} Jeremy's defence team was said to be preparing a fresh submission.<ref name=Kennedy2Dec2013/>{{update inline|date=July 2023}}
{{Quote box4
|quote = 05.25 Firearms team are in conversation with a person from inside the farm<br/>
05.29 From CA7 &mdash;Challenge to persons inside house met with no response<ref>, jeremybamber.com, accessed 7 August 2010.</ref>
|source =
|width = 40%
|align = center
}}


== In popular media ==
*Another piece of evidence consisted of four entries in the logs and incident report. Hunter told the Commons that it contradicted the prosecution's account of police finding Nevill's body downstairs in the kitchen, and the other four bodies upstairs. An entry in the radio message log said: "0737: one dead male and one dead female in kitchen." The telephone message log said: "0738: one dead male and one dead female found on entry." At 7:40 am, the incident log noted a message from a Detective Inspector IR: "Police entered premises. One male dead, one female dead." At this point police had not yet searched upstairs. When they did, they later reported: "House now thoroughly searched by firearms team. Now confirmed a further 3 bodies found."<ref name=Hunter/> The chief prosecution lawyer, Anthony Arlidge QC, told Bamber's lawyers in 2005 that he had not seen any of these logs.<ref name=pardon/> A retired police officer who worked on the case told reporters in 2011 that the police logs were simply mistaken.<ref name=ChronicleAug122010/>
The case became the subject of a television drama series, '']'', starring ] as Bamber and ] as Sheila, broadcast in January 2020 on ] in the UK and ] in the United States.<ref name="RT-2019">{{cite web |author=David Craig |title=When is ITV drama White House Farm on TV? What's it about? |url=https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-12-13/itv-drama-white-house-farm/ |website=Radio Times |date=8 January 2020 |access-date=16 December 2019 |archive-date=16 December 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191216102739/https://www.radiotimes.com/news/tv/2019-12-13/itv-drama-white-house-farm/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>Peter White, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191214213955/https://deadline.com/2019/11/hbo-max-takes-u-s-rights-to-stephen-graham-fronted-itv-crime-drama-white-house-farm-1202797078/ |date=14 December 2019 }}, ''Deadline'', 29 November 2019.</ref> In 2021, documentary maker ] produced a four-part series for ] on the murders, titled ''The Bambers: Murder At The Farm''.<ref name="SkyNewsTheroux">{{cite web |last=Mercer |first=David |url=https://news.sky.com/story/louis-theroux-examines-jeremy-bamber-murders-and-reveals-why-legit-people-believe-five-time-killer-is-innocent-12406985 |title=Louis Theroux examines Jeremy Bamber murders – and reveals why 'legit' people believe five-time killer is innocent |date=18 September 2021 |access-date=31 December 2021 |work=]}}</ref> Theroux told the '']'' that the series had to be extended from an initial three-episode format due to the complexities of the case,<ref>{{cite web |last=Henry |first=Grace |url=https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/true-crime/louis-theroux-murder-at-the-farm-bamber-case-newsupdate/ |title=Louis Theroux says there's "more to" Bamber family case in Murder at the Farm |date=26 September 2021 |access-date=31 December 2021 |work=] |issn=0033-8060}}</ref> and told ] that "both scenarios have anomalies".<ref name="SkyNewsTheroux"/>


==See also==
===Telephone log and scratch marks===
{{Portal|1980s|Law|England}}
In August 2010, the ''Daily Mirror'' reported that the defence team had located a police telephone log that had been entered as evidence during the trial, but had not been noticed by Bamber's lawyers, and was not part of the jury bundle; see ]. Bamber's defence team said it showed that someone calling himself Mr Bamber had telephoned police on the night of the attack to say his daughter had one of his guns and was going berserk.<ref name=Collins/> Stan Jones, a former detective sergeant who worked on the case, said the log was not new, and that all the paperwork was given at the time to the defence. He told ''The Essex Chronicle'': "The only person who telephoned the police was Jeremy Bamber. There is no way his father phoned. To suggest it is farcical."<ref name=ChronicleAug122010>, ''Essex Chronicle'', 12 August 2010.</ref>
*]
*]
*]


==Sources==
The defence team also gave the CCRC a report dated 17 January 2010 from Peter Sutherst, described by newspapers as one of the UK's top photographic experts, who was asked by the defence in 2008 to examine negatives of photographs of the kitchen taken on the day of the murders and later. In his report, he argued that scratch marks in paintwork on the kitchen mantelpiece had been created after the crime-scene photographs had been taken. The prosecution alleged that the marks had been made as the silencer, attached to the rifle, had scratched against the mantelpiece during the struggle in the kitchen between Bamber and his father, and that paint chips identical to that on the mantelpiece were found on or inside the silencer. Sutherst said the scratch marks appeared in photographs taken on 10 September, 34 days after the murders, but were not visible in the original crime-scene photographs. He also said he had failed to find in the photographs any chipped paint on the carpet below the mantelpiece, where it might have been expected to fall had the mantelpiece been scratched. He told ''The Observer'' in February 2010: "In this case the scratch marks underneath the mantelshelf turned out to be the most significant bit of evidence that we came across. ... It was possible to line up all these pictures in jigsaw fashion to show that the scratch mark from the underside of the mantelshelf did not extend into the picture of the mantelshelf taken on the 7th of August ... So the marks had been put there after the original incident."<ref name=TownsendFeb2010/>
===Notes===
{{notelist|25em}}


===References===
===Evidence from gun experts===
{{reflist|25em}}
In February 2012, ''The Observer'' reported that gun experts commissioned by the defence had concluded the silencer may not have been used in the killings. That the gun had a silencer on it during the murders was so crucial to the prosecution's case that the judge, when instructing the jury, said the silencer "could, on its own, lead the jury to believe that Bamber was guilty." The experts' reports stated that the absence of a silencer would explain the burn marks on Sheila and Nevill's bodies, which were dismissed as a "mystery" during the trial.<ref name=Allison4Feb2012>Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark. , ''The Observer'', 4 February 2012.</ref>


===Works cited===
One of the reports was written by David Fowler, chief medical examiner for the state of Maryland in the United States; other experts involved in that investigation were Ljubisa Dragovic, chief medical examiner of Oakland county in Michigan, and Marcella Fierro, a former chief medical examiner for the state of Virginia. A second report was written by Daniel Caruso, chief of burn services at the Arizona Burn Center, and a third by experts working for Dr. John Manlove, a forensic scientist in Oxfordshire in the UK.<ref name=Allison4Feb2012/>
:''Most news reports are cited above only''.
'''Books and long-form journalism'''
{{refbegin}}
* {{cite news |last1=Allison |first1=Eric |last2=O'Kane |first2=Maggie |last3=Grandjean |first3=Guy |last4=Townsend |first4=Mark |last5=Shorter |first5=Louise |last6=Madlena |first6=Chavala |last7=Timerlake |first7=Jacqui |last8=Khalili |first8=Mustafa |last9=Bentley |first9=Holly |last10=Glynn |first10=Roisin |display-authors=3 |title=Jeremy Bamber: Will new evidence bring historic third appeal? – video |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk/video/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-video |work=The Guardian |date=30 January 2011 |ref={{sfnref|Allison et al.|2011}} |access-date=13 December 2016 |archive-date=28 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161228035321/https://www.theguardian.com/uk/video/2011/jan/30/jeremy-bamber-new-evidence-video |url-status=live }}
* {{cite book |last1=Caffell |first1=Colin |title=In Search of the Rainbow's End: The Inside Story of the Bamber Murders |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WXHADwAAQBAJ |date=1994 |publisher=Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. |location=London |isbn=9781529309171 }}
* {{cite book |last1=Lee |first1=Carol Ann |author-link=Carol Ann Lee |title=The Murders at White House Farm |date=2015 |publisher=Sidgwick & Jackson |location=London |isbn=9781447285755 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zV3WCwAAQBAJ }}
* {{cite book |last1=Lomax |first1=Scott |author-link=Scott Lomax |title=Jeremy Bamber: Evil, Almost Beyond Belief? |date=2008 |publisher=The History Press |location=Stroud |isbn=9780750950626 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DRJqPQAACAAJ }}
* {{cite book |last1=Powell |first1=Claire |title=Murder at White House Farm |date=1994 |publisher=Headline Book Publishing |location=London }}
* {{cite news |last1=Smith |first1=David James |title=And by dawn they were all dead |url=http://davidjamessmith.net/pdf_articles/DJS_bamber.pdf |work=The Sunday Times Magazine |date=11 July 2010 |pages=18–22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120310084041/http://davidjamessmith.net/pdf_articles/DJS_bamber.pdf |archive-date=10 March 2012 |url-status=live }}
* {{cite book |last1=Wilkes |first1=Roger |title=Blood Relations: Jeremy Bamber and the White House Farm Murders |date=1994 |publisher=Robinson Publishing |location=London }}
{{refend}}


'''Legal cases'''
==See also==
*]
*]

==Notes==
{{refbegin}} {{refbegin}}
*<!--Note: I've done it this way because I'm having trouble with the legal citation template.-->{{cite book|author=R v Bamber|title= EWHC Crim 2912|date=12 December 2002|url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html|at=Case&nbsp;No: 20011745 S1|ref={{sfnref| EWCA Crim 2912}}|archive-url=https://archive.today/20120731000208/http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html|archive-date=31 July 2012|url-status=live}}
*The full reference for , 12 December 2002 is "R - v - Jeremy Bamber", before Lord Justice Kay Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques, EWCA Crim 2912 Case No: 20011745 S1, Royal Courts of Justice, 12 December 2002, accessed 10 August 2010.
* {{cite book|author=R v Bamber|title= EWHC 862 (QB)|date=16 May 2008|url=http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/144_13850.htm |at=Case&nbsp;No: 2005/52/MTR|ref={{sfnref| EWHC 862 (QB)}}|archive-url=https://archive.today/20081121100039/http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/144_13850.htm|archive-date=21 November 2008|url-status=dead}}
* {{cite book|author=R v Bamber |title= EWCA Crim 962|date=14 May 2009|url=http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/962.html |at=Case&nbsp;No: 2008/03986/A5 |ref={{sfnref| EWCA Crim 962}}|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130414165128/http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/962.html|archive-date=14 April 2013|url-status=live}}
{{refend}} {{refend}}
{{reflist|2}}


==Further reading== ==Further reading==
*Caffell, Colin (2020 edition) ''In Search of the Rainbow's End: Inside the White House Farm Murders''. With 2018 foreword from Caffell. Hodder & Stoughton (paprback) ISBN 9781529309164
* ; also see , accessed 3 May 2011.
*, Anglia Television, August 1985.
*Allison, Eric and Hattenstone, Simon. , ''The Guardian'', 10 February 2011.
*, Yorkshire Television, 1993.
*BBC News. , BBC News, 5 August 2010.
*, Anglia Television, 2003.
*Galloway, George. , House of Commons, 15 May 2007.
*'']: Jeremy Bamber''. Series 2. Crime+Investigation, ], 2011.
*Appleyard, Nick (2009). "Tonight's the Night". ''Life Means Life''. London: John Blake Publishing Ltd.
*D'Cruze, Shani; Walklate, Sandra L.; Pegg, Samantha (2013). "The White House Farm murders". ''Murder: Social and Historical Approaches to Understanding Murder and Murderers''. Uffculme: Willan.
*Howard, Amanda (2014). "Jeremy Bamber". ''A Killer in the Family''. London: New Holland Publishers.
*Lane, Brian (1995). ''Chronicle of 20th Century Murder''. Wiltshire: Select Editions.
*Leyton, Elliott (2009). ''Sole Survivor: Children Who Murder Their Families''. London: John Blake Publishing Ltd.


{{Mass shootings in the United Kingdom}}
===Books and book chapters===
*Appleyard, Nick. "Tonight's the Night" in ''Life Means Life''. John Blake Publishing Ltd, 2009, p. 103ff.
*Caffell, Colin. ''In Search of the Rainbow's End''. Hodder & Stoughton Ltd, 1994.
*D'Cruze, Shani; Walklate, Sandra L.; and Pegg, Samantha. "The White House Farm murders," in ''Murder: Social and Historical Approaches to Understanding Murder and Murderers''. Willan, 2006, p. 117ff.
*]. ''Jeremy Bamber: Evil, Almost Beyond Belief?''. The History Press, 2008.
*''Murder Casebook 7: The White House Farm Murders''. Marshall Cavendish, 1990.
*Powell, Claire. ''Murder at White House Farm: Story of Jeremy Bamber''. Headline Book Publishing, 1994.
*Wilkes, Roger. ''Blood Relations: Jeremy Bamber and the White House Farm Murders''. Penguin, 1994.


{{DEFAULTSORT:White House Farm murders}}
===Films===
]
*Internet Movie Database. (1993).
]
*Internet Movie Database. (2003).
]

]
{{Persondata <!-- Metadata: see ] -->
]
| NAME = Bamber, Jeremy
]
| ALTERNATIVE NAMES =
]
| SHORT DESCRIPTION =
]
| DATE OF BIRTH = 13 January 1961
]
| PLACE OF BIRTH =
]
| DATE OF DEATH =
]
| PLACE OF DEATH =
]
}}
]
{{DEFAULTSORT:Bamber, Jeremy}}
] ]
] ]
] ]
] ]
]
]
]
]
]

Latest revision as of 01:22, 23 December 2024

Murders in England in 1985

White House Farm murders
Large red-brick farmhouse, seen through treesWhite House Farm, 2007
White House Farm murders is located in EssexWhite House Farm murdersclass=notpageimage| White House Farm, Essex
Date7 August 1985
LocationWhite House Farm, near Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, England
Coordinates51°45′33″N 0°48′12″E / 51.7591°N 0.8032°E / 51.7591; 0.8032
Deaths
  • June Bamber (61)
  • Nevill Bamber (61)
  • Sheila Caffell (28)
  • Daniel Caffell (6)
  • Nicholas Caffell (6)
ConvictedJeremy Bamber (then 24), convicted on 28 October 1986 of five counts of murder
SentenceWhole-life order

The White House Farm murders took place near the village of Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, England, during the night of 6–7 August 1985. Nevill and June Bamber were shot and killed inside their farmhouse at White House Farm along with their adopted daughter, Sheila Caffell, and Sheila's six-year-old twin sons, Daniel and Nicholas Caffell. The only surviving member of the immediate family was the adopted son, Jeremy Bamber, then aged 24, who said he had been at home a few miles away when the shooting took place.

Police initially believed that Sheila, who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia, had fired the shots before turning the gun on herself, but weeks after the murders, Jeremy's ex-girlfriend told police that he had implicated himself. The prosecution argued that, motivated by a large inheritance, Jeremy had shot the family with his father's semi-automatic rifle, then placed the gun in Sheila's hands to make the deaths look like a murder–suicide. A silencer, the prosecution said, was on the rifle and would have made it too long, they argued, for Sheila's fingers to reach the trigger to shoot herself. Jeremy was convicted of five counts of murder in October 1986 by a 10–2 majority verdict, sentenced to a minimum of twenty-five years, and informed in 1994 that he would never be released. The Court of Appeal upheld the verdict in 2002.

Jeremy protested his innocence throughout, although his extended family remained convinced of his guilt. Between 2004 and 2012, his lawyers submitted several unsuccessful applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission, arguing that the silencer might not have been used during the killings, that the crime scene might have been damaged then reconstructed, that crime scene photographs were taken weeks after the murders and that the time of Sheila's death had been miscalculated.

A key issue was whether Jeremy had received a call from his father on the night of the murder to tell him Sheila had "gone berserk" with a gun. Jeremy said that he did, that he alerted police and that Sheila fired the final shot while he and the officers were standing outside the house. It became a central plank of the prosecution's case that the father had made no such call and that the only reason Jeremy would have lied about it — indeed, the only way he could have known about the shootings when he alerted the police — was that he was the killer himself.

Bamber family

June and Nevill Bamber

Nevill and June Bamber. A key issue was whether their daughter Sheila was strong enough to have subdued Nevill, who was 6 ft 4 in (193 cm) tall, in what appeared to have been a violent struggle in the kitchen.

Ralph Nevill Bamber (known as 'Nevill', born 8 June 1924) was a farmer, former Royal Air Force (RAF) pilot and magistrate at the local Witham magistrates' court. He and his wife, June (née Speakman, born 3 June 1924), had married in 1949 and moved into the Georgian White House Farm on Pages Lane, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, Essex, set among 300 acres (120 ha) of tenant farmland that had belonged to June's father. The Court of Appeal described Nevill as "a well-built man, 6 ft 4 in (193 cm) tall and in good physical health." This became significant because Jeremy's defence later suggested that Sheila, a slim woman aged 28, had been able to beat and subdue her father, something the prosecution contested.

Unable to have biological children, the Bambers adopted Sheila and Jeremy as infants; the children were not related to each other. June suffered from depression and had been admitted to a psychiatric hospital in the 1950s, including in 1958 after Sheila's adoption, where she was given electroshock therapy at least six times. In 1982 she was treated by Hugh Ferguson, a psychiatrist who later saw Sheila.

The Bambers were financially secure, owning property that included the farmhouse, a flat in London, 300 acres of land and a caravan site. The couple gave the children a good home and private education, but June was intensely religious and tried to force her children and grandchildren to adopt the same ideas. She had a poor relationship with Sheila, who felt June disapproved of her, and June's relationship with Jeremy was so troubled that he had apparently stopped speaking to her. Sheila's ex-husband was concerned about the effect June was having on his sons; she made them kneel and pray with her, which upset him and the boys.

Daniel and Nicholas Caffell

Daniel and Nicholas Caffell (born 22 June 1979) were born to Sheila and Colin Caffell, who married in 1977 and divorced in 1982. Colin was an art student when he met Sheila. Both parents were involved in the children's upbringing after the divorce, although the boys were briefly placed in foster care in 1982–83 because of Sheila's health problems. For several months before the murders they had been living with Colin in his home in Kilburn, North London, not far from Sheila's residence in Maida Vale.

A week-long visit to White House Farm had been arranged for August 1985 at the Bambers' request; the plan was that the boys would visit their grandparents with Sheila before going on holiday to Norway with their father. Daniel and Nicholas were reluctant to stay at the farm. They disliked that June made them pray, and in the car on the way asked Colin to speak to her about it. In addition Daniel had become a vegetarian and was worried about being forced to eat meat. When their father dropped them off at the house on 4 August, it was the last time he saw them. The boys are buried together in Highgate Cemetery. Sheila was cremated, and the urn with her ashes was placed in their coffin.

Sheila Caffell

Background

Nicholas, Sheila and Daniel Caffell, circa 1984

Sheila Jean "Bambi" Caffell (born 18 July 1957) was born to the 18-year-old daughter of Eric Jay, a senior chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury. At his insistence, the baby was placed for adoption. Her mother gave Sheila up to the Church of England Children's Society two weeks after the birth, and the Bambers adopted her in October 1957. The chaplain had known Nevill in the RAF and selected the Bambers from a list of prospective adopters.

After school Sheila attended secretarial college in Swiss Cottage, London. In 1974, when she was aged 17, she discovered she was pregnant by Colin Caffell. The Bambers arranged an abortion. Her relationship with her mother deteriorated significantly that summer after June found Sheila and Colin sunbathing naked in a field. June reportedly started calling Sheila the "devil's child."

Sheila continued with her secretarial course, then trained as a hairdresser, and briefly worked as a model with the Lucie Clayton Charm Academy, including two months' work in Tokyo. After she became pregnant again, she married Colin at Chelmsford Register Office in May 1977, but miscarried in the sixth month. The Bambers bought the couple a garden flat in Carlingford Road, Hampstead, to help Sheila recuperate. Sheila suffered another miscarriage, then on 22 June 1979, after four months of bed rest in hospital, she gave birth to Daniel and Nicholas. Colin, apparently having begun an affair just before the birth, left Sheila for five months. Sheila became increasingly upset; on one occasion, when Colin left her 21st birthday party with another woman, she required hospital treatment after breaking a window with her fist. The couple divorced in May 1982.

After the divorce, Nevill bought Sheila a flat in Morshead Mansions, Maida Vale, and Colin helped raise the children from his home in nearby Kilburn. Sheila decided to trace her birth mother, then living in Canada. They met at Heathrow Airport in 1982 for a brief reunion, but a relationship did not develop. At around this time Sheila became friendly with a group of young women who nicknamed her "Bambi", and who later told reporters that she often complained about her poor relationship with her adoptive mother. The group partook in drugs, particularly cocaine, and fraternisations with older men. As her brief modelling career had ended after the birth of the boys, Sheila lived on welfare and took low-paying jobs, including as a waitress for one week at School Dinners, a London restaurant in which dinner was served by young women in school uniform, stockings and suspenders. There were also cleaning jobs and one episode of nude photography that she later regretted.

Health

Sheila's mental health continued to decline, with episodes of banging her head against walls. In 1983 her family doctor referred her to Hugh Ferguson, the psychiatrist who had treated June. Ferguson said Sheila was in an agitated state, paranoid and psychotic. She was admitted to St Andrew's Hospital, a private psychiatric facility, where Ferguson diagnosed a schizoaffective disorder. After Sheila was discharged in September 1983, he continued seeing her as an out-patient and concluded that his first diagnosis had been mistaken. Ferguson now believed that she had schizophrenia and began treating her with trifluoperazine, an antipsychotic drug.

Ferguson wrote that Sheila believed the devil had given her the power to project evil onto others, and that she could make her sons have sex and cause violence with her. She called them the "devil's children", the phrase June had used of Sheila, and said she believed she was capable of murdering them or of getting them to kill others. She spoke about suicide, although the court heard that Ferguson did not regard her as a suicide risk.

Sheila was readmitted to St Andrew's in March 1985, five months before the murders, after a psychotic episode in which she believed herself to be in direct communication with God and that certain people, including her boyfriend, were trying to hurt or kill her. She was discharged four weeks later, and as an out-patient received a monthly injection of haloperidol, an antipsychotic drug that has a sedative effect. From that point, the twins lived all or most of the time with Colin in Kilburn. According to Jeremy, the family discussed placing the boys in daytime foster care over dinner on the night of the murders, with little response from Sheila.

Despite Sheila's erratic mental state, Ferguson told the court that the kind of violence necessary to commit the murders was not consistent with his view of her. In particular, he said he did not believe she would have killed her father or children, because her difficult relationship was confined to her mother. Colin said the same: that, despite her tendency to throw things and sometimes hit him, she had never harmed the children. June's sister, Pamela Boutflour, testified that Sheila was not a violent person and that she had never known her to use a gun; June's niece, Ann Eaton, told the court that Sheila did not know how to use one. Jeremy disputed this, telling police on the night of the shooting, as they stood outside the house, that he and Sheila had gone target shooting together. He acknowledged later that he had not seen her fire a gun as an adult.

Jeremy Bamber

Main article: Jeremy Bamber
Bamber shortly after his arrest in September 1985.

Jeremy Nevill Bamber was born on 13 January 1961 to a student midwife who, after an affair with a married British Army sergeant, gave her baby to the Church of England Children's Society when he was six weeks old. His biological parents later married and had other children; his father became a senior staff member in Buckingham Palace. The Bambers adopted Jeremy when he was six months old. They sent him to St Nicholas Primary, then along with Sheila to Maldon Court prep school. This was followed when he was aged 9, in September 1970, by Gresham's School, a boarding school in Holt, Norfolk, where he joined the cadet force. Jeremy was apparently unhappy at Gresham's because of bullying and other factors.

After leaving Gresham's with no qualifications, Jeremy attended sixth form college, and in 1978 achieved seven O-levels. Nevill paid for him to visit Australia, where he took a scuba-diving course, before travelling to New Zealand. Former friends alleged that Jeremy had broken into a jeweller's shop while in New Zealand and had stolen an expensive watch. He had also boasted, they said, of being involved in smuggling heroin. Jeremy returned to England in 1982 to work on his adoptive parents' farm for £170 a week, and set up home in a cottage Nevill owned at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger. The cottage lay 3–3.5 miles (5.6 km) from White House Farm, a five-minute drive by car and at least fifteen minutes by bicycle. Nevill also gave Jeremy a car to use, and eight percent of a family company, Osea Road Camp Sites Ltd, which ran the Bambers' caravan site.

Jeremy lived in Head Street, Goldhanger, Essex

To his supporters, who over the years have included Members of Parliament and journalists, Jeremy is a victim of one of Britain's worst miscarriages of justice. The Guardian took up his case in the early 1990s; one or more Guardian journalists began corresponding with him in 2006, and two interviewed him in 2011. Describing Jeremy as "clever and strategic", they wrote that there was something about him that made the public unsympathetic toward him. He was "handsome in a rather cruel, caddish way—he seemed to exude arrogance and indifference. ... Like Meursault in the Camus novel L'Étranger, he did not seem to display the appropriate emotions." He is reported to have passed a polygraph test in 2007.

Jeremy's detractors include his extended family and his father's former secretary, Barbara Wilson. She told reporters that Jeremy used to provoke his parents, riding in circles around his mother on a bicycle, wearing make-up to upset his father and once hiding a bag of live rats in Wilson's car. Whenever Jeremy visited the farm there were arguments, she claimed. Tension had apparently increased in the weeks before the murders; Wilson said Nevill had remarked to her about foreseeing a "shooting accident." Jeremy's ex-girlfriend, Julie Mugford, alleged that he had talked about killing his family. A farm worker testified that Jeremy had once said of Sheila: "I'm not going to share my money with my sister." The court heard that, in March that year, while discussing security at the family's caravan site, he had told his uncle: "I could kill anybody. I could even kill my parents." Jeremy denied having said this.

Extended family, inheritance

The financial ties and inheritance issues within the immediate and extended family provided a motive and added a layer of complexity to the case. The Bambers' company, N. and J. Bamber Ltd, was worth £400,000 in 1985 (c. £1,061,016 in 2021). In their wills, June left £230,000 (c. £608,000) and Nevill £380,000 (c. £1,004,000). During the trial, the court heard that the Bambers had left their estate to both Jeremy and Sheila, to be divided equally. In addition, Nevill's will had said that, to inherit, Jeremy had to be working on the farm at the time of his father's death. The court also heard, from Mugford's mother, that he had been saying June wanted to change her will to bypass him and Sheila and leave her estate to Sheila's twins instead.

The parents' estate included land and buildings occupied by Jeremy's cousins, who were made aware, after the murders, that he intended to sell them. It was one of those cousins who found the silencer in the gun cupboard, with the flecks of blood and paint that proved pivotal to the prosecution. Because of Jeremy's conviction, the estate passed instead to the cousins. One moved into White House Farm, while that cousin and several others acquired full ownership of the caravan site and other buildings. This conflict of interest became a bone of contention, as did the apparent failure of the police to search and secure the crime scene. Jeremy argues that the family set him up, a claim that one of the group dismissed in 2010 as "an absolute load of piffle."

Jeremy has launched two legal actions while in prison, claiming a share of the estate, which the cousins said was part of an attempt to harass and vilify them. In 2003 he began a High Court action to recover £1.2 million from the estate of his maternal grandmother, arguing that he should have inherited her home at Carbonnells Farm, Wix, which went instead to June's sister—the grandmother had cut Jeremy out of her will when he was arrested—and that he was owed seventeen years' rent from his cousins who lived there. In 2004 he went to the High Court again to claim a £326,000 share of the profit from the caravan site. The court ruled against him in both cases.

Jeremy's visit to the farm

Atmosphere in the house

On Sunday, 4 August 1985, three days before the murders, Sheila and the boys arrived at White House Farm to spend the week with Nevill and June. The housekeeper saw Sheila that day and noticed nothing unusual. Two farm workers saw her the following day with her children and said she seemed happy. One of the crime scene photographs showed that someone had carved "I hate this place" into the cupboard doors of the bedroom in which the twins were sleeping.

Jeremy visited the farm on the evening of Tuesday, 6 August. He told the court that during his visit his parents suggested to Sheila that the boys be placed in daytime foster care with a local family; he said Sheila did not seem bothered by the suggestion and had simply said she would rather stay in London. The boys had been in foster care before, although in London rather than near White House Farm, and it had not appeared to cause a problem for Sheila. Ferguson told the Court of Appeal in 2002 that any suggestion that the children be removed from her care would have provoked a strong reaction from Sheila, but that she might have welcomed daytime help.

A farmworker heard Jeremy leave around 9:30 pm. Barbara Wilson, the farm's secretary, telephoned Nevill at around that time and was left with the impression that she had interrupted an argument. She said Nevill was short with her and seemed to hang up in irritation, something he had never done before; he was by all accounts an even-tempered man. June's sister, Pamela Boutflour, telephoned around 10 pm. She spoke to Sheila, who she said was quiet, then to June, who seemed normal.

Murder weapon

Jeremy told the court that, hours before the murders on 6 August, he had loaded the rifle, thinking he heard rabbits outside, but had not used it. He left the rifle on the kitchen table, with a full magazine and a box of ammunition, before leaving the house. It did not at that point have the silencer or telescopic sight attached, he claimed. Both had been on the rifle in late July, according to a nephew, but Jeremy said his father must have removed them. The prosecution disputed this, maintaining that the silencer was on the rifle when the family was murdered.

Nevill kept several guns at the farm. He was reportedly careful with them, cleaning them after use and securing them. He had bought the gun, a .22 Anschütz model 525 semi-automatic rifle, on 30 November 1984, along with a Parker Hale silencer, telescopic sight and 500 rounds of ammunition. It used cartridges, which were loaded into a magazine that held ten rounds. Twenty-five shots were fired during the killing, so if the rifle was fully loaded to begin with, it would have been reloaded at least twice. The court heard that the magazine became harder to load with each cartridge; loading the tenth was described as "exceptionally hard".

The rifle had normally been used to shoot rabbits with the silencer and telescopic sight attached. The court heard that the sight had to be removed with a screwdriver, but it was usually left in place because it was time-consuming to realign it. Nevill's nephew visited the farmhouse on the weekend of 26–28 July 1985 and told the court that he had seen the rifle, in the gun cupboard in the ground-floor office, with the sight and silencer attached. He had taken the gun out and used it for target shooting.

Police logs, 7 August 1985

Telephones in the farmhouse

There were three telephones at White House Farm on the night of the shooting, all on the same landline. There was usually a cream rotary phone in the main bedroom on Nevill's bedside table; a beige Statesman phone in the kitchen; and a blue Sceptre 100 phone in the office on the first floor. (There was a fourth phone too, an Envoy cordless phone in the kitchen, but it had been picked up for repair on 5 August.) The rotary phone had at some point been moved out of the main bedroom and into the kitchen, where the police found it with its receiver off the hook. They found the Statesman phone still in the kitchen but hidden in a pile of magazines.

Jeremy's call to police

Jeremy telephoned Chelmsford police station (and not the 999 emergency number) from his home in the early hours of 7 August to raise the alarm. He told them he had received a telephone call from his father—from the landline at White House Farm to the landline at Bamber's home—to say that Sheila had "gone berserk" with a gun. Jeremy said the line went dead in the middle of the call.

The prosecution argued that Jeremy had received no such call, and that his claim to have done so was part of his setting the scene to blame Sheila. Nevill was "severely bloodied" at that point, according to the Court of Appeal, but the telephone had "no visible blood" on it when police examined the scene, although it was acknowledged that no swabs had been taken. It was Jeremy, the prosecution said, who had left the kitchen telephone off the hook after calling his home from White House Farm to establish that part of his alibi.

After Jeremy telephoned the police, a British Telecom operator checked the White House Farm line—at 3:56 am according to the police log, and at 4:30 am according to the Court of Appeal—and found that the line was open. The operator could hear a dog barking. British Telecom did not at the time keep records of local calls. According to experts who testified at the trial, if Nevill had telephoned Jeremy without replacing the receiver, the line between them would have remained open for one or two minutes. During this time, Jeremy would not have been able to use his telephone.

Explaining why he had called a local police station and not 999, Jeremy told police on the night that he had not thought it would make a difference to how soon they would arrive. He said he had spent time looking up the number, and even though his father had asked him to come quickly, he had first telephoned his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, in London, then had driven slowly to the farmhouse. Jeremy acknowledged that he could have called one of the farm workers but had not considered it. In his early witness statements, Jeremy said he had telephoned the police immediately after receiving his father's call, then telephoned Mugford. During later police interviews, he said he had called Mugford first. Jeremy said he was confused about the sequence of events.

Logs

Event log

In 2010 Jeremy's lawyers highlighted two police logs in support of his application to have his case referred back to the Court of Appeal. The question was whether these logs support the prosecution position that there was one call that night to the police, from Jeremy alone, or the defence position that there were two calls, one from Nevill followed by a second from Jeremy.

One log shows that Jeremy rang the local police station and spoke to police constable Michael West in the information room. As a result, West began an "event log". This states that Jeremy's call came in at 3:36 am on 7 August 1985. Jeremy maintains that he telephoned ten minutes after his father phoned him. But at trial it was accepted that West had misread a digital clock and that the call had probably come in just before 3:26 am, because that was when West asked a civilian dispatcher, Malcolm Bonnett, to send a car to the scene. The car, Charlie Alpha 5, was dispatched at 3:35 am. The event log noted a call from:

Mr. Bamber, 9 Head Street, Goldhanger ... . Father phoned (age 62). "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy + has the gun." Phone went dead. Father Mr. Bamber H/A White House Farm ... Sister Sheila Bamber age 27. Has history of mental illness. ... Despatched CA5 to scene ... Informant requested to attend scene."

Radio log: "Daughter gone berserk".

The Court of Appeal noted that Jeremy said he had "tried to ring his father back at White House Farm but he could not get a reply". During the trial, the court heard that Jeremy said his father had not hung up after speaking and that he could hear noise in the background. At some point PC West spoke to Jeremy again on the telephone; Jeremy apparently complained about the time the police were taking, saying: "When my father rang he sounded terrified." He was told to go to the farm and wait for the police.

Radio log

Michael Bonnett, a civilian dispatcher in Chelmsford police station's information room, began a "radio log" which kept track of messages about the situation. The radio log discusses a telephone call made at 3:26 am on 7 August. According to the prosecution, this is the call known to have been made by Jeremy, the same call entered in the event log. According to the defence, the radio log is not simply a duplicate log of Jeremy's call but a log of a separate call to the police by Nevill.

The radio log is headed, "Daughter gone berserk": "Mr Bamber, White House Farm, Tolleshunt d’Arcy—daughter Sheila Bamber, aged 26 years, has got hold of one of my guns." It adds: "Message passed to CD by the son of Mr Bamber after phone went dead." It goes on to say: "Mr Bamber has a collection of shotguns and .410s", and it includes White House Farm's telephone number: 860209. The final entry says: "0356 GPO have checked phone line to farmhouse and confirm phone left off hook." The radio log shows that a patrol car, Charlie Alpha 7 (CA7)—not Charlie Alpha 5, as mentioned in the event log—was sent to the scene at 3:35 am.

Scene at White House Farm

Events outside

Pages Lane leading to White House Farm

After the telephone calls, Jeremy drove to the farmhouse, as did three officers from Witham police station who later testified that he had been driving much more slowly than them; they passed him on Pages Lane and arrived at the farmhouse one or two minutes before him. Jeremy's cousin, Ann Eaton, testified that he was normally a fast driver. The group waited outside the house for a tactical firearms unit to arrive, which turned up at 5 am and decided to wait until daylight before trying to enter. Police determined that all the doors and windows to the house were shut except for the window in the main bedroom on the first floor. Using a loudhailer, they spent two hours trying to communicate with Sheila. The only sound they reported from the house was a dog barking.

While waiting outside, the police questioned Jeremy, who they said seemed calm. According to the Court of Appeal, Jeremy told them about the phone call from his father and that it had sounded as though someone had cut off the call. He also said he did not get along with his sister. When asked whether she might have "gone berserk with a gun", the police said he replied: "I don't really know. She is a nutter. She's been having treatment." When asked why Nevill would have called Jeremy and not the police, he replied that his father was the sort of person who might want to keep things within the family. Jeremy claimed to have called Chelmsford police station, rather than 999, because he did not think it would affect the police's response time. Over the next few hours he talked about cars in general with one of the officers, saying that the Osea Road caravan site "would be able to stand him a Porsche" soon.

Jeremy told the police that Sheila was familiar with guns and that they had gone target shooting together. He said he had been at the farmhouse himself a few hours earlier, and that he had loaded the rifle because he thought he had heard rabbits outside. Jeremy had left the rifle on the kitchen table fully loaded, with a box of ammunition nearby. A doctor who was called to the house testified the deaths could have occurred at any time during the night. He said Jeremy appeared to be in a state of shock: he broke down, cried and seemed to vomit. The doctor said Jeremy told him about the discussion the family had had about possibly placing Sheila's sons in foster care.

Scene inside

Apparent struggle

The police entered the farmhouse at 7:54 am, using a sledgehammer to break the back door. The door had been locked from the inside, with the key still in the lock. They found five bodies with multiple gunshot wounds, Nevill downstairs in the kitchen and the rest upstairs. Twenty-five shots had been fired, mostly at close range. In what order the family was killed is not known. A telephone was lying on one of the kitchen surfaces with its receiver off the hook, next to empty .22 cartridge cases. The police said chairs and stools were overturned, and there was broken crockery, a broken sugar basin, a broken ceiling light, and what looked like blood on the floor.

Nevill

photographThe lantern outside St. Nicholas's Church, Tolleshunt D'Arcy, was given in memory of Nevill and June Bamber, who had been churchwardens there.photograph

Nevill was found in the kitchen, dressed in pyjamas, lying over an overturned chair next to the fireplace, amid a scene suggestive of a struggle. He had been shot eight times, six times to the head and face, fired when the rifle was a few inches from his skin. The remaining shots to his body had occurred from at least two feet away. Based on where the empty cartridge cases were found—three in the kitchen and one on the stairs—the police concluded that he had been shot four times upstairs, but had managed to get downstairs where a struggle took place, and during which he was hit several times with the rifle and shot again, this time fatally.

There were two wounds to Nevill's right side, and two to the top of his head which would probably have resulted in unconsciousness. The left side of his lip was wounded, his jaw was fractured, and his teeth, neck and larynx were damaged. The pathologist said he "would not have been able to engage in purposeful talk", according to the Court of Appeal. There were gunshot wounds to his left shoulder and left elbow. The court heard that he had "black eyes and a broken nose, linear bruising to the cheeks, lacerations to the head, linear type bruising to the right forearm, bruising to the left wrist and forearm and three circular burn type marks to the back. The linear marks were consistent with Mr Bamber having been struck with a long blunt object, possibly a gun." One of the pillars of the prosecution case was that Sheila would not have been strong enough to inflict this beating on Nevill, who was 6 ft 4 in (1.93 m) tall and by all accounts in good health.

June

June's body and clothing were heavily bloodstained; she was found in her nightdress with bare feet. The police believe she had been sitting up during part of the attack, based on the pattern of blood on her clothing. She was found lying on the floor by the door of the master bedroom. June had been shot seven times. One shot to her forehead, between her eyes, was fired from under one foot (30 cm) away. That and another shot to the right side of her head would both have caused her death quickly, the court heard. There were also shots to the right side of her lower neck and to her right forearm, and two injuries on the right side of her chest and right knee.

Daniel and Nicholas

The boys were found in their beds in their own room (formerly Sheila's room). They appeared to have been shot while in bed. The court heard that Daniel had been shot five times in the back of the head, four times with the gun held within one foot (30 cm) of his head, and once from over two feet (60 cm) away. Nicholas had been shot three times, all contact or close-proximity shots.

Sheila

Sheila was found on the floor of the master bedroom with her mother. She was in her nightdress, her feet were bare, and she had two bullet wounds under her chin, one of them on her throat. The pathologist, Peter Vanezis, said that the lower of the injuries had occurred from three inches (76 mm) away and that the higher one was a contact injury. The higher of the two would have killed her immediately. The lower injury would have killed her too, he said, but not necessarily straight away. Vanezis testified that it would be possible for a person with such an injury to stand up and walk around, but the lack of blood on her nightdress suggested to him that she had not done this. He believed that the lower of her injuries had happened first because it had caused bleeding inside the neck; the court heard that if the immediately fatal wound had happened first, the bleeding would not have occurred to the same extent. The pattern of bloodstains on her nightdress suggested she had been sitting up when she received both injuries, Vanezis said.

Blood and urine samples indicated that Sheila had taken haloperidol and, several days earlier, had used cannabis. There were no marks on her body suggestive of a struggle. The firearms officer who first saw her said her feet and hands were clean, her fingernails manicured and not broken, and her fingertips free of blood, dirt or powder. There was no trace of lead dust. The rifle magazine would have been loaded at least twice during the killings; this would usually leave lubricant and material from the bullets on the hands. A scenes-of-crimes officer, Detective Constable Hammersley, said there were bloodstains on the back of her right hand but that otherwise her hands were clean.

There was no blood on Sheila's feet or other debris, such as the sugar that was on the downstairs floor. Low traces of lead were found on her hands and forehead at post-mortem, but the levels were consistent with the everyday handling of things around the house. A forensic scientist, Brian Elliott, testified that if Sheila had loaded eighteen cartridges into a magazine he would expect to see more lead on her hands. The blood on her nightdress was consistent with her own, and no trace of firearm-discharge residue was on it. Given that Sheila was wearing just a nightdress, it was hard to see how she could have carried the cartridges. The rifle, without the silencer or sights attached, was lying on her body pointing up at her neck. June's Bible lay on the floor to the right of Sheila. It was normally kept in a bedside cupboard. June's fingerprints were on it, as were others that could not be identified, including one made by a child.

Police investigation

Murder-suicide theory, crime scene

Further information: § Alleged crime-scene damage
Front page of the Daily Express, 8 August 1985

The police and media were initially convinced by the murder-suicide theory. Detective Chief Inspector Thomas Jones, deputy head of CID, was so sure Sheila had killed her family that he ordered Jeremy's cousins out of his office when they asked him to consider whether Jeremy had set the whole thing up. The Daily Express reported on 8 August 1985, the day after the murders:

A farming family affectionately dubbed "The Archers" was slaughtered in a bloodbath yesterday. Brandishing a gun taken from her father's collection, deranged divorcee Sheila Bamber, 28, first shot her twin six-year-old sons. She gunned down her father as he tried to phone for help. Then she murdered her mother before turning the automatic .22 rifle on herself.

The result of this certainty was that the investigation was poorly conducted. The murder scene was not secured or searched thoroughly, and evidence was not recorded or preserved. Within a couple of days, the police had burned the bloodstained bedding and carpets, apparently to spare Jeremy's feelings. The scenes-of-crime officer moved the murder weapon without wearing gloves, and it was not examined for fingerprints until weeks later. Three days after the killings, Bamber and the extended family were given back the keys to the house.

Police did not find the silencer in the cupboard. One of Jeremy's cousins found it on 10 August, with what appeared to be flecks of red paint and blood, and took it to another of the cousin's homes; it took the police a further three days to collect it. A few days after that, the cousins found a scratch on the red mantelpiece that the prosecution said was caused by the silencer during a struggle for the gun; that accounted for the fleck of red paint. The Bible found near Sheila was not examined at all. Journalist David Connett writes that a hacksaw blade that might have been used to gain entry to the house lay in the garden for months. Officers did not take contemporaneous notes; those who had dealt with Jeremy wrote down their statements weeks later. The bodies were released days after the murders, and three of them (Nevill, June and Sheila) were cremated. Jeremy's clothes were not examined until one month later. Ten years later, all blood samples were destroyed.

After Jeremy was convicted, the trial judge, Mr Justice Maurice Drake, expressed concern about the "less than thorough investigation", while The Times wrote about "blunders, omissions and ineptitude". Home Secretary Douglas Hurd requested a report on the investigation from Essex Chief Constable Robert Bunyard and in March 1989 issued a statement in the House of Commons: "It is clear that errors were made in the early stages of the police investigation contrary to existing force practice."

Funeral, Bamber's behaviour

External media
Images
image icon (left to right) Mugford, Bamber and Colin Caffell at the funeral of June, Nevill and Sheila, 16 August 1985.
Video
video icon Funeral service, Anglia Television, 16 August 1985.

The inquest into the murders was opened on 14 August 1985. The police gave evidence that the killings constituted a murder–suicide, and the bodies were released. Nevill, June and Sheila were cremated; the boys were buried. Jeremy's behaviour before and after the funeral increased suspicion among his family that he had been involved; they alleged that he sobbed during the funeral service for his parents and sister, and at one point seemed to buckle and had to be supported by Mugford, but that he was smiling and joking later at the wake.

Shortly after the funerals, Jeremy travelled to Amsterdam with Mugford and a friend, where he bought a large quantity of cannabis; the travel agent who sold the tickets said the group had been in high spirits. Jeremy also began selling his family's belongings; Mugford's mother was offered June's car and an ad was placed in a local newspaper asking £900 for Nevill's. Just after his first arrest and release in September, Jeremy tried to sell twenty nude photographs of Sheila for £20,000 to The Sun and went on another overseas trip with a friend, this time to Saint-Tropez.

Fingerprints on rifle

A print from Sheila's right ring finger was found on the right side of the butt of the rifle, pointing downwards. A print from Jeremy's right forefinger was on the rear end of the barrel, above the stock and pointing across the gun. He said he had used the gun to shoot rabbits. There were three other prints that could not be identified.

Silencer

Further information: § Arguments about the silencer

The silencer was not on the gun when the bodies were discovered. It was found by one of Jeremy's cousins, three days after the murders, in the ground-floor office gun cupboard. Whether it was on the gun during the murders became a pivotal issue. The prosecution maintained that the silencer had indeed been on the gun, and that this meant Sheila could not have shot herself. Forensic tests indicated that her arms were not long enough to turn the gun on herself with the silencer attached. If she had shot the others with the silencer, then realized the gun was too long for her to shoot herself, the silencer would have been found next to her body; she had no reason to return it to the gun cupboard before going back upstairs to shoot herself. If Sheila was not the killer, it meant Jeremy had lied about the telephone call from his father saying Sheila had "gone berserk" with the gun.

The police searched the gun cupboard on the day of the murders but found nothing. Three days later, on 10 August, Bamber's extended family visited the farm with Basil Cock, the estate's executor. During that visit, one of the cousins, David Boutflour, found the silencer and rifle sights in the gun cupboard. The court heard that this was witnessed by Boutflour's father and sister, as well as by Basil Cock and the farm secretary.

Instead of alerting the police, the family took the silencer to Boutflour's sister's home. Boutflour said it felt sticky. They found red paint and blood on the silencer, and its surface had been damaged. When the police collected the silencer on 12 August, five days after the murders, an officer reportedly noticed an inch-long grey hair attached to it, but this had disappeared by the time the silencer arrived at the Forensic Science Service (FSS) at Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire. A scientist at the FSS, John Hayward, found blood on the inside and outside surface of the silencer, the latter not enough to permit analysis. The blood inside was found to be the same blood group as Sheila's, although it could have been a mixture of Nevill's and June's. A firearms expert, Malcolm Fletcher, said the blood was backspatter caused by a close-contact shooting.

Scratch marks on mantelpiece

Further information: § Arguments about the scratch marks

Jeremy's cousins returned to the farmhouse to search for the source of the red paint on the silencer. In the kitchen they found marks in the red paint on the underside of the mantelpiece above an AGA cooker. A sample taken by a scenes-of-crime officer was found to contain the same fifteen layers of paint and varnish that were in the paint flake found on the silencer. Casts of the marks on the mantelpiece were deemed consistent with the silencer having come into contact with the mantel several times.

Julie Mugford's statements

Background

On 7 September 1985, a month after the murders, Mugford changed her statement to police, now alleging that Jeremy had been planning to kill his family. As a result of her second statement, he was arrested the following day.

Jeremy and Mugford had started dating in 1983, when she was aged 19 and studying for a degree in education at Goldsmiths College in London. She had taken a holiday job in Sloppy Joe's, a pizzeria in Colchester, where Jeremy had a bar job in the evenings. During police interviews, Mugford admitted to a brief background of dishonesty: in 1985 she had been cautioned for using a friend's chequebook after it had been reported stolen to obtain goods worth around £700; she said that she and the friend had repaid the money to the bank. Mugford also acknowledged having helped Jeremy, in March 1985, to steal just under £1,000 from the office of the Osea Road caravan site his family owned. She said that he had staged a break-in to make it appear that strangers were responsible.

Statements to police

Mugford was initially supportive of Jeremy. Photographs of his parents' and Sheila's funeral show him weeping and hanging onto her arm. During an interview with the police on the day after the murders, she said that Jeremy had telephoned her at home in the early hours of 7 August, between 3:00 and 3:30 am, and said, "There's something wrong at home," and sounded worried. She said she had been tired and had not asked what was wrong.

Mugford's position changed the following month after she'd had a series of rows with Jeremy. He seemed to want to end the relationship, and they had argued about his involvement in the murders. Mugford told Jeremy he was a psychopath and at one point tried to smother him with a pillow. During one argument on 4 September, another woman telephoned Jeremy in Mugford's presence. As it became clear to Mugford that he had been seeing the woman, she smashed a mirror and slapped him; he then twisted her arm up her back. Three days later, she went to the police and changed her statement.

In the second statement, Mugford alleged that between July and October 1984, Jeremy had said he wished he could "get rid of them all". He had talked disparagingly about his "old" father and "mad" mother, she claimed, who were trying to "run his life". Jeremy was also alleged to have said that his sister had nothing to live for and that the twins were disturbed. That the Bambers were paying for Sheila's expensive flat in Maida Vale annoyed him, she said.

In discussions she said she had dismissed as "idle talk", Jeremy had talked about sedating his parents with sleeping pills, shooting them, then setting fire to the farmhouse. He reportedly said Sheila would make a good scapegoat. Mugford alleged he had discussed cycling along the back roads to the house, entering through the kitchen window because the catch was broken, and leaving it via a different window that latched when it was shut from the outside. A telephone call would be made from White House Farm to his home in Goldhanger "because the last phone call made would be recorded". Jeremy claimed to have killed rats with his bare hands to test whether he was able to kill but he said it had taught him that he would not be able to kill his family, although he allegedly continued to talk about doing so.

"Tonight or never" allegation

Mugford said she had spent the weekend before the murders with Jeremy in his cottage in Goldhanger, where he had dyed his hair black. She had seen his mother's bicycle there, she said; the prosecution later alleged that he had used this bicycle to cycle between his cottage and White House Farm on the night of the murders to avoid being seen in his car on the road. Mugford told police that Jeremy had telephoned her at 9:50 pm on 6 August to say he had been thinking about the crime all day, was "pissed off", and that it was "tonight or never". A few hours later, at 3:00–3:30 am on 7 August, Mugford said he phoned her again to say: "Everything is going well. Something is wrong at the farm. I haven't had any sleep all night ... bye honey and I love you lots." Her flatmates' evidence suggested that call had come through closer to 3:00 am. Jeremy called later in the morning to tell Mugford that Sheila had gone mad and that a police car was coming to pick her up. When she arrived with the police at Jeremy's cottage, she said he had pulled her to one side and said: "I should have been an actor."

Later on the evening of 7 August, Mugford asked Jeremy whether he had done it. He said no, but that a friend of his had, whom he named; the man was a plumber the family had used in the past. Jeremy allegedly said he had told this friend how he could enter and leave the farmhouse undetected, and that one of his instructions had been for the friend to telephone him from one of the phones in the farmhouse that had a memory redial facility, so that if the police checked it he would have an alibi. Everything had gone as planned, he said, except that Nevill had put up a fight, and the friend had become angry and shot him seven times. The friend had allegedly told Sheila to lie down and shoot herself last, Jeremy said. The friend then placed the Bible on her chest so she appeared to have killed herself in a religious frenzy. The children were shot in their sleep, he said. Mugford said Jeremy claimed to have paid the friend £2,000.

Letter about Mugford

A letter dated 26 September 1985 from the assistant director of public prosecutions who prepared the case against Jeremy suggests that Mugford not be prosecuted for the burglary, the cheque fraud, and a further offence of selling cannabis. Mugford subsequently testified against Jeremy during his trial in October 1986. The judge told the jury that they could convict Jeremy on Mugford's testimony alone. Immediately after the verdict was announced, Mugford sold her story to the News of the World for £25,000 (equivalent to £93,000 in 2,023).

Bamber's arrest

As a result of Mugford's statement, Jeremy was arrested on 8 September 1985, as was the friend Mugford said he had implicated, although the latter had a solid alibi and was released. Jeremy told police Mugford was lying because he had jilted her. He said he loved his parents and sister, and denied that they had kept him short of money; he claimed the only reason he had broken into the caravan site with Mugford was to prove that security was poor. He further claimed he had occasionally gained entry to the farmhouse through a downstairs window and had used a knife to move the catches from the outside. He also claimed he had seen his parents' wills, and that they had left the estate to be shared between him and Sheila. As for the rifle, Jeremy told police the gun was used mostly with the silencer off because it would otherwise not fit in its case.

Charged on 9 September with breaking into the Osea Bay caravan site on 25 March 1985 and stealing £980, Jeremy was released on bail on 13 September, after which he went on holiday to Saint-Tropez with a friend. Shortly before this, he tried to sell his life story and nude photographs of Sheila to The Sun newspaper for £20,000. Before leaving England, Jeremy said that he returned to the farmhouse, gaining entry by the downstairs bathroom window. He claimed he did this because he had left his keys in London and needed papers from the house for the trip to France; he entered through the window rather than borrow keys from the farm's housekeeper who lived nearby. When he returned to England on 29 September, Jeremy was arrested at Dover and charged with the murders.

Trial, October 1986

Prosecution case

map
A: Jeremy Bamber's home in Head Street, Goldhanger 51°44′45″N 0°45′21″E / 51.745857°N 0.755881°E / 51.745857; 0.755881
B: White House Farm, Pages Lane, Tolleshunt D'Arcy. 51°45′33″N 0°48′12″E / 51.7591°N 0.8032°E / 51.7591; 0.8032

Jeremy's trial, which lasted eighteen days, opened on 3 October 1986 before Mr Justice Drake and a jury of seven men and five women at Chelmsford Crown Court. The prosecution was led by Anthony Arlidge QC, and the defence by Geoffrey Rivlin QC, supported by Ed Lawson QC. The Times wrote that Jeremy cut an arrogant figure in the witness box. At one point, when prosecutors accused him of lying, he replied: "That is what you have got to establish."

The prosecution case was that Jeremy, motivated by hatred and greed, had left White House Farm around 10 pm on 6 August 1985, after dining with his family, to drive to his home in Goldhanger. Later, perhaps in the early hours of the morning of 7 August, he had returned to the farm on his mother's bicycle — which he had borrowed a few days earlier — cycling along a route that avoided the main roads and approaching the farmhouse from the back. He had entered the house through a downstairs bathroom window, taken the rifle with the silencer attached, and gone upstairs. He had shot June in her bed; she had managed to walk a few steps before collapsing and dying. He had shot Nevill in the bedroom too, but Nevill was able to get downstairs where he and Jeremy fought in the kitchen before Jeremy shot him four times, twice in his temple and twice in the top of his head. He had shot Sheila in the main bedroom, next to her mother, and had shot the children in their beds as they slept.

Jeremy had then arranged the scene to make it appear that Sheila was the killer, the prosecution argued. He discovered that she could not have reached the trigger with the silencer attached, so he removed it and returned it to the gun cupboard, then placed a Bible next to her body to introduce a religious theme. After removing the kitchen phone from its hook, he left the house via a kitchen window, perhaps after showering, and banged the window from the outside so that the catch dropped back into position. He had then cycled back to Goldhanger on his mother's bicycle. Shortly after 3 am, he had telephoned Mugford, then the police at 3:26 am to say he had just received a frantic call from his father. To create a delay before the bodies were discovered, he had not called 999, had driven slowly to the farmhouse, and had told police that his sister was familiar with guns so that they would be reluctant to enter.

The prosecution further argued that Jeremy had not received a telephone call from his father, that Nevill was too badly injured after the first shots to have spoken to anyone, that there was no blood on the kitchen phone that had been left off the hook, and that Nevill would have called the police before calling Jeremy. They also argued that, had Jeremy really received such a call, he would have dialled 999, alerted the farm workers, then made his way quickly to White House Farm himself.

The silencer played a central role in the prosecution's case. It was deemed to have been on the rifle when it was fired because of the blood found inside it. The prosecution said the blood had come from Sheila's head when the silencer was pointed at her. Had she discovered that she could not shoot herself with the silencer attached, the court heard, it would have been found next to her body; she had no reason to return it to the gun cupboard. That she had carried out the killings was further discounted because, it was argued, she had not recently expressed suicidal thoughts; the expert evidence was that she would not have harmed her children or father; she had no interest in or knowledge of guns; she lacked the strength to overcome her father; and there was no evidence on her clothes or body that she had moved around the crime scene or been involved in a struggle. In particular, her long fingernails had remained intact.

Defence case

The defence maintained that the witnesses who said Jeremy disliked his family were lying or had misinterpreted his words. Mugford had lied about his confession, they said, because he had betrayed her. No one had seen Jeremy cycle to and from the farm. There were no marks on him on the night in question that suggested he had been in a fight. No blood-stained clothing of his was recovered. He had not driven to the farm as quickly as he could have after his father telephoned because he was afraid, they said. There was no probative value in the finding of a hacksaw in the garden, because Jeremy had entered the house via the windows many times, before the killings and since.

The defence argued that Sheila was the killer and that she did know how to handle guns, having been raised on a farm and had attended shoots when she was younger. She had a very serious mental illness, had told a psychiatrist she felt capable of killing her children, and the loaded rifle and cartridges had been left on the kitchen table by Jeremy. There had been a recent family argument about placing her children in foster care. A former boyfriend of Sheila's gave a written statement to the court that she had had some kind of breakdown in March 1985, in his presence, when she began beating the wall with her fists because the telephone line had gone dead during a call; she had said the phone was bugged and talked about God and the devil, and how the latter loved her. This former boyfriend said he had feared for the safety of people around Sheila, who had a "deep and intense dislike" of June, her adoptive mother. The defence argued that people who have carried out so-called "altruistic" killings have been known to engage in ritualistic behaviour before killing themselves, and that Sheila might have placed the silencer in the cupboard, changed her clothes and washed herself, which would explain why there was little lead on her hands, or why sugar from the floor was not found on her feet. There was also a possibility that the blood in the silencer was not hers, but was a mixture of Nevill's and June's.

Summing up, verdict

Home Secretary Douglas Hurd (pictured in 2013) decided in 1988 that Bamber should never be released.

The judge told the jury that there were three crucial points, in no particular order. Did they believe Mugford or Jeremy? Were they sure that Sheila was not the killer who then committed suicide? He said this question involved another: was the second, fatal, shot fired at Sheila with the silencer on? If yes, she could not have fired it. Finally, did Nevill call Jeremy in the middle of the night? If there was no such call, it undermined the entirety of Jeremy's story; the only reason he would have had to invent the phone call was that he was responsible for the murders.

On 28 October, after deliberating for more than nine hours, the jury found Jeremy guilty by a majority of 10–2 (the minimum required for conviction). Sentencing him to five life terms, with a recommendation that he serve a minimum of twenty-five years, the judge told Jeremy: "Your conduct in planning and carrying out the killing of five members of your family was evil, almost beyond belief." In December 1994, Home Secretary Michael Howard told Jeremy that he would remain in prison for the rest of his life, following a decision in 1988 by the Home Secretary of the day, Douglas Hurd.

Appeals

Leave to appeal refused, 1989 and 1994

Jeremy first sought leave to appeal in November 1986, arguing that the judge had misdirected the jury. The application was heard and refused by Mr Justice Caulfield in April 1988. During a full hearing in March 1989 before three Appeal Court judges—Lord Lane, the Lord Chief Justice; Mr Justice Roch; and Mr Justice Henry—Jeremy's lawyer, Geoffrey Rivlin QC, argued that the trial judge's summing up had been biased against his client, that his language had been too forceful, and that he had undermined the defence by advancing his own theory. Rivlin also argued that the defence had not pressed Mugford about her dealings with the media but should have, because as soon as the trial was over her story began to appear in newspapers. On 20 March 1989 the judges refused Jeremy leave to appeal, ruling that there was nothing unsafe or unsatisfactory about the verdicts.

Because the trial judge had criticized the police investigation, Essex Police held an internal inquiry. Jeremy alleged this report confirmed that evidence had been withheld by the police so he made a formal complaint, which was investigated in 1991 by the City of London Police. This investigation uncovered more material, which Jeremy used to petition the Home Secretary in September 1993 for a referral back to the Court of Appeal, refused in July 1994. During this process, the Home Office declined to give Jeremy the expert evidence it had obtained, so he applied for judicial review of their decision in November 1994, which resulted in the Home Office handing over the evidence. In 1996 a police officer destroyed many of the trial exhibits, saying later he had not been aware that the case was ongoing. Jeremy's defence team referred to the destruction of blood samples as a "disgrace".

Court of Appeal, 2002

Criminal Cases Review Commission referral

In 1997 the Home Office passed Jeremy's case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which had just been established to review alleged miscarriages of justice. In March 2001 the CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal because of the discovery of DNA inside the silencer; this was found as a result of a test not available in 1986 and constituted fresh evidence. Jeremy's conviction rested in part on evidence that Sheila's blood had been found inside the silencer, suggesting that it had been on the gun when she died; but her arms were not long enough to point the gun back at herself and pull the trigger with the silencer attached. The appeal was heard from 17 October to 1 November 2002, at the Royal Courts of Justice, by Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Wright and Mr Justice Henriques, who published their decision on 12 December 2002. The prosecution was represented by Victor Temple QC and Jeremy by Michael Turner QC. In a 522-paragraph judgment, the judges concluded that there was no conduct on the part of investigators that threatened the integrity of the trial, and that the more they examined the case, the more they thought the jury had been right.

Grounds

Jeremy initially brought sixteen issues to the attention of the court. Two (grounds 14 and 15) related to the silencer and DNA testing; the rest were about failure to disclose evidence or the fabrication of evidence. The defence withdrew ground 11 ("the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant") before the hearing.

  • Ground 1a – "hand swabs from Sheila Caffell"
  • 1b – "the testing of the hand swabs from Sheila Caffell"
  • 2 – "disturbance of the crime scene"
  • 3 – "evidence relating to windows"
  • 4 – "timing of phone call to Julie Mugford"
  • 5 – "evidence relevant to the credibility of Julie Mugford"
  • 6 – "letter from Colin Caffell"
  • 7 – "the statement of Colin Caffell"
  • 8 – "photograph showing carving of the words 'I hate this place'"
  • 9 – "the Bible"
  • 10 – "the question of inheritance"
  • 11 – "the proposed purchase of a Porsche by the appellant"
  • 12 – "the telephone in the office"
  • 13 – "scars on the appellant's hands"
  • 14 and 15 – "blood in the sound moderator"
  • 15 – "DNA evidence"
  • 16 – "police misconduct"

New silencer evidence

Bamber's appeal at the Royal Courts of Justice was dismissed in December 2002.

Although all the grounds (except 11) were reviewed by the court, the CCRC referred the case to the Court of Appeal on the basis of ground 15, the discovery of DNA on the silencer, the result of a test not available in 1986. The silencer evidence during the trial had come from John Hayward, a biologist in private practice, formerly of the FSS. He had found a "considerable amount of blood" inside the silencer; he had stated that it was human blood and that the blood group was consistent with it having come from Sheila. He said there was a "remote possibility" that it was a mixture of blood from Nevill and June.

Mark Webster, an expert instructed by Jeremy's defence team, argued that Hayward's tests had been inadequate and that there was a real possibility, not a remote one, that the blood had come from Nevill and June. This was a critical point, because the prosecution case rested on the silencer having been on the gun when Sheila was shot, something she could not have done herself because of the length of her arms. If she was shot with the silencer on the gun, it meant that someone else had shot her. If her blood was inside the silencer, it supported the prosecution's position that she had been shot by another party, but if the blood inside the silencer belonged to someone else, that part of the prosecution case collapsed.

The defence argued that new tests comparing DNA in the silencer to a sample from Sheila's biological mother suggested that the "major component" of the DNA in the silencer had not come from Sheila. A DNA sample from June's sister suggested that the major component had come from June, the defence argued. The court concluded that June's DNA was in the silencer, that Sheila's DNA may have been in the silencer, and that there was evidence of DNA from at least one male. The judges' conclusion was that the results were complex, incomplete, and also meaningless because they did not establish how June's DNA came to be in the silencer years after the trial, did not establish that Sheila's was not in it, and did not lead to a conclusion that Jeremy's conviction was unsafe.

Against whole-life tariff

Further information: List of prisoners with whole-life tariffs

In 2008 Jeremy lost a High Court appeal before Mr Justice Tugendhat against his whole-life tariff. This was upheld by the Court of Appeal in 2009. Jeremy and three other British whole-life prisoners appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, but the appeal was rejected in 2012. Jeremy and two of the prisoners (one of them the serial killer Peter Moore) appealed that decision, and in 2013 the European Court's Grand Chamber ruled that keeping the prisoners in jail with no prospect of release or review may not have been compatible with Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.

Campaign

Background

Peter Tatchell appealed in 2015 for all evidence related to the case to be released to the defence.

A campaign, known from November 2015 as JB Campaign Ltd, gathered pace over the years to secure Jeremy's release. The civil-liberties group Justice for All took up his case in 1993 to prepare for his appeal that year, and The Guardian ran a long investigative piece by Jim Shelley in November 1993 that included a telephone interview with Jeremy from HMP Long Martin, Worcestershire; Jeremy said he still could not understand why he had been convicted. From March 2001 several websites were set up to discuss the evidence, and in 2002 Jeremy used one of the sites to offer a £1 million reward for evidence that would overturn his conviction. Campaign events included a supporter reading a letter from Jeremy to his parents at their graveside, and a "Bamber bake-off" featuring his mother's favourite recipes.

Jeremy's case was taken up by MPs George Galloway (Respect) and Andrew Hunter (DUP) and journalists Bob Woffinden and Eric Allison of The Guardian. Allison became one of the campaign's patrons. Woffinden argued between 2007 and 2011 that Sheila had shot her family, then watched as police gathered outside before shooting herself. He changed his mind in 2011 and said he believed Jeremy was guilty. In 2015 the human-rights campaigner Peter Tatchell appealed to the Chief Constable of Essex Police to disclose all evidence related to the case.

Campaign's arguments

Location of Sheila's body, time of death

The defence disputed the location of Sheila's body. The police said they had found her upstairs with her mother. According to early police logs, one officer reported seeing through a window what he thought was the body of a woman near the kitchen door, but he later radioed that it was a man. A retired police officer who worked on the case said in 2011 that the first police logs were simply mistaken in reporting that a woman's body had been found downstairs. Jeremy's lawyers argued that images of Sheila taken by a police photographer at around 9 am on 7 August 1985 showed that her blood was still wet. According to the defence team, had she been killed before 3:30 am, as the prosecution said, the blood would have congealed by 9 am. They argued that she was alive when Jeremy was standing outside the house with the police, shot herself in the kitchen just as the police entered, then ran up one of the staircases to the bedroom, where she shot herself again, this time fatally.

Alleged crime-scene damage

The defence argued that the first officers to enter the farmhouse had inadvertently disturbed the crime scene, then reconstructed it. Crime-scene photographs not made available to the original defence show Sheila's right arm and hand in slightly different positions in relation to the gun, which is lying across her body. The gun itself also appears to have moved. Former Detective Chief Superintendent Mick Gradwell of Lancashire Constabulary, shown the photographs by The Guardian, said in 2011: "The evidence shows, or portrays, Essex police having damaged the scene, and then having staged it again to make it look like it was originally. And if that has happened, and that hasn't been disclosed, that is really, really serious."

Arguments about the silencer

Further information: § Silencer

The contention that the gun had a silencer on it during the murders was central to the prosecution's case; Jeremy and his lawyers have sought since 1987 to discredit the silencer evidence. With the silencer fitted, the gun was too long for Sheila to have turned it on herself. According to the prosecution, paint on the silencer could be matched to fresh scratch marks on the kitchen mantelpiece, assumed to have been made during a fight for the gun. That the silencer was found in the gun cupboard was important to the prosecution, because Sheila had no reason to return it to the cupboard before killing herself. But that it was found by one of the cousins who inherited part of the estate—days after the police had searched the house—blighted the prosecution's case, although it was accepted by a majority of the jury.

Lee writes that the silencer evidence became confused because of the way the exhibit was named. It was first called "SBJ/1", because it was handed over by Detective Sergeant Stan Jones (SBJ). When it was learned that David Boutflour had found it, the silencer was renamed exhibit "DB/1". But because there was a Detective Constable David Bird, it was renamed again to "DRB/1". The name changes led to confusion in later documents, giving the impression that more than one silencer had been found. In 2011, Lee writes, Jeremy's blog announced: "We can now prove 100% that there were two sound moderators obtained by police at different times." The CCRC responded that year that the claims were "not supported by the material that exists". Again in 2013 Jeremy's blog said: "I can now prove with 100% certainty that Essex police seized one Parker Hale (MM1 type) suppressor from the house on 7 August 1985" (the day of the murder, rather than the day the cousin found it). According to The Times in 2013, he aimed to show that the police had taken four silencers from his family members, including the one in the cupboard, and that evidence and paperwork from them—and from an additional laboratory silencer—had been mixed up.

In or around 2012, Jeremy's lawyers commissioned gun experts from the US and UK to examine photographs of the bodies and the silencer evidence. They argued that injuries on the bodies were consistent with the silencer not having been used, and that its absence would explain burn marks on Nevill's body. The court had heard that "three circular burn type marks" had been found on Nevill's back. In November 1985 a police report submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions had argued that the burn marks were made with the hot end of the gun or with a poker from the AGA cooker.

Arguments about scratch marks

Further information: § Scratch marks on mantelpiece

The defence commissioned a report from Peter Sutherst, a British forensic photographic expert, who was asked in 2008 to examine negatives of the kitchen taken on the day of the murders and later. In his report, dated 17 January 2010, Sutherst argued that the scratch marks in the red paintwork on the kitchen mantelpiece had been created after the crime-scene photographs had been taken. The prosecution alleged that the marks had been made during the struggle in the kitchen between Bamber and his father, as the silencer, attached to the rifle, had scratched against the mantelpiece. The prosecution said that paint chips identical to the paint on the mantelpiece had been found on or inside the silencer. Sutherst said the scratch marks appeared in photographs taken on 10 September 1985, 34 days after the murders, but were not visible in the original crime-scene photographs. He also said he had failed to find in the photographs any chipped paint on the carpet below the mantelpiece, where it might have been expected to fall had the mantelpiece been scratched during a struggle. Sutherst was asked by the CCRC to examine a red spot on the carpet visible in photographs underneath the scratches on the mantelpiece. He said the red spot matched a piece of nail varnish missing from one of Sheila's toes. Sutherst concluded that the scratch marks on the mantel had been created after the day of the murders.

Arguments about police logs

Further information: § Radio log

Police telephone logs had been entered as evidence during the trial, but had not been noticed by Jeremy's lawyers. Jeremy's new defence team based their new CCRC submissions in part on these logs, particularly on the radio log that, they say, shows Nevill called police that night to say his daughter had "gone berserk" with one of his guns. A separate log of a police radio message shows there was an attempt to speak to someone inside the farmhouse that night, as police waited outside to enter, but there was no response. Police say the officers simply made a mistake.

Arguments about Mugford letter

Further information: § Letter about Mugford

Jeremy's lawyers argued that the 26 September 1985 letter to Mugford from John Walker, assistant director of public prosecutions, raised the possibility that she had been persuaded to testify in the hope that charges against her would not be pursued. In the letter, Walker had suggested to the Chief Constable of Essex Police, "with considerable hesitation", that Mugford not be prosecuted for drug offences, burglary and cheque fraud, offences to which she had confessed during her police interviews regarding Bamber. The defence team also highlighted that, as soon as the verdict was announced, Mugford sold her story to the News of the World for £25,000 (equivalent to £92,526 in 2023).

Criminal Cases Review Commission, 2004–2012

In 2004 Jeremy's defence team, which included Giovanni di Stefano, applied unsuccessfully to have the CCRC refer the case back to the Court of Appeal. His lawyers made a fresh submission to the CCRC in 2009. The CCRC provisionally rejected Jeremy's 2009 submission in February 2011 in an 89-page document. It invited his lawyers to respond within three months, extended the deadline to allow them to study all 406 crime-scene photographs, and in September 2011 granted them an indefinite period in which to pursue an additional line of inquiry.

The CCRC finally rejected the application in April 2012 in a 109-page report, which said the submission had not identified any new evidence or legal argument that would raise the real possibility of the Court of Appeal overturning the conviction. In November 2012 the High Court turned down Bamber's application for a judicial review of that decision. The next year, di Stefano was sentenced in the UK to 14 years in prison for having fraudulently presented himself as a lawyer. As of December 2013 Jeremy's defence team was said to be preparing a fresh submission.

In popular media

The case became the subject of a television drama series, White House Farm, starring Freddie Fox as Bamber and Cressida Bonas as Sheila, broadcast in January 2020 on ITV in the UK and HBO Max in the United States. In 2021, documentary maker Louis Theroux produced a four-part series for Sky Crime on the murders, titled The Bambers: Murder At The Farm. Theroux told the Radio Times that the series had to be extended from an initial three-episode format due to the complexities of the case, and told Sky News that "both scenarios have anomalies".

See also

Sources

Notes

  1. Cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger: 51°44′45″N 0°45′21″E / 51.745857°N 0.755881°E / 51.745857; 0.755881 (Cottage at 9 Head Street, Goldhanger)
  2. White House Farm farmhouse: 51°45′33″N 0°48′12″E / 51.7591°N 0.8032°E / 51.7591; 0.8032 (White House Farm farmhouse)
  3. EWCA Crim 2912, 430: "At trial the evidence was that when the kitchen was entered the telephone in the kitchen was off the hook as can be seen in a number of photographs particularly photographs 13 and 14. The defence contended that the telephone off the hook was entirely consistent with Nevill having phoned the Appellant. The Prosecution countered this by alleging that the Appellant had set the scene. They drew attention to the fact that Nevill was severely bloodied and that the telephone had no visible blood upon it although no swabs were taken from it."
  4. EWCA Crim 2912, 149: "The appellant returned the moderator to the gun cupboard and before leaving the address called his home at Goldhanger, leaving the receiver off the hook, thus lending support to the alibi he would later rely upon. He then left the premises, one available route being to climb out of the kitchen window, banging it from the outside to drop the catch back into position and then cycled home."
  5. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 24–27: "In the early hours of Wednesday, 7 August the appellant telephoned Chelmsford Police Station on a direct line number as opposed to the 999 emergency call system and spoke to PC West. He said, 'You've got to help me. My father has just rung me and said, "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun." Then the line went dead'. He explained that he had tried to ring his father back at White House Farm but he could not get a reply. "Using a radio link PC West contacted Malcolm Bonnet at the Chelmsford H/Q Information Room. PC West then spoke to the appellant again, who complained at the time the officer was taking. He said, "When my father rang he sounded terrified". The appellant was told to go to the farm and to wait there for the police. PC West described the appellant as sounding 'very laconic' and calm during the first part of their conversation and said that there was no sense of urgency. When he spoke to him again the appellant appeared 'more urgent and distressed in his manner'. "PC West recorded the time of the appellant's call as 3.36 a.m. At trial it was accepted that the officer had misread a digital clock. The officer's contact with Mr Bonnett was recorded as being at 3.26 a.m. and it seems clear that the appellant's call must have been at 3.26 a.m. or very shortly before. "At 3.35 am, Mr Bonnet arranged for a police car to go to White House Farm. A check made by a British Telecom operator of the telephone line to the farm was made at 4.30 am. The receiver was off the hook and all the operator could hear was a dog barking."
  6. R v Bamber, EWCA Crim 2912, 79: "Exercises and tests conducted at the laboratory established that it would have been physically impossible for a woman of Sheila Caffell's height and reach to have operated the trigger and shot herself with the sound moderator attached to the weapon. She simply could not have reached it. Thus she could only have committed suicide if the sound moderator had been removed from the rifle."
  7. According to Carol Ann Lee, in her book The Murders at White House Farm (2015), Jeremy said in April 1987 that DCI Jones had found the silencer under a bed on 7 August 1985, the day of the murders, and had placed it in the gun cupboard for safekeeping. Jeremy claimed to have seen a statement from Jones to that effect. The Essex police called this "total nonsense" in a letter to the Crown Prosecution Service, and Bamber was never able to produce the statement.
  8. The experts were David Fowler, chief medical examiner for the US state of Maryland; Ljubisa Dragovic, chief medical examiner of Oakland County, Michigan; Marcella Fierro, former chief medical examiner for the US state of Virginia; Daniel Caruso, chief of burn services at the Arizona Burn Center; and John Manlove, a British forensic scientist.

References

  1. EWCA Crim 2912; Lee 2015, pp. xiii–xv.
  2. ^ EWCA Crim 2912.
  3. Smith 2010, 18–22; for extended family, 19–20.
  4. ^ "Murder most foul, but did he do it?". The Times (editorial). 18 March 2001. Archived from the original on 3 October 2006. Retrieved 5 August 2020.
  5. EWCA Crim 2912, 153.
  6. For dates of birth, Caffell 1994, 15; for the other biographical details, Powell 1994, 18, 21–22, 25.
  7. EWCA Crim 2912, 12, 151.v(c).
  8. Lee 2015, 20, 23–24.
  9. Lee 2015, 71.
  10. ^ Lee 2015, 338.
  11. Powell 1994, 34, 52–53, 230; for religion, also see Lee 2015, 150.
  12. Smith 2010, 18; Caffell 1994, 29, 151.
  13. Caffell 1994, 139–141; EWCA Crim 2912, 16–17
  14. EWCA Crim 2912, 373.
  15. Caffell 1994, 25; EWCA Crim 2912, 17.
  16. Caffell 1994, 29–30, 151; EWCA Crim 2912, 371–372.
  17. Caffell 1994, 79–82.
  18. ^ Keel, Paul (29 October 1986). "Bamber's perfect crime brings 25-year sentence". The Guardian. 1.
  19. For "Bambi", Caffell 1994, 55; for the date of birth, Wilkes 1994, 35.
  20. Lee 2015, 20–21.
  21. Powell 1994, 21–22, 29, 32; Caffell 1994, 128, 131; Lee 2015, 27.
  22. Caffell 1994, 135–137; Lee 2015, 41.
  23. Powell 1994, 36–37; Lee 2015, 46.
  24. Caffell 1994, 139.
  25. Lee 2015, 46.
  26. Lee 2015, 49; Caffell 1994, 1994, 139–142, 144.
  27. Lee 2015, 70.
  28. Powell 1994, 51–52.
  29. Powell 1994, 59–65; Lee 2015, 111.
  30. Powell 1994, 74–79; Lee 2015, 111.
  31. Powell 1994, 80.
  32. EWCA Crim 2912, 84–85; Lee 2015, 82.
  33. EWCA Crim 2912, 84.
  34. Powell 1994, 230; EWCA Crim 2912, 85; Lee 2015, 81, 111–115.
  35. EWCA Crim 2912, 86–87.
  36. EWCA Crim 2912, 370.
  37. Powell 1994, 231; EWCA Crim 2912, 88–89
  38. EWCA Crim 2912, 83.
  39. EWCA Crim 2912, 82.
  40. EWCA Crim 2912, 30, 143.
  41. Powell 1994, 174.
  42. Lee 2015, 25, 59–60; Powell 1994, 265.
  43. ^ Lee 2015, 31.
  44. "Parents tormented by private anguish over flawed children". The Times. 29 October 1986.
  45. Powell 1994, 40, 47–48.
  46. Keel, Paul (29 October 1986). "Unhappy family caught in tragedy at White House Farm". The Guardian. 27.
  47. EWCA Crim 2912, 18.
  48. Lee 2015, 80.
  49. Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark (30 January 2011)."The new evidence Jeremy Bamber says could end his 26 years in prison" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Observer.
  50. Allison, Eric and Hattenstone, Simon (10 February 2011). "Is Jeremy Bamber innocent?" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Guardian.
  51. Galloway, George (15 May 2007). "Lie Detectors: Jeremy Bamber" Archived 4 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine. House of Commons.
  52. "Slaughter At The Farm" Archived 12 August 2020 at the Wayback Machine. Countdown to Murder. Channel 5, 13 November 2013, from 00:10:40.
  53. Kennedy, Dominic (8 November 2013). "Jeremy Bamber's father 'foresaw' family slaughter at farm" Archived 10 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine. The Times.
  54. Lee 2015, 278–282.
  55. EWCA Crim 2912, 116–118
  56. Keel, Paul (8 October 1986). "Bamber had no qualms about killing, uncle says". The Guardian. 2.
  57. EWCA Crim 2912, 119, 423.
  58. ^ UK Retail Price Index inflation figures are based on data from Clark, Gregory (2017). "The Annual RPI and Average Earnings for Britain, 1209 to Present (New Series)". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
  59. ^ Keel, Paul (29 October 1986). "The trail that led to Bamber". The Guardian. 27.
  60. Lee 2015, 266.
  61. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 73–74.
  62. ^ Smith 2010, 19–20.
  63. Moore, Matthew (12 July 2010). "Jeremy Bamber claims he was framed for murder by cousins" Archived 7 August 2018 at the Wayback Machine, The Daily Telegraph.
  64. ^ "Killer's family cash claim fails" Archived 3 December 2013 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 6 October 2004.
  65. "Bamber claims £1m from family" Archived 4 March 2017 at the Wayback Machine. BBC News, 18 August 2003; Ezard, John (19 August 2003). "Murder family sued by killer" Archived 30 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine. The Guardian.
  66. EWCA Crim 2912, 22.
  67. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 392–404; Kennedy 2002.
  68. EWCA Crim 2912, 370
  69. EWCA Crim 2912, 373–377.
  70. Lee 2015, 156, 412.
  71. Lee 2015, 157.
  72. EWCA Crim 2912, 23.
  73. EWCA Crim 2912, 21, 30.
  74. Lee 2015, 218.
  75. EWCA Crim 2912, 146.
  76. EWCA Crim 2912, 12.
  77. EWCA Crim 2912, 13; Lee 2015, 104.
  78. EWCA Crim 2912, 69; Lee 2015, 318.
  79. EWCA Crim 2912, 13.
  80. EWCA Crim 2912, 21.
  81. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 66–67.
  82. Lee 2015, 249–250.
  83. EWCA Crim 2912, 430.
  84. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 24; for "gone berserk", "Jury told of Bamber's 'fatal mistake'", The Guardian, 22 October 1986, p. 2, and Lee 2015, xiii.
  85. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 153
  86. EWCA Crim 2912, 430.
  87. EWCA Crim 2912, 149.
  88. File:Jeremy Bamber police log.JPG, Essex police log, 7 August 1985; EWCA Crim 2912, 27.
  89. EWCA Crim 2912, 68.
  90. Lee 2015, 309–310.
  91. EWCA Crim 2912, 144.
  92. EWCA Crim 2912, 29, 134.
  93. ^ Collins, Nick (5 August 2019). "Jeremy Bamber murders: new evidence could clear killer". The Daily Telegraph.
  94. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 24.
  95. ^ Lee 2015, 164.
  96. Lee 2015, 344.
  97. ^ Connett, David (8 August 2010). "Past crimes: The Bamber files" Archived 15 September 2017 at the Wayback Machine. The Independent.
  98. Lee 2015, 164, 345.
  99. Allison et al. 2011, 00:02:00.
  100. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 8.
  101. Lee 2015, 163.
  102. Lee 2015, 168.
  103. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 30.
  104. EWCA Crim 2912, 39.
  105. Lee 2015, 171.
  106. EWCA Crim 2912, 8, 33–36.
  107. EWCA Crim 2912, 58.
  108. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 33.
  109. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 41.
  110. EWCA Crim 2912, 42.
  111. EWCA Crim 2912, 43, 63.
  112. EWCA Crim 2912, 36, 44, 65.
  113. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 45–53.
  114. For the forensic scientist's name, see Lee 2015, 362.
  115. Lee 2015, 337.
  116. EWCA Crim 2912, 52.
  117. ^ Lee 2015, p. xiii.
  118. Lee 2015, 215–216.
  119. EWCA Crim 962, 11.
  120. Horsnell, Michael (29 October 1986). "Detectives' blunders let Bamber roam free". The Times. Issue 62601, p. 3; Lee 2015, 383–384.
  121. Douglas Hurd, "Jeremy Bamber Archived 4 October 2017 at the Wayback Machine, Hansard, 23 March 1989, column 804.
  122. Lee 2015, 243–245.
  123. Lee 2015, 248.
  124. Lee 2015, 251.
  125. Lee 2015, 319–320.
  126. EWCA Crim 2912, 72.
  127. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 74.
  128. EWCA Crim 2912, 79.
  129. ^ Smith 2010, 20.
  130. EWCA Crim 2912, 73.
  131. EWCA Crim 2912, 75–79; Lee 2015, 319, 323–324.
  132. EWCA Crim 2912, 78; Lee 2015, 318, 319.
  133. EWCA Crim 2912, 80.
  134. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 127–136.
  135. Lee 2015, 86, 89.
  136. EWCA Crim 2912, 114–115.
  137. EWCA Crim 2912, 94–95.
  138. Lee 2015, 261–264.
  139. Lee 2015, 268–271.
  140. Lee 2015, 275; EWCA Crim 2912, 96.
  141. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 97.
  142. Lee 2015, 278.
  143. Lee 2015, 279.
  144. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 98–115.
  145. Lee 2015, 281–282.
  146. Lee 2015, 282.
  147. ^ Eric Allison, "Jeremy Bamber in new challenge to conviction for murdering family" Archived 27 September 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Guardian, 29 March 2012.
  148. "Jeremy Bamber: prosecutor's correspondence with police—full documents" Archived 31 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Guardian, 29 March 2012.
  149. ^ Lee 2015, 381.
  150. "Model's brother remanded on bail". The Guardian. 14 September 1985. 3.
  151. Lee 2015, 319–320; Lashmar, Paul (22 September 1985). "Missing facts on a massacre". The Observer. 5.
  152. EWCA Crim 2912, 127–136; "Murder charge". The Guardian. 30 September 1985.; "Bamber killings: son remanded". The Glasgow Herald. 1 October 1985. Archived from the original on 24 January 2013.
  153. Keel, Paul (3 October 1986). "Farmhouse killings by son who called police—QC". The Guardian. 2.
  154. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 145–150.
  155. Lee 2015, 413; for the prosecution's summary, Lee 2015, 342–344.
  156. ^ Lee 2015, 410.
  157. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 151.
  158. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 152; Lee 2015, 364.
  159. "Friend tells of Bambi's 'temper'". The Guardian. 21 October 1986. 2.
  160. ^ EWHC 862 (QB), 1; for Hurd, also see Lee 2015, 387; for Howard, also see Campbell, Duncan (29 April 1985). "Bamber loses plea over life term ruling", The Guardian.
  161. Lee 2015, 377–379.
  162. ^ Powell 1994, 276, 283–285; EWCA Crim 2912, 155–158
  163. ^ "Bamber refused appeal over farmhouse murders". The Guardian. 21 March 1989. 4.
  164. "Judge ridiculed Bamber's defence, says QC". The Guardian. 15 March 1989. 8.
  165. "Bamber appeal plea". The Guardian. 28 September 1993. 3.
  166. ^ Shelley, Jim (13 November 1993). "Who killed Bambi?". The Guardian.; Shelley, Jim (13 November 1993). "Jeremy Bamber interviewed". The Guardian.
  167. EWCA Crim 2912, 159ff
  168. EWCA Crim 2912, 165
  169. ^ Foster, Peter; Penny, Thomas (12 March 2001). "Appeal Court reviews Bamber 'massacre'". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 5 May 2013. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  170. "Commission refers conviction of Jeremy Bamber to Court of Appeal". Criminal Cases Review Commission. 12 March 2001. Archived from the original on 23 December 2004.
  171. EWCA Crim 2912, 166ff
  172. Morris, Steven (13 March 2001). "Bamber relies on 'forensic issue' to overturn 1986 conviction". The Guardian. 2.
  173. EWCA Crim 2912, 170.
  174. EWCA Crim 2912, 511–513.
  175. Sarah Hall, "Bamber loses appeal over murder convictions" Archived 2 January 2017 at the Wayback Machine, The Guardian, 13 December 2002.
  176. EWCA Crim 2912, 174
  177. EWCA Crim 2912, 169–174
  178. ^ EWCA Crim 2912, 428
  179. Kennedy, Dominic (18 October 2002). "15 reasons by Bamber says he is innocent". The Times. No. 67585. p. 3.
  180. EWCA Crim 2912, 175–213; Kennedy 2002.
  181. EWCA Crim 2912, 214–232; Kennedy 2002.
  182. EWCA Crim 2912, 233–260; Kennedy 2002.
  183. EWCA Crim 2912, 261–288; Kennedy 2002.
  184. EWCA Crim 2912, 289–330; Kennedy 2002.
  185. EWCA Crim 2912, 331–366; Kennedy 2002.
  186. EWCA Crim 2912, 367–377; Kennedy 2002.
  187. EWCA Crim 2912, 378–391; Kennedy 2002.
  188. EWCA Crim 2912, 405–421; Kennedy 2002.
  189. EWCA Crim 2912, 422–427; Kennedy 2002.
  190. EWCA Crim 2912, 429–443; Kennedy 2002.
  191. EWCA Crim 2912, 444–451; Kennedy 2002.
  192. EWCA Crim 2912, 452–475; Kennedy 2002.
  193. EWCA Crim 2912, 476–508; Kennedy 2002.
  194. EWCA Crim 2912, 509–511; Kennedy 2002.
  195. EWCA Crim 2912, 452; also see 75–80.
  196. EWCA Crim 2912, 453–454; for Hayward, Lee 2015, 259, 319, 323–324.
  197. EWCA Crim 2912, 464, 467.
  198. EWCA Crim 2912, 476–508; Horsnell, Michael (13 December 2002). "Bamber loses appeal over five murders". The Times. p. 14.
  199. ^ Kennedy, Dominic (2 December 2013). "Bamber challenges murder conviction over gun evidence". The Times. Issue 71057. p. 23.
  200. EWHC 862 (QB), 7.
  201. EWCA Crim 962, 4, 40; "Killer's life term is 'justified'" Archived 18 May 2009 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 14 May 2009.
  202. "Murderers lose appeal against whole life tariffs" Archived 17 December 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 17 January 2012.
  203. "Killers' life terms 'breach their human rights'" Archived 16 December 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 9 July 2013.
  204. "J B Campaign Ltd" Archived 30 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, Companies House.
  205. "Murderer's website sparks anger". Birmingham Evening Mail. 5 March 2001; "Killer Bamber offers £1m reward" Archived 3 February 2011 at the Wayback Machine. BBC News, 22 December 2002.
  206. Boyle, Danny (2 March 2016). "Jeremy Bamber sends campaigner to record graveside message asserting his innocence" Archived 3 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine, The Daily Telegraph. Harley, Nicola (15 July 2015). "Killer Jeremy Bamber's supporters defend bake-off event" Archived 3 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine, The Daily Telegraph.
  207. ^ McKinstry, Leo (7 April 2012). "Lack of appeal" Archived 5 January 2014 at the Wayback Machine, The Spectator; Lee 2015, 400.
  208. Hunter, Andrew (9 February 2005). "Jeremy Bamber" Archived 1 December 2017 at the Wayback Machine, House of Commons.
  209. ^ "MP 'would offer bail' for killer" Archived 14 July 2014 at the Wayback Machine. BBC News. 8 December 2004; "Interview with Eric Allison" Archived 28 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine. JB Campaign Ltd, courtesy of YouTube, 15 December 2016.
  210. "Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell signs petition for disclosure of Jeremy Bamber evidence" Archived 3 January 2017 at the Wayback Machine. ITV News, 29 September 2015.
  211. Lee 2015, 172; also see EWCA Crim 2912, 33, 35, 36.
  212. "Maldon: Detective rejects new evidence Bambi went 'berserk' as farcical" Archived 18 August 2010 at the Wayback Machine, Essex Chronicle, 12 August 2010.
  213. McDevitt, John (27 January 2011). "Jeremy Bamber: 'New evidence proves unfair trial'". Channel 4 News. Archived from the original on 16 December 2018. Retrieved 16 December 2018.
  214. Allison et al. 2011, 00:06:36 for the detective's name; from 00:08:00 for the quote; Gradwell, Mick (10 February 2011). "Which adopted child shot farmhouse family?" Lancashire Evening Post.
  215. ^ Lee 2015, 394.
  216. Lee 2015, 396–397.
  217. Lee 2015, 396–397.
  218. ^ Allison, Eric and Townsend, Mark (4 February 2012). "Gun experts raise doubts over Jeremy Bamber murder verdict" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Observer.
  219. EWCA Crim 2912, 42.
  220. ^ Mark Townsend, Eric Allison, "Jeremy Bamber did not murder his family, insists court expert" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Observer, 21 February 2010.
  221. Mark Townsend, Eric Allison, Shehani Fernando, Maggie Kane, "Jeremy Bamber conviction challenged by new photographic evidence" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Observer, 21 February 2010.
  222. Smith 2010, 22.
  223. Eric Allison, Mark Townsend, "The new evidence Jeremy Bamber says could end his 26 years in prison" Archived 28 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Observer, 30 January 2011.
  224. Lomax 2008, image 8, between 128 and 129.
  225. "Bamber in new bid to clear name" Archived 7 February 2006 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 2 August 2005.
  226. ^ Eric Allison, Peter Walker, "Jeremy Bamber loses attempt to appeal" Archived 30 December 2016 at the Wayback Machine, The Guardian, 11 February 2011.
  227. "Jeremy Bamber's lawyers given more time to prepare case" Archived 18 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 19 July 2011.
  228. "Jeremy Bamber's lawyers get further time to prepare" Archived 18 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 2 September 2011.
  229. "Family killer Jeremy Bamber fails in appeal bid" Archived 20 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 26 April 2012.
  230. "Jeremy Bamber's latest action against conviction fails" Archived 20 September 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 29 November 2012.
  231. "Bogus Italian lawyer Giovanni di Stefano found guilty" Archived 3 November 2018 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 27 March 2013.
  232. David Craig (8 January 2020). "When is ITV drama White House Farm on TV? What's it about?". Radio Times. Archived from the original on 16 December 2019. Retrieved 16 December 2019.
  233. Peter White, "HBO Max Takes U.S. Rights To Stephen Graham-Fronted ITV Crime Drama ‘White House Farm’" Archived 14 December 2019 at the Wayback Machine, Deadline, 29 November 2019.
  234. ^ Mercer, David (18 September 2021). "Louis Theroux examines Jeremy Bamber murders – and reveals why 'legit' people believe five-time killer is innocent". Sky News. Retrieved 31 December 2021.
  235. Henry, Grace (26 September 2021). "Louis Theroux says there's "more to" Bamber family case in Murder at the Farm". Radio Times. ISSN 0033-8060. Retrieved 31 December 2021.

Works cited

Most news reports are cited above only.

Books and long-form journalism

Legal cases

Further reading

  • Caffell, Colin (2020 edition) In Search of the Rainbow's End: Inside the White House Farm Murders. With 2018 foreword from Caffell. Hodder & Stoughton (paprback) ISBN 9781529309164
  • Bambers' funeral service, Anglia Television, August 1985.
  • The White House Farm Murders, Yorkshire Television, 1993.
  • Real Crimes: Jeremy Bamber, Anglia Television, 2003.
  • Crimes That Shook Britain: Jeremy Bamber. Series 2. Crime+Investigation, A&E Networks, 2011.
  • Appleyard, Nick (2009). "Tonight's the Night". Life Means Life. London: John Blake Publishing Ltd.
  • D'Cruze, Shani; Walklate, Sandra L.; Pegg, Samantha (2013). "The White House Farm murders". Murder: Social and Historical Approaches to Understanding Murder and Murderers. Uffculme: Willan.
  • Howard, Amanda (2014). "Jeremy Bamber". A Killer in the Family. London: New Holland Publishers.
  • Lane, Brian (1995). Chronicle of 20th Century Murder. Wiltshire: Select Editions.
  • Leyton, Elliott (2009). Sole Survivor: Children Who Murder Their Families. London: John Blake Publishing Ltd.
Mass shootings in the United Kingdom
19th
century
20th
century
21st
century
Categories: