For 25 years Jeremy Bamber claimed he was convicted of murders he didn’t commit. Now as a result of new evidence and previously hidden police documents, his case may be going back to the court of appeal for a third time
Subscribe to The Guardian on YouTube ► http://is.gd/subscribeguardian
Support the Guardian ► https://support.theguardian.com/contribute
Today in Focus podcast ► https://www.theguardian.com/news/series/todayinfocus
Sign up for the Guardian documentaries newsletter ► https://www.theguardian.com/info/2016/sep/02/sign-up-for-the-guardian-documentaries-update
The Guardian ► https://www.theguardian.com
The Guardian YouTube network:
Guardian News ► http://is.gd/guardianwires
Owen Jones talks ► http://bit.ly/subsowenjones
Guardian Football ► http://is.gd/guardianfootball
Guardian Sport ► http://bit.ly/GDNsport
Guardian Culture ► http://is.gd/guardianculture
source
Makes you think doesn’t it
Guardian report …. they do not tell the truth
No forensic link to Bamber amongst all that carnage . SOCOs need a pristine murder scene tho ,
Why would Bamber contact the police in the early hours If he had carried out the murders ?
Bamber killed 2 children.
There is ONE thing that conclusively proves his innocence. Sheila was found lying with a gun on her body pointed to her head. She had been shot twice in the neck and jaw (it's perfectly possible to shoot yourself twice with a .22 by the way) It is inconceivable that, if Jeremy Bamber was the killer, he had somehow convinced his sister either BEFORE (in the bedroom where his parents were apparently sleeping 2 feet away in their bed!!) or AFTER the rampage, to calmly lay down and allow him to aim the gun under her chin and kill her. No struggle, drug and alcohol tests on her were negative and NO silencer attached. One of the biggest miscarriages of justice in UK history. Watch the official Bamber videos if you want even more evidence of his innocence (and there's lots more)
There were mistakes but he did it and he's where he should be.
the gunshot wounds to Sheila prove she cant have shot herself and therefore it HAS to be Jeremy , there are no other suspects.
Free Bamber
If there was somebody in the house why didn't anyone hear the final shot? .
He's 59 now.
He has the eyes of a killer.
Did Bamber have his mothers dog put to sleep ?
Bamber is as guilty as Peter Sutcliffe.
Another fit up
He should get a new hearing on the way the police handled the case, the police cleared out the evidence i.e bloodstained carpets ,and other stuff, then Bamber's relatives arrive and find a silencer in a box with blood on it? I mean if Jeremy did do that would he leave a major clue like a silencer on the scene Wouldn't Jeremy have got rid of the silencer? , His relatives come and they investigate it and find the silencer then the police say the relatives solved the crime and the relatives get the farm and inheritance? Jeremy didn't get a fair trial and was convicted under mysterious circumstances ,The police screw up and Jeremy should get a new hearing, he actually should be released by the way the police handled the case.
Bamber did not seem to be grief-stricken when his family was murdered, whether by him or by his sister from reading accounts of his behaviour at the funeral. He was implicated by his cousins and his girlfriend.
Hes building a defence around holes. Desperate to get out.
We need to think about why Bamber wants to become a free man again after spending the last 33 years in prison and remand. By overturning his conviction he will release a book becouse of his notoriety, which itself will be a real money earner, he will try and claim back parts of the family estate after he was convicted and he will not need to look for a job as since he is only a few years away from retirement. That is the real reason he will never admit to killing his family. Bamber knows any admission of guilt to this stage will neutralise his efforts for release to zero. As the sole survivor of the family, it is obvious the murders were committed by Bamber for financial gain.
Omg these people frame him to inherit the farm and money so the son is innocent
I have always thought he is guilty and still do
I never believed he did it. Just because of something I noticed at the time. It was stated that no one had entered the house at some time after the crime. But there was something on the mantle piece cant remember exactly what but may have been a gun or part of had been moved. It showed that relatives with a vested interest had moved evidence.
A women who never handled a gun wouldn't let her children have toy guns couldn't make a cup of tea did it?