Criminology Task 8
Examine information for validity
Jeremy Bamber
In 1986, Jeremy Bamber was convicted of murdering his parents, sister, and her twin boys and
sentenced to life in prison. There is a lot of information that has come to light since the first trial that
suggests his guilty judgement is invalid and that Bamber is innocent.
There is very little evidence that Bamber's verdict is correct. Initially, the prosecution fought the
theory that Sheila was the murderer when a silencer fitting the murder weapon was discovered in
the gun closet, which also contained either red paint or blood. This caused Bamber a lot of issues
since if the gun had a silencer, it would have been too huge for Sheila to kill herself, implying that
there was another gunman. This was reinforced by the fact that the blood found in the silencer had
the same AK1 enzyme as Sheila's blood did. As a result, she couldn't have murdered herself and then
returned the silencer to the closet. This evidence all leads to a separate assailant. This notion was
strengthened when Bamber's ex-girlfriend came forward and informed authorities that Bamber had
told her that he planned to murder his family by hiring a hitman. The authorities discovered a
motivation for Bamber to commit the crime: if his entire family died, he would be the single inheritor
of the money and the mansion. The police then concocted the notion that Bamber may have biked
to the crime site and back before making the phone call to evade discovery. This evidence supports
the assumption that Bamber's conviction is genuine and that he is really guilty.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence pointing to Bamber's innocence. Authorities first
assumed Sheila committed the murders because she suffered from schizophrenia and had recently
been released from a hospital. Sheila believes her sons are the devil's offspring, but the thought of
them being taken from her frequently sets off a schizophrenic episode. According to Bamber, the
day before the killings, Bamber's parents informed Sheila that they felt she should give them custody
so she wouldn't have to worry about caring for children, which sparked a huge argument.
Furthermore, Sheila's doctor stated that the dispute was likely to have triggered a psychotic episode,
and that she did, in fact, conduct the murders. This would imply that Bamber's conviction was void
and that Sheila was the genuine killer.
This is bolstered by the fact that Sheila was reared on the farm and, as a result, understood how to
handle a pistol. However, when the police records were studied, the main flaws with the case
became apparent. The police acknowledged that there was activity within the home when they
arrived, which could not have been Bamber because he came soon after police and was with them
from 3:45am till the police entered. Because this man's Bamber could not have been inside the
home and is unlikely to have been the killer, his conviction is invalid. Furthermore, the police were
talking to someone inside the house around 5:20 a.m., when Bamber was still inside, implying that
the person they were speaking with was the killer. When the police arrived at 7:37 a.m., they
discovered two dead in the kitchen, one man and one female, and three victims upstairs. Two
sources caught up on this and reported it. However, during the trial, it was alleged that there was
only one body in the kitchen and four upstairs, which would be impossible if everyone inside was
dead. This implies that one of the family members was still alive, most likely the murderer. It was
speculated that Sheila shot herself in the kitchen but was not dead, and that she managed to walk
upstairs through one of the several staircases inside the property without being seen by the police.
She died once she got upstairs. This is very likely since forensic images taken at 10 a.m. reveal that
Sheila's blood was still flowing, unlike the other bodies, indicating that she was the last to die and
, died considerably later than the others. Her body also did not show rigour mortis like the other
victims, indicating that she died lately. This would explain the discrepancies between early police
reports and evidence presented in court, as well as how Bamber couldn't have killed his family
because he was outside with the cops all night and didn't enter the house, despite the fact that
Sheila had only recently died. This implies that Bamber did not murder his family, and hence his
guilty judgement is invalid.
There is apparently other evidence to imply that Sheila was the murderer and that Bamber is
innocent. Since the initial trial, phone records have been disclosed, proving that the father did, in
fact, contact the police, claiming that Sheila had a pistol and was "going insane." This demonstrates
that Sheila was most likely the killer, and so Bamber's guilty conviction is invalid and he is innocent.
Furthermore, the prosecution said that if the gun had a silencer, Sheila would not have been able to
fire herself since her arms were not long enough. However new evidence has demonstrated that the
gun wouldn't have been too long as there were multiple positions in which Sheila could have shot
herself, and that she would have been able to do it making the probability that Sheila was the killer
much higher.
The police first suspected Bamber of the killings after his ex-girlfriend came forward and said that
Bamber hired a hitman to kill his family. However, it was later found that Bamber's girlfriend only
came forward after Bamber had broken up with her, and she most likely did so out of spite.
Furthermore, the alleged hitman hired by Bamber had a perfect alibi for the high of the killings and
had no knowledge what was going on. Later, it was revealed that his ex-girlfriend had attempted to
suffocate Jeremy with a pillow following their break-up, proving her desire to harm Bamber, and so
her evidence is untrustworthy. Because this was such an essential component of the trial, it is likely
that the verdict was invalidated because it persuaded the jury despite clear mistakes in the
testimony.
In addition, there were several problems with the evidence in the trial. Following the killings, police
removed and destroyed vital evidence from the farm home, including blood-stained carpets and
furniture. This implies that evidence that may have shown Bamber's innocence was deleted.
However, a jury must think that a person is innocent until proven guilty, therefore this police
negligence should be believed in order to exonerate Bamber. Furthermore, numerous documents,
such as evidence and statements, have been placed under public interest immunity, and some have
been destroyed after the first trial, implying that the truth about what occurred during the first trial
will never be discovered. A retrial is improbable because of a paucity of documentation and proof.
Moreover, the destruction of the records shows that there is proof that Bamber is innocent, but the
police do not want to concede to another miscarriage of justice, which would render Bamber's
judgement null and void.
Furthermore, numerous documents, such as evidence and statements, have been placed under
public interest immunity, and some have been destroyed after the first trial, implying that the truth
about what occurred during the first trial will never be discovered. A retrial is improbable because of
a paucity of documentation and proof. Furthermore, the destruction of the records shows that there
is proof that Bamber is innocent, but the police do not want to concede to another miscarriage of
justice, which would render Bamber's judgement null and void. Ballistic testing revealed that there
would have been no need for a silencer because the murder weapon was a.22 pistol, which naturally
produces less noise than other weapons. This is also compatible with the notion that Sheila may
have shot herself after moving upstairs without the cops hearing the pistol fire. In addition, red paint
or blood was discovered on the silencer, which was said to have come from a scratch on the mantle.
Examine information for validity
Jeremy Bamber
In 1986, Jeremy Bamber was convicted of murdering his parents, sister, and her twin boys and
sentenced to life in prison. There is a lot of information that has come to light since the first trial that
suggests his guilty judgement is invalid and that Bamber is innocent.
There is very little evidence that Bamber's verdict is correct. Initially, the prosecution fought the
theory that Sheila was the murderer when a silencer fitting the murder weapon was discovered in
the gun closet, which also contained either red paint or blood. This caused Bamber a lot of issues
since if the gun had a silencer, it would have been too huge for Sheila to kill herself, implying that
there was another gunman. This was reinforced by the fact that the blood found in the silencer had
the same AK1 enzyme as Sheila's blood did. As a result, she couldn't have murdered herself and then
returned the silencer to the closet. This evidence all leads to a separate assailant. This notion was
strengthened when Bamber's ex-girlfriend came forward and informed authorities that Bamber had
told her that he planned to murder his family by hiring a hitman. The authorities discovered a
motivation for Bamber to commit the crime: if his entire family died, he would be the single inheritor
of the money and the mansion. The police then concocted the notion that Bamber may have biked
to the crime site and back before making the phone call to evade discovery. This evidence supports
the assumption that Bamber's conviction is genuine and that he is really guilty.
On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence pointing to Bamber's innocence. Authorities first
assumed Sheila committed the murders because she suffered from schizophrenia and had recently
been released from a hospital. Sheila believes her sons are the devil's offspring, but the thought of
them being taken from her frequently sets off a schizophrenic episode. According to Bamber, the
day before the killings, Bamber's parents informed Sheila that they felt she should give them custody
so she wouldn't have to worry about caring for children, which sparked a huge argument.
Furthermore, Sheila's doctor stated that the dispute was likely to have triggered a psychotic episode,
and that she did, in fact, conduct the murders. This would imply that Bamber's conviction was void
and that Sheila was the genuine killer.
This is bolstered by the fact that Sheila was reared on the farm and, as a result, understood how to
handle a pistol. However, when the police records were studied, the main flaws with the case
became apparent. The police acknowledged that there was activity within the home when they
arrived, which could not have been Bamber because he came soon after police and was with them
from 3:45am till the police entered. Because this man's Bamber could not have been inside the
home and is unlikely to have been the killer, his conviction is invalid. Furthermore, the police were
talking to someone inside the house around 5:20 a.m., when Bamber was still inside, implying that
the person they were speaking with was the killer. When the police arrived at 7:37 a.m., they
discovered two dead in the kitchen, one man and one female, and three victims upstairs. Two
sources caught up on this and reported it. However, during the trial, it was alleged that there was
only one body in the kitchen and four upstairs, which would be impossible if everyone inside was
dead. This implies that one of the family members was still alive, most likely the murderer. It was
speculated that Sheila shot herself in the kitchen but was not dead, and that she managed to walk
upstairs through one of the several staircases inside the property without being seen by the police.
She died once she got upstairs. This is very likely since forensic images taken at 10 a.m. reveal that
Sheila's blood was still flowing, unlike the other bodies, indicating that she was the last to die and
, died considerably later than the others. Her body also did not show rigour mortis like the other
victims, indicating that she died lately. This would explain the discrepancies between early police
reports and evidence presented in court, as well as how Bamber couldn't have killed his family
because he was outside with the cops all night and didn't enter the house, despite the fact that
Sheila had only recently died. This implies that Bamber did not murder his family, and hence his
guilty judgement is invalid.
There is apparently other evidence to imply that Sheila was the murderer and that Bamber is
innocent. Since the initial trial, phone records have been disclosed, proving that the father did, in
fact, contact the police, claiming that Sheila had a pistol and was "going insane." This demonstrates
that Sheila was most likely the killer, and so Bamber's guilty conviction is invalid and he is innocent.
Furthermore, the prosecution said that if the gun had a silencer, Sheila would not have been able to
fire herself since her arms were not long enough. However new evidence has demonstrated that the
gun wouldn't have been too long as there were multiple positions in which Sheila could have shot
herself, and that she would have been able to do it making the probability that Sheila was the killer
much higher.
The police first suspected Bamber of the killings after his ex-girlfriend came forward and said that
Bamber hired a hitman to kill his family. However, it was later found that Bamber's girlfriend only
came forward after Bamber had broken up with her, and she most likely did so out of spite.
Furthermore, the alleged hitman hired by Bamber had a perfect alibi for the high of the killings and
had no knowledge what was going on. Later, it was revealed that his ex-girlfriend had attempted to
suffocate Jeremy with a pillow following their break-up, proving her desire to harm Bamber, and so
her evidence is untrustworthy. Because this was such an essential component of the trial, it is likely
that the verdict was invalidated because it persuaded the jury despite clear mistakes in the
testimony.
In addition, there were several problems with the evidence in the trial. Following the killings, police
removed and destroyed vital evidence from the farm home, including blood-stained carpets and
furniture. This implies that evidence that may have shown Bamber's innocence was deleted.
However, a jury must think that a person is innocent until proven guilty, therefore this police
negligence should be believed in order to exonerate Bamber. Furthermore, numerous documents,
such as evidence and statements, have been placed under public interest immunity, and some have
been destroyed after the first trial, implying that the truth about what occurred during the first trial
will never be discovered. A retrial is improbable because of a paucity of documentation and proof.
Moreover, the destruction of the records shows that there is proof that Bamber is innocent, but the
police do not want to concede to another miscarriage of justice, which would render Bamber's
judgement null and void.
Furthermore, numerous documents, such as evidence and statements, have been placed under
public interest immunity, and some have been destroyed after the first trial, implying that the truth
about what occurred during the first trial will never be discovered. A retrial is improbable because of
a paucity of documentation and proof. Furthermore, the destruction of the records shows that there
is proof that Bamber is innocent, but the police do not want to concede to another miscarriage of
justice, which would render Bamber's judgement null and void. Ballistic testing revealed that there
would have been no need for a silencer because the murder weapon was a.22 pistol, which naturally
produces less noise than other weapons. This is also compatible with the notion that Sheila may
have shot herself after moving upstairs without the cops hearing the pistol fire. In addition, red paint
or blood was discovered on the silencer, which was said to have come from a scratch on the mantle.
