Jeremy and Sheila Scenario

[Erik Narramore]

Could Jeremy and Sheila have been confederates?

I have thought along those same lines myself.  He schemes up a Machiavellian plan to create a rift between Sheila and her parents over the children.  He may even have been the one who introduced the idea of fostering into the conversation he claims took place at the kitchen table.  He then loads the rifle on the pretext of looking for rabbits.  He then returns and ostentatiously leaves the rifle out in a place that Sheila would surmise, believing she may go mad with it later.

It would explain why he calls the police rather than obeying Nevill, it explains his strange calls to Julie, and it also explains his anxiety with the police on reaching the farm.  Of course, another explanation for those things is simply that he is guilty, the calls were staged, and his behaviour in the presence of Bews and Myall is down to him knowing what has happened because he did it and he proceeds to manipulate those officers to firm up what he thinks is his alibi.

Thinking about the incident in reverse: If Nevill has told him that Sheila has got the gun and he needs to come over right away, why didn't he just go straight to the farm?  People complain that he didn't ring 999, but surely that puts the cart before the horse due to the benefit of hindsight.  If you stop and think about it, why ring the police at all?  Of course, you could argue it's because he's a bit of a Nervous Nelly or he knew in his gut that something was wrong, but it could also be that he just knew.

[Erik Narramore]

Even if Jeremy is entirely innocent, he remains culpable for leaving the rifle and magazine out.

One problem with the theory that Jeremy would leave it to Sheila is that he is supposed to be a greedy inheritance killer.  How does he know that Sheila will manage to kill everybody?  He is leaving a lot to chance.

On the other hand, it could be that the intention was that Sheila would just kill herself and the twins and that's what Jeremy assumed, but she was discovered by Nevill or June and they ended up dead too.

Another question is whether there was collusion between Jeremy and Sheila.  The safest course is just to leave the rifle out for Sheila to find.  If they discuss it, Jeremy risks being found out, however he may have assumed nobody would believe Sheila.

It could even be that Jeremy did kill the four and left Sheila alive, on the basis that she would take the blame and nobody would believe her claim that Jeremy was involved.  In that scenario, maybe she did actually shoot herself after the police arrived?

[Erik Narramore]

In the past, I had always thought that Jeremy encouraging Sheila could have been a possibility, but when you yourself mentioned it recently on a different thread, that prompted me to go back to it and have another think about it.

On reflection, I find it unlikely for the reason that Jeremy would not know and could not control the outcome, and frankly, he would surely doubt Sheila's ability to complete such a massacre 'successfully' (if that's the right word).

I don't believe there was any prior communication between them along the lines you suggest, because Jeremy would not have been able to rely on Sheila and it would have made no sense if his goal was inheritance. What if Sheila told somebody?  I just find it rather implausible.  The only caveat is: we don't know the extent of Sheila's experience with guns, and also, if Jeremy's motive was something other than inheritance, then maybe he colluded with Sheila, but we can't see in his mind, and as explained, how could he rely on and trust Sheila?

I really think it is a simple choice: Jeremy or Sheila.

If Jeremy is innocent, then he is culpable for leaving the rifle and magazine out, which must have been carelessness or sheer laziness, though in mitigation, Nevill was the certificated firearms owner and must bear ultimate responsibility, and hardly set a good example in that respect.  He couldn't even be bothered to fit a proper lock on the gun cupboard.

[Erik Narramore]

Technically, Sheila could have been both in a statement of derangement and had an accomplice, the two things being inter-related.  I think your second idea implies Jeremy intentionally left the rifle and ammunition out for her, or something like that, but how could Jeremy be sure what would happen next?

As an aside, it's also doubtful Jeremy would collude with her because he could never be sure that she wouldn't blow the gaff and tell somebody.

It was either Jeremy or Sheila.  It can't have been both.  If Jeremy did confess to Mike Teskowitz along the lines Mike says, then what that tells me is that Jeremy is the killer, and only Jeremy, and his confession to Mike implicating Sheila was construed perhaps to make him appear less cold-blooded (though, ironically, it would make him seem more cold-blooded, if anything, in my eyes).

[Erik Narramore]

I note that Paul Harrison, the author of Deviant, announced on the Blue Forum and the Red Forum his intention to write a book about the case some time before it was published and while he was still researching it.  Mike Teskowitz could have contacted him.

I am not implying that Mike is lying, but if Mike has been having problems and acting under clouded judgement, this may have been taken advantage of.

[Erik Narramore]

Why would Jeremy just want Sheila dead?  If Jeremy is a probate killer, it makes no sense.

A scenario only works if Jeremy wants them all dead, but how could Jeremy know that Sheila would carry out this plan successfully, or at all?  He was handing control over to Sheila, which meant an unpredictable outcome.  Given that lightning, as a rule, doesn't strike in the same place twice, it's a risky strategy.  If Sheila fails to kill just one person, even herself, this opens the way for Jeremy having to share the inheritance with others.  He can't then plot their deaths without running quite a high risk of detection.

As an analogy, it sort of reminds me a little bit of the flaw with the thinking of some JFK conspiracy theorists who say it was a Cuban or Soviet plot or it was the mafia, or The Mossad, or something along those lines.  The only way such theories work is if the conspirators are able to control the consequences of eliminating JFK.  This, in turn, means that logically the Vice President, LBJ, had to be a co-conspirator or under the direct control of conspirators, otherwise the whole conspiracy seems a bit ropey, even pointless - unless of course the assassination was just a show of force, but if so, it seems a rather stupid course of action, if not self-defeating.

[Erik Narramore]

Paul Harrison's theory was that Jeremy and Sheila acted together, but the collusion theory doesn't work.  It's an attractive idea and sounds convincing and plausible on its face, but when you think it through logically, you realise that a guilty Jeremy would not - and could not - involve Sheila, and even if he was the thickest person in the world, he had to have realised this himself.  The culprit must be either Jeremy or Sheila; it's extremely unlikely that it was both.  There is, admittedly, a small possibility that they were both deranged and acted in concert somehow, without regard for the consequences.

As for the letter Paul Harrison published, it looks and reads fake to me, but could well be a genuine letter from a fake - if you see the distinction.  Ironically, Harrison may have been taken in himself.  Otherwise, I agree with the assessments of the book: it's the worst book on the case, if it qualifies as a book at all.

[Erik Narramore]

Maybe Jeremy and Sheila were not confederates, but Jeremy incited Sheila to commit a massacre?

If we say Jeremy was setting Sheila up, then it would be premeditated, and so Jeremy would give it some thought.  He would quickly realise that by handing things over to Sheila, he would have no control over the outcome.  He couldn't even be sure that Sheila would pick up the rifle in the first place, never mind manage to competently operate the rifle and shoot everybody in the house.

It is admitted that Jeremy did not leave the rifle out in front of Sheila.

Again, Jeremy says he left the rifle and ammunition out in the scullery/back kitchen.  That is not in Sheila's line of sight.  If Sheila was involved in this at all, then it must have been on her own initiative and the result of one of the following:

(i). Jeremy had a habit of leaving the rifle and ammunition in the roughly the same position in the scullery and Sheila knew this, so knew where to find them; or,

(ii). Sheila was on her way to the gun cupboard (located in Nevill's den) and saw the rifle and ammunition; or,

(iii). (being schizophrenic) she was wandering around the house and found the rifle and ammunition at random.

Admittedly, each of these is plausible.

[Erik Narramore]

Even if Jeremy is entirely innocent, he remains culpable for leaving the rifle and magazine out.

One problem with the theory that Jeremy would leave it to Sheila is that he is supposed to be a greedy inheritance killer.  How does he know that Sheila will manage to kill everybody?  He is leaving a lot to chance.

On the other hand, it could be that the intention was that Sheila would just kill herself and the twins and that's what Jeremy assumed, but she was discovered by Nevill or June and they ended up dead too.

Another question is whether there was collusion between Jeremy and Sheila.  The safest course is just to leave the rifle out for Sheila to find.  If they discuss it, Jeremy risks being found out, however he may have assumed nobody would believe Sheila.

It could even be that Jeremy did kill the four and left Sheila alive, on the basis that she would take the blame and nobody would believe her claim that Jeremy was involved.  In that scenario, maybe she did actually shoot herself after the police arrived?