Did Colin Caffell Contribute To Sheila's Schizophrenia?

Started by Erik Narramore, January 29, 2022, 07:40:22 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Erik Narramore

Was Colin Caffell a factor in Sheila's schizophrenia?  I don't see it as crucially important, but I did raise this question previously myself.  Note that I am not suggesting that Colin caused Sheila's schizophrenia, which is more of a medical question and outside our domain, as it would involve a specialist discussion about genetics and child-rearing.  What I am wondering is what were the background factors and influences during Sheila's late adolescence and early 20s, which is the critical period for schizophrenia.  I wonder if one of them may have been the marriage to and relationship with Colin.

Personally, I'm not especially interested in Colin Caffell.  Moreover, while I don't have anything against him particularly, at the same time I've never really taken to him.  He is what he is, and let's remember he is the bereaved father.  Nevertheless, Steve keeps mentioning him, so there must be something important to cover.

Some things I have heard about Colin, which may or may not be true:

1. He slept with another woman on Sheila's 21st. birthday.  As a result, Sheila turned violent on him.
2. He punched Sheila at least once.
3. Sheila destroyed some of his artwork.
4. Colin pressured, or influenced, Sheila to pursue modelling.
5. The marriage broke down.  Colin blames Sheila for this.
6. During the journey to White House Farm prior to the tragedy, Sheila asked if Colin would take her back and he told her emphatically that there was no hope of resurrecting the marriage.
7. The recent ITV dramatisation included a scene in which Sheila pleads with Colin to ask her parents before he leaves to take her off the medication, and Colin says he will raise the matter on his return.

They were married and then divorced, and I do wonder to what extent the relationship was a factor in Sheila's problems.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

I forgot to add a point to the list above, which I will now add:

It is said that during the journey to White House Farm prior to the tragedy, Sheila asked if Colin would take her back and he told her emphatically that there was no hope of resurrecting the marriage.

I will edit further if I think of more.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

I've also added reference to the scene in the ITV drama in which Sheila pleads with Colin to ask her parents to take her off the medication.  I don't know if that scene has any factual basis.  It's something I'll look into further at some point, unless somebody here already knows.
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

It could be that Sheila was not schizophrenic when she was married to Colin, but were there factors in the marriage and relationship that led to it?
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams

Erik Narramore

Some points I'd like to make (assuming I am right on some or all of this, it may need to also go in the Colin Caffell thread):

1. It appears that prior to 1982, June had never been mentally-ill.  She did have mental health issues that dated back to the late 1950s, but if I understand correctly, that was more along the lines of severe depression.  June's psychosis started after Sheila's marriage to Colin.

2. Sheila was a normal girl/woman up to her marriage to Colin.  There is simply nothing I can see in her history that is the remotest bit unusual.  Indifference to academics.  Trouble with June.  Minor experimentation with drugs.  June catches her with a local boy (or Colin or whatever).  Boredom and dropping out of finishing school.  Not sure what to do.  Can't hold down a job.  This is all normal to a degree and none of it is cause for undue alarm in relation to a young person.  Furthermore, her relationship with Nevill was said to be good.

3. I accept that June calling her the Devil's child (assuming that happened) is a bit much and would have distanced her from June.  The tension in the relationship is apparent in the painfully-awkward photograph taken in the garden.  But really, schizophrenia...??

4. In Dr. Ferguson's statement, he says that June responded to treatment for her psychosis.  Yet Colin makes great play of problems he says were caused by June.  Unless I'm mistaken, the marriage was ended before the onset of June's psychosis.  I wonder how much of the focus on June's supposed 'religious mania' is Colin exaggerating in order to downplay problems that could be traced back to him?

5. Assuming Dr. Ferguson's diagnosis of Sheila was correct (it may well not have been), this schizophrenia may have been a result of a confluence of causes and factors: a bit of genetics, distant relationship with June, and drug-taking.  But I wonder how much of a factor her relationship and marriage to Colin was?  It seems to me that Colin has a vested interest in allowing us to focus on June's religious zeal and the simple notion that she was a 'religious nut' while taking our eye off on his own role in all this.

Question:

(i). How do we know about the 'Devil's child' incident in which June caught her with somebody?  Who is the source for this?

(ii). There is a letter from Colin to Nevill in which he complains about June.  Am I right in saying that this letter was unsent?  In other words, is it right that the source for the letter is entirely Colin himself, the letter having not been received prior to the incident?
"If the accusation is not proved beyond reasonable doubt against the man accused in the dock, then by law he is entitled to be acquitted, because that is the way our rules work.  It is no concession to give him the benefit of the doubt. He is entitled by law to a verdict of Not Guilty." - R v Adams