Jeremy moved the phones around

[Erik Narramore]

This starts with the suggestion that in Julie's account to Essex Police, she reveals knowledge of a phone being moved around inside the farmhouse prior to the incident.

The prosecution are assuming that nobody else would have mentioned the phones to Julie and you're also assuming that Jeremy would only mention the phones to her if we was guilty.  These are clearly faulty assumptions.

Jeremy called her twice on the morning of the killings and the phones were central to the investigation.  She could have picked up this information from an innocent Jeremy as much as a guilty Jeremy.  An innocent Jeremy is as likely to discuss the case with her as a guilty Jeremy.

Or she could have got the information from the police or from one of the relatives - or really, anybody who was in touch with those people.  Or it could have been some combination thereof.

Overall, her evidence is of no legal value.  It doesn't prove anything, never has.  Even if every single thing that Julie Mugford said was in fact true, it still doesn't prove that Jeremy killed the family.  He could have been joking or trying to excite her sexually or showing-off, or it could be that he was in shock.

[Erik Narramore]

On a careful reading, Julie's statement does not support what the prosecution say.  The relevant passage in sheet 12 does not state how she learned about the portable phone.  It could be (and quite likely is) the case that she had occasion to use the portable phone herself on visits to White House Farm, perhaps to call her mother or a friend or some such, and that's why she knows about it.  She could then have elaborated from there, having learned from Jeremy, the police and/or relatives that the phones are core to the incident.  We can't say one way or the other because there are no corroborating facts.  All we have are Julie's own claims and assertions, and some of it is even just theorisation.

I accept it's evidence, but it's not what I would consider to be hard evidence, especially for a murder case.  I consider her whole contribution to the case as useful background information on Jeremy that, if substantially true, tells us that he was, quite frankly, a bit of a nutter who bragged to her about how he planned to do his family in and told her and one other person he hated his family.  It doesn't follow that he actually went and did it or that he is a murderer.

[Erik Narramore]

She could have come across the information herself, as I say, by using the phone herself at the house.  June may have said: "Use the portable phone to ring your Mum, Julie."  Why not?  Seems the natural thing to do.

Or she may have got the information from an innocent Jeremy.  Again, is there a reason why not?  He could have mentioned the phones to her and she could have then mentioned her recollection of using the portable phone, and he might have then remarked that it had a redial feature (which she may not have been aware of, if she only used it occasionally to ring her mother or housemates).

I'm also sceptical about the belief Jeremy planned all this.  Everybody assumes it, based on an inheritance motive, but there are some problems:

(i). First, the inheritance motive is weak under closer scrutiny and in my view falls apart for anybody who thinks about it and is in possession of the facts about the estates and Jeremy's own disposition, characteristics and situation.

(ii). We have no evidence that Jeremy is a psychopath.

(iii). Regardless of (i) and (ii) above, Jeremy would not have planned the calls because his aim, in staging a murder-suicide, would be to kill Nevill quickly in bed, with June also found shot in the same room, and Sheila nearby with the rifle left on or by her body.  He won't want to mess around marching Nevill to the kitchen, because that's not what Sheila would do, nor would Nevill allow it.

I appreciate there is inherent in the phone call an attempt to create a quasi-alibi for Jeremy in that Nevill is said to refer to Sheila, but I think the idea only occurred to Jeremy when things went wrong and Nevill ended up in the kitchen.  If you think about it, Jeremy now has to explain Nevill's presence in the kitchen, which he would not have had to do if the physical evidence had been that Nevill is simply found dead in bed.

There is, though, one thought I have had that gives me further pause and could suggest I am wrong.  If Jeremy is staging this as a murder-suicide, wouldn't he have thought about the possibility of a struggle between Nevill and Sheila?

Remember:

(a). Sheila's relationship with Nevill was sound.  Would she summarily fire on him in bed?  Isn't it more likely there would be a 'middle bit' between the onset of her psychosis and the shooting in which she would be screaming and shouting and throwing a tantrum, etc?

(b). Sheila is Nevill's daughter.  He wouldn't just try and bludgeon her or knock her out or something like that, rather he would try to reason with her and struggle with her.

Would Jeremy think it through to this extent?  Maybe if he had planned it he would, and maybe that's how Nevill ends up downstairs.  In other words, it's not inadvertent or due to Jeremy running out of ammunition, it's because Jeremy has either forced Nevill downstairs or lured him there.  But then, the portable phone itself still doesn't come into it.  Or does it?

Maybe I am wrong and maybe you're right and the reason Nevill was downstairs is because the 'thing that went wrong' is Jeremy's realisation that the portable phone is nowhere to be seen, so he needs Nevill to be near the kitchen phone.  But how does this comport with staging Sheila's murder-suicide in a plausible way?  Jeremy is a fairly bright guy, remember.  Quite simply, why doesn't he just resolve to shoot Nevill in bed?

Criminals think in simple terms, not out of a lack of intelligence, but rather because the best plans are simple plans.

[Erik Narramore]

To be honest, I've never understood the point of Jeremy moving the phones around.  What does it achieve?

People who say Jeremy moved the phones seem to be getting things the wrong way round and think that Nevill in the kitchen means there has to be a phone in the kitchen, but surely the relevant point about that is that there was a phone in the kitchen already, so it clicked in Jeremy's head to stage a call.  He wouldn't think to add a phone to the kitchen, and then come up with the idea of a call as well.  That's over-thinking it, if you ask me.

Remember also that a round-dial phone isn't much good in a situation where Nevill is caught still in bed and not alert, so a hypothetical of Nevill found in the kitchen and the lack of a phone in the kitchen could have been interpreted by the police as Nevill trying to draw Sheila away from June and the twins, or Nevill discovers Sheila in the kitchen and they struggle, or whatever - either scenario taking place after a call to Jeremy from upstairs.

Actually, I would have thought if Jeremy is going to mess about with the phones at all, it would make more sense for him to do so before the incident, not after, because:

(i). Nevill could dial 999 from upstairs if he detects an intruder; and,
(ii). if Nevill manages to escape downstairs or if already downstairs on Jeremy's entry to the farmhouse, it would be quite easy for Nevill to quickly dial 999 on the fawn-coloured digital phone that was supposed to be in the kitchen (according to people who think Jeremy moved the phones).

Even then, I do struggle to see the purpose of it, as I do with moving them after, but it would be a bit more logical to do so before.  Personally I also don't believe the silencer was used and I am anyway sceptical as to its efficacy for the purpose, and it could be that Jeremy was also of the latter view and moved the phone downstairs beforehand as added contingency, and maybe made some excuse to Nevill, or maybe Nevill moved the phones about or told Jeremy to due to one of the phones being under repair.  But if, alternatively, we assume the prosecution case about the silencer, then what purpose is served by moving the phones in this way?  Just as with moving them after the incident, it seems like an over-complication.

You could even argue the very opposite: that Jeremy should leave the phone in the master bedroom and let the impression be given that Nevill could, even did, reach for the phone.  What harm does it do to Jeremy's staging?

Surely Jeremy is more likely to raise suspicions by messing around with the phones.  If he does it before the incident without permission, Nevill would notice.  If after, somebody else would notice, and Jean Boutell, the housekeeper, did.