Subduing Sheila

[Erik Narramore]

I don't believe Sheila was bound and gagged.  The reason can simply be explained by looking at any picture of Sheila lying dead on the bedroom floor.  See where the blood is around her mouth.

Also, Sheila had no marks on her that would correspond to this, if we accept what the police and pathologist say about her injuries.

She also does not look like somebody who was in distress at the point of death.  I realise this point is a bit more subjective and debatable, but she looks to me like somebody who passed on in a calm state, having composed herself.

[Erik Narramore]

A variation on this scenario could be that Jeremy shot Sheila while she was bound up, then only realised she was still alive after taking her gag off.  The blood on Sheila's mouth would be due to the second shot in the main bedroom.

I do think Jeremy taking care of Sheila first is the ideal approach if Jeremy is planning things out properly.  I suggested previously that one way he could have done this is by shooting Sheila in bed, then cleaning up in that room later.  This would entail some risk, but it would avoid the need to subdue Sheila.  It could also be that the second shot is in the main bedroom after he realises that the first shot did not kill her.  But I don't believe Jeremy actually went about it this way, if he is the killer.  I doubt his planning would have been that thorough and the aspirated blood on the main bedroom carpet would be absent in such a scenario - a flaw that may have incriminated Jeremy still more.

[Erik Narramore]

However, I remain unconvinced she would be bound and gagged.

It would mean he now has Sheila in a state of distress.  OK, maybe the disorientation and so on would help him at this point, so there may be something in what you say.

I am still not convinced he would have been able to bind her up without leaving marks on her, but perhaps leave that point for now.

[Erik Narramore]

What about the sedation theory?  This is the official explanation on which Jeremy's convictions rest.

The prosecution assume that Sheila would have been sedated, but even then, they are contradictory because they posit that Sheila would have been a distraction.  I thought she was sedated?  I think the sedation theory cannot be accepted as fact, it is merely a debatable assumption.

To recap, I fall into the 'reasonable doubt' camp.  That does not mean I think Jeremy is innocent or there has been a miscarriage of justice on anything other than strict evidentiary grounds.  It's not up to me anyway, it is just my opinion that the convictions are unsafe.

I think that the evidence for Sheila being sedated is indifferent, at best.  When you put this together with Sheila's clean hands and feet, this means we have reasonable doubt because we have to explain what Sheila was doing upstairs while Jeremy was struggling with his father, and there is no explanation that doesn't involve Jeremy in great difficulty.  The police have clearly grasped the same point and put forward to the DPP that Sheila was shot once in the master bedroom before Jeremy followed Nevill downstairs.  I reject this for reasons already explained.  I also gather that Dr. Vanezis posited that blood on the carpet of the master bedroom would have dried quickly.  I respect Dr. Vanezis but don't find that particular view convincing enough because we still need to explain what Sheila was doing and why it is that, according to the police, she was so clean.  It's still possible for Jeremy to do it, but rather difficult.

Ironically, in different circumstances, the Crown might well have been hung by their own petard with the 'Sheila was too clean' argument.  What was Sheila doing?  Reading a women's magazine?  Getting June's blood on her?  Running to the twins?  Doing her nails?  Reading a book while waiting her turn?  Would a gun have been enough to make her comply with Jeremy in such circumstances?  Maybe, but can we be sure?

Crucially, there is no forensic evidence for the alternative course of action: i.e. my own theory that Jeremy may have shot her in the second bedroom while she was propped-up in bed or sitting-up or doing something similar.  This is important because Jeremy does have a case to answer and we need to eliminate all theorised avenues.  I actually don't favour my own theory, partly due to the lack of forensic support.  We also have the problem that the MacDonell Report, Ismail's evidence at the 2002 appeal, and Dr. Vanezis' pathological report all conflict with, even contradict, this scenario, though in fairness this may be because the scenario has never been proposed.  I also think Jeremy was as psychotic as Sheila and he didn't plan it out.

But let's say my theory is right and it all began in the second bedroom.  If Jeremy had done it this way, he would have had to kill her first before everybody else, then after killing the other four, he would have had to go back and change the bed clothes, which we can assume would have aspirated blood on them because the first shot didn't kill her.  Then, he had to carry her to the master bedroom, which in itself is easy work, but he had to do so without leaving any forensic trace of this in the second bedroom or on the landing, or indeed in the master bedroom itself.  Remember he also had to do all this while not leaving any traces of himself in the second bedroom.  He also had to remember to leave the light on in the second bedroom.  Did the Raid Group officers find the second bedroom with the light still on or not?

Again, like the scenario of Sheila running to the master bedroom or the twins, it's not impossible.  It could have happened this way, but it would have involved Jeremy in tremendous difficulty, to the extent that I find there is reasonable doubt.  Otherwise, potentially we have Jeremy going round the house with a pair of tweezers and a mop and bucket, and then in the dark he has to take care not to leave any trace of his entry and exit, or (if you believe that he used the silencer) his entry and exit to the gun cupboard and its immediate environs.

Now compare and contrast this with the defence theory that Sheila did it and washed herself before committing suicide with the same rifle.  Again, like with the Crown case theory, there are issues, but it's not impossible. The so-called 'ritualistic cleaning' theory is easy to ridicule, but it comports with the forensic evidence.  It's all quite plausible.

[Erik Narramore]

2020 edition of the Lee book, Appendix I, pp. 410-416.

Ainsley's report to the DPP was dated November 1985 and was submitted in support of a request to indict Bamber for the five murders.

Mike may have the report somewhere among his papers.  Lee only extracts a small section from it, unfortunately.

Lee resolves the puzzle of Sheila's movements thus [p.415]:

"While father and son were fighting in the kitchen, June had managed to force herself up from the bed.  The commotion had also woken Sheila, who crossed the landing to her parents' bedroom, drowsy and confused.  At the sight of her mother bleeding profusely as she steadied herself on the edge of the bed, Sheila rushed to the other side of the room, where the door to the box room was the quickest route to the twins.  June staggered round the bed after her, but before she could reach Sheila, Jeremy returned with the gun.

"Sheila froze.  June started towards hers on, who fired three more shots into her neck, head, and finally between the eyes.  June hit her shoulder against the door as she slumped to the floor.

"Jeremy then forced Sheila down beside the bed and shot her once in the throat."

Then, after killing the twins, she has him noticing that Sheila is still alive and so he re-loads a single cartridge in the kitchen and goes back and kills her.

[Erik Narramore]

Lee isn't saying that Sheila made it to the twins' room.  She 'froze' in the master bedroom, so never saw the twins.

Lee's scenario doesn't really account for why Sheila ended up so 'clean'.  In my view, nothing can, unless you accept that Jeremy incapacitated Sheila in the second bedroom and carried her to the master bedroom.

[Erik Narramore]

Sheila could (and I think, should) have had June's blood all over her.  Or are you saying she just left her mother to die and didn't help or comfort her?  I know she didn't necessarily like June, but isn't that a bit much?  At the least, wouldn't the instinctive thing be to rush to help her, getting all her blood on her in the process?  Maybe that explains the palm print on the night dress?

But OK, maybe Carol Ann Lee's guesswork is wrong and she went to the twins' room instead.  If so, why didn't she stay with the twins, even if she realised they were dead?  Why didn't she hide?  Why didn't she run around in circles and scream and shout and shake it all about?  Why is she naked under that nightdress, with no bra and knickers?  Yet at the same time, she went straight into the melee?

[Erik Narramore]

I find it hard to believe Sheila would not have fought back or struggled or tried to run if faced with an assailant.  Even Mike Ainsley admitted this was a flaw in the prosecution case in his report to the DPP.  I believe the guilt case rests on the idea that Sheila would comply with a gun pointed at her, but that was not certain.  Wouldn't she ask about the twins?

The guilt camp explain it by Jeremy carrying Sheila while she is asleep, but I see too many holes and uncertainties in that.  Jeremy has to leave the weapon somewhere while he carries her.  He has to move her into position, which means he will wake her up.  He will give her the weapon to hold. The guilt camp rely on the notion that Sheila was sedated, but there is no evidence that she was sedated at all.

Jeremy could have disguised himself as a way of inducing shock and compliance in Sheila, but I would maintain that if Jeremy disguised himself, Sheila and her parents would almost-certainly have recognised him.

He was counting on Sheila hearing nothing while he dealt with the others.  He could have tied Sheila up, but I think that would have left marks and there would be a risk of Sheila injuring herself.  He also had to get to Sheila and tie her up without being intercepted by Nevill or June.

Furthermore, the 'tie her up' theory in a sense is just a way of deferring the central question: how does Jeremy enforce Sheila's compliance?  If he ties her up, he has to: (i). tie her up in the first place without her struggling, fighting and running, and without her shouting to alert her parents; (ii). carry her somewhere, probably while she struggles; and, (iii). untie her, which means she will struggle, fight and might get away.

A solution to (i) is to catch her asleep, but there's no certainty of that, and no evidence she was sedated in the first place.  A solution to (iii) is that he shoots her while she is still tied up, but that possibility is immediately discounted by the blood patterns you see in photographs of her body.

Maybe he ungagged her to shoot her, but how does he know he needs to ungag her to shoot her?  It's circular.  Like with a lot of the prosecution case, it all falls apart on closer scrutiny.

It could also be that Sheila co-operated with Jeremy.  Schizophrenia is a cruel illness.  She was a troubled young woman and it is possible that when she realised Jeremy was going to kill her, she resigned herself to this fate and accepted it.  I can't see that, though.  She had two boys sleeping nearby.

There is one obvious solution and I think it is the only reasonable possibility.  We cannot with certainty exclude the possibility that Sheila was drugged by Jeremy.  The toxicology tests may not have picked this up.  I will need to go back and double-check this.  It could be that the tests were specific, in which case the theory of Jeremy drugging her cannot be ruled out, and could even be seen as a probability.  But then, isn't Jeremy taking a risk that the drug would be detected in tests?  I think that is a risk, but on the other hand, Jeremy, if he is the killer, was taking risks anyway and may have counted on the right tests not being done.  This would mean he planned it all, and we don't know to what lengths he went in his planning.  One reason I like the drugging idea is that Jeremy took an interest in the efficacy of sleeping tablets some months before.

Could it be that Julie knows more than she is letting on and even knows how Jeremy incapacitated Sheila but can't say because there is a paper trail that would then implicate her?

[Erik Narramore]

However, if Jeremy sets out to drug Sheila, how is this achieved?  If he injects her with something, wouldn't there be needle marks?

[Leslie Aalders]

I find it hard to believe Sheila would not have fought back or struggled or tried to run if faced with an assailant.  Even Mike Ainsley admitted this was a flaw in the prosecution case in his report to the DPP.  I believe the guilt case rests on the idea that Sheila would comply with a gun pointed at her, but that was not certain.  Wouldn't she ask about the twins?

The guilt camp explain it by Jeremy carrying Sheila while she is asleep, but I see too many holes and uncertainties in that.  Jeremy has to leave the weapon somewhere while he carries her.  He has to move her into position, which means he will wake her up.  He will give her the weapon to hold. The guilt camp rely on the notion that Sheila was sedated, but there is no evidence that she was sedated at all.

Jeremy could have disguised himself as a way of inducing shock and compliance in Sheila, but I would maintain that if Jeremy disguised himself, Sheila and her parents would almost-certainly have recognised him.

He was counting on Sheila hearing nothing while he dealt with the others.  He could have tied Sheila up, but I think that would have left marks and there would be a risk of Sheila injuring herself.  He also had to get to Sheila and tie her up without being intercepted by Nevill or June.

Furthermore, the 'tie her up' theory in a sense is just a way of deferring the central question: how does Jeremy enforce Sheila's compliance?  If he ties her up, he has to: (i). tie her up in the first place without her struggling, fighting and running, and without her shouting to alert her parents; (ii). carry her somewhere, probably while she struggles; and, (iii). untie her, which means she will struggle, fight and might get away.

A solution to (i) is to catch her asleep, but there's no certainty of that, and no evidence she was sedated in the first place.  A solution to (iii) is that he shoots her while she is still tied up, but that possibility is immediately discounted by the blood patterns you see in photographs of her body.

Maybe he ungagged her to shoot her, but how does he know he needs to ungag her to shoot her?  It's circular.  Like with a lot of the prosecution case, it all falls apart on closer scrutiny.

It could also be that Sheila co-operated with Jeremy.  Schizophrenia is a cruel illness.  She was a troubled young woman and it is possible that when she realised Jeremy was going to kill her, she resigned herself to this fate and accepted it.  I can't see that, though.  She had two boys sleeping nearby.

There is one obvious solution and I think it is the only reasonable possibility.  We cannot with certainty exclude the possibility that Sheila was drugged by Jeremy.  The toxicology tests may not have picked this up.  I will need to go back and double-check this.  It could be that the tests were specific, in which case the theory of Jeremy drugging her cannot be ruled out, and could even be seen as a probability.  But then, isn't Jeremy taking a risk that the drug would be detected in tests?  I think that is a risk, but on the other hand, Jeremy, if he is the killer, was taking risks anyway and may have counted on the right tests not being done.  This would mean he planned it all, and we don't know to what lengths he went in his planning.  One reason I like the drugging idea is that Jeremy took an interest in the efficacy of sleeping tablets some months before.

Could it be that Julie knows more than she is letting on and even knows how Jeremy incapacitated Sheila but can't say because there is a paper trail that would then implicate her?

I think the biggest risk with drugging Sheila is managing to stick a needle in without her screaming.If he put his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming she would automatically wake and wrestle about making it difficult to administer the drug.

Besides,does he sneak into Sheilas room in the dark to save rousing her? Very tricky,but then if he puts on the light she may well wake up and scream,game over.Very,very tricky.No,even for Bamber to break in and sneak up stairs to drug Sheila is no mean feat in itself before he starts shooting.

As you say,to bind and gag her would be just as problematic obviously.Yet Vanezis stated that it was unlikely Sheila could be shot without being drugged.Kenneally obviously came to the same conclusion for his report and did not suspect foul play,concluding Sheila was indeed responsible.

The more you think about it,it becomes clear that if Jeremy Bamber is guilty he was astonishingly lucky to leave a crime scene that looked like murder suicide.Fooling those first on the scene,and indeed Kenneally a month later after an indepth review of the case.

Indeed,it was only after Julie Mugford came forward that things changed.We are told that many had doubt of Bambers innocence from the off,but this was not reflected in Kenneallys report.

It seems there is no doubt that Mugfords testimony and the silencer were  Jeremy Bambers downfall.And of course his behaviour,if you want to include that as some kind of evidence.

But the point is,a credible JB scenario seems elusive.That seems to be why a detailed reconstruction of how the murders were carried out is always omitted from TV docunentaries or dramas.If the problems for a JB scenario were pointed out,I think many would begin to have doubt of his guilt.

[Rob Garland]

I don't believe Sheila was sedated, firstly there is no evidence she was and also how is the sedative administered? If orally by JB putting something in her food that evening, then there is a good risk of Sheila falling asleep before she even goes upstairs to go to bed. If an injection while Shelia is asleep then this is extremely risky, probably resulting in Sheila waking up and screaming the house down.

Sheila would have been checked for needle marks at autopsy.

My biggest objection to Sheila being sedated is that JB would have made no mistake with the first shot.

Guilters bang on and on about plausible Sheila scenarios, but the police saw nothing amiss at the crime scene with Sheila being the perpetrator, and a scenario with JB being the perpetrator having to control three adults to me is next to impossible.

[Leslie Aalders]

I don't believe Sheila was sedated, firstly there is no evidence she was and also how is the sedative administered? If orally by JB putting something in her food that evening, then there is a good risk of Sheila falling asleep before she even goes upstairs to go to bed. If an injection while Shelia is asleep then this is extremely risky, probably resulting in Sheila waking up and screaming the house down.

Sheila would have been checked for needle marks at autopsy.

My biggest objection to Sheila being sedated is that JB would have made no mistake with the first shot.

Guilters bang on and on about plausible Sheila scenarios, but the police saw nothing amiss at the crime scene with Sheila being the perpetrator, and a scenario with JB being the perpetrator having to control three adults to me is next to impossible.

I think what we have to do Rob,is imagine we are Bamber at the planning stage and ask ourselves what were his options with Sheila,what had he decided to do? Just what was his plan,and what does the crime scene tell us?

There is no evidence that Sheila was drugged or tied up,so this was not in JBs plan.So what does that leave us with? Speed and surprise? The evidence shows that the twins were probably shot many times in quick succession,and June received several non fatal shots first,as did Nevill.So if speed and surprise was his plan,it went badly awry.

But even if Bamber managed to run from bedroom to bedroom and kill Nevill,June and the twins with one head shot each before Sheila was awake,he still had to get her to comply with being shot.Could he count on this? Was this his plan? That Sheila would simply give up and accept death?I dont think many of us would consider this as much of a cast iron plan.

Why not use the double barrelled shotgun on Sheila? At least that way the damage would obliterate any bruises to Sheilas face.Bamber could have punched her in the face and knocked her out before he shot the others.He could even have bound her wrists and feet with Duck tape to keep her at bay.

Anyway,if JB is guilty,what the crime scene shows is that Sheila just happened to freeze or faint at just the right time to allow JB to shoot her,yet he somehow still messed up and shot her in the neck and needed a second bullet up into the brain to finish her off.

So I suppose if we go by what the crime scene shows,we have to come to the conclusion that JB thought he could simply break into the Whitehouse and kill Nevill,June and the twins WITHOUT subduing Sheila in any way,deciding she would not run and escape if she heard any screams or comotion.

It is what the crime scene shows,so it is reasonable to assume if JB is indeed guilty this was his plan.Kill everyone else and simply ignore Sheila,she will simply stay put till she is needed then sit down and agree to be shot without a struggle.

So what is really most likely,the above,or Sheila taking her own life?

[Leslie Aalders]

I don't believe Sheila was sedated, firstly there is no evidence she was and also how is the sedative administered? If orally by JB putting something in her food that evening, then there is a good risk of Sheila falling asleep before she even goes upstairs to go to bed. If an injection while Shelia is asleep then this is extremely risky, probably resulting in Sheila waking up and screaming the house down.

Sheila would have been checked for needle marks at autopsy.

My biggest objection to Sheila being sedated is that JB would have made no mistake with the first shot.

Guilters bang on and on about plausible Sheila scenarios, but the police saw nothing amiss at the crime scene with Sheila being the perpetrator, and a scenario with JB being the perpetrator having to control three adults to me is next to impossible.

I think what we have to do Rob,is imagine we are Bamber at the planning stage and ask ourselves what were his options with Sheila,what had he decided to do? Just what was his plan,and what does the crime scene tell us?

There is no evidence that Sheila was drugged or tied up,so this was not in JBs plan.So what does that leave us with? Speed and surprise? The evidence shows that the twins were probably shot many times in quick succession,and June received several non fatal shots first,as did Nevill.So if speed and surprise was his plan,it went badly awry.

But even if Bamber managed to run from bedroom to bedroom and kill Nevill,June and the twins with one head shot each before Sheila was awake,he still had to get her to comply with being shot.Could he count on this? Was this his plan? That Sheila would simply give up and accept death?I dont think many of us would consider this as much of a cast iron plan.

Why not use the double barrelled shotgun on Sheila? At least that way the damage would obliterate any bruises to Sheilas face.Bamber could have punched her in the face and knocked her out before he shot the others.He could even have bound her wrists and feet with Duck tape to keep her at bay.

Anyway,if JB is guilty,what the crime scene shows is that Sheila just happened to freeze or faint at just the right time to allow JB to shoot her,yet he somehow still messed up and shot her in the neck and needed a second bullet up into the brain to finish her off.

So I suppose if we go by what the crime scene shows,we have to come to the conclusion that JB thought he could simply break into the Whitehouse and kill Nevill,June and the twins WITHOUT subduing Sheila in any way,deciding she would not run and escape if she heard any screams or comotion.

It is what the crime scene shows,so it is reasonable to assume if JB is indeed guilty this was his plan.Kill everyone else and simply ignore Sheila,she will simply stay put till she is needed then sit down and agree to be shot without a struggle.

So what is really most likely,the above,or Sheila taking her own life?

Now,you may be thinking that my post above is a ramble of nonsense,but if JB is guilty he did indeed need a plan,he had to make the crime scene look like four murders and a suicide.Now because there is no evidence of Sheila being drugged or tied up prior to being shot,the only conclusion we can come to is that either Bamber is innocent or his plan was to simply leave things to LUCK.

So in actual fact JB didn't have a plan at all,yet things that night worked out perfectly for him regarding the death of Sheila.Now that is lucky!

[Leslie Aalders]

Even the police scenario sent to the DPP points to luck on Bambers part.They have Sheila waking up and going through to the main bedroom of her own accord while JB is in the kitchen,then freezing and being forced down and shot when Bamber returns.

Now,I am not saying that the police scenario is wrong,but if it happened that way you are again agreeing that JB had no plan for Sheila,and left her to luck.Think about it,you have to be.You are saying that JB entered the Whitehouse that night,knowing he had to leave Sheila till last,BUT had no idea how he would go about it.

The only other possibility is that JB did have a plan to deal with Sheila and it worked,only it was so diabolically clever that not of us have worked out what it was.

[Leslie Aalders]

Dont you think it is more than a little odd to attempt a major crime without having a plan to deal with the most important player,the one who's death has to be seen as self inflicted? Yet the crime scene shows nothing was planned beforehand regarding Sheila in a JB scenario,dosen't it?