My Testimony to Jeremy Bamber

I first became interested in Jeremy’s case during his 1986 trial.  I remember feeling somewhat perturbed by the lack of any concrete evidence and intrigued as to why the Court should rely heavily on the emotional backlash of a woman scorned. However, it was the introduction of a sound moderator and the speed at which it became the integral factor of the case which baffled me most of all.  Since it was believed from the outset that it was a murder/suicide investigation, it would seem to me that the rational process of thought would be to repudiate the sound moderator as opposed to an attempt to choreograph a correlation between the implement and the crime.

These two factors kept niggling away at me over the years, whilst intermittently reflecting on the possibility of an innocent man withering away in jail.  I must have written dozens of letters to Jeremy in the early days, though they seemed so futile when reading them back:  ‘if there’s anything I can do to help..... ’; ‘I’ve always believed in your innocence.....’.   Each letter ended up in tiny pieces in the waste paper bin.  I felt so helpless: before the ubiquitous use of computers it was not only difficult to know what course of action one could take but just charting the course of Jeremy’s sentence proved near enough impossible.

I read Roger Wilkes book ‘Blood Relations’ and Claire Powell’s book ‘Murder at White House Farm’.  Both these authors are predisposed to imparting a sense of verisimilitude to their accounts which can at times be quite compelling, but still there were too many anomalies that just didn’t add up.......

How could a murderer carry out such a crime and yet leave no forensic evidence behind? 

How could Jeremy have possibly carried out the murder of his family, returned to his cottage in Goldhanger within the allotted time frame (ten minutes I believe), remove any forensic evidence from his bicycle/car, clean himself up, change/dispose of his clothing and regain his composure before telephoning the police?

Furthermore, had Jeremy been responsible for the murder of his family, planned with such meticulous attention to detail, why then did he fail to arrange a credible alibi? 

It wasn’t until many years later with the aid of the internet that I was able to accrue more information on Jeremy’s case: and the more I read, the more convinced I became of his innocence and the enormity of this grave miscarriage of justice. 

I began to take a more active role in Jeremy’s campaign.  But it was only then, once we started corresponding (when he was no longer just a character in a book or an occasional face in a newspaper), that the reality of the situation really hit me.  This was ‘real life’ and this man has been imprisoned for twenty-five years, and has spent every day relentlessly fighting to clear his name, dealing with one knock-back after another: two failed appeals; the upgrading of his twenty-five year sentence to a full-life tariff; having his neck slashed by a fellow inmate to within millimetres of losing his life - requiring twenty-six stitches.

In the relatively short time I have known Jeremy I have found him to be extremely personable with a gregarious nature.  He is warm-hearted, discerning, and perceptive and yet has a delicate sensitivity about him.  I feel privileged that Jeremy should consider me one of his friends and that I should have played an infinitesimal role along the route to Jeremy’s freedom.

I do not know from where Jeremy gets his strength and perseverance.  It is to his ultimate credit that, where most people in his position would have crumbled, Jeremy has endured this injustice  without the comfort and support of his remaining family, and yet has still found the will and the resolve to continue his crusade and ongoing fight for justice.