Jeremy Bamber: Anthony Pargeter

Attrib http://jeremybamber.org/

Anthony Pargeter and his rifle and sound moderator

Anthony Pargeter is Jeremy’s cousin on his father’s side. He married Regine Hausser, daughter of famous photographer Robert Hausser. Anthony’s sister was called Jacqueline and she married Richard Wood.

Anthony and Jacqueline also had half brothers, as their mother, Audrey, had died and Reginald married again having two other sons called Clive and Roland. It is in Roland’s statement where rumours of a plane flying over to drop drugs at the farm in the middle of the night must have started. He confesses his own involvement in drugs and details a convoluted account of visiting a psychic and her telling him a tale of three hit men who killed the family. [1]

Anthony Pargeter had been shooting with Jeremy and was a frequent visitor to the farm from his home at the time in Bourne End, Buckinghamshire. He told the police that Jeremy became interested in guns in 1980 and then details that he himself had a .410 shotgun, he then graduated to a 12 bore shotgun, giving his .410 to Jeremy which Jeremy never used. [2] This gun was kept at the farm and had to be licensed to Nevill Bamber as Jeremy Bamber did not own a gun, only an air rifle.  In his 8^th of August Statement he describes Jeremy as “a likeable young man” and that Nevill Bamber had told him that he had spoken of the acquisitions of farmland to give Jeremy an opportunity to try farming on his own if he ever wished to do so. Nevill had told Anthony that he would be around for a few years yet to guide Jeremy. [3] This is contrary to media reports that Nevill Bamber had a strange premonition that he was going to die.

In his later statement of September Anthony’s feelings about Jeremy appear to have shifted and he becomes suspicious of Jeremy’s interest in guns. He also details a conversation with David Boutflour about their discussion on the red paint found the moderator which matched the paint on the Aga surround. He says he went to the farm and noticed the scoring in the paint work and believed this is where the moderator had come into contact with the mantle. [4]

Where was Anthony Pargeter’s rifle and moderator on the night of the tragedy?

Anthony Pargeter made many statements to the police about the tragedy. In his statement of 8^th August and the 10^th of September he makes no mention of his rifle being at the farm. He discusses the rifle owned by Nevill and its whereabouts, but he does not clarify he came across it whilst looking for his own gun until statements made later.

So on the 17^th of September he goes on to detail that he kept two 12 bore shotguns and an air rifle at the farm house but after the tragedy picked them up from David Boutflour and took them back to his home in Bourne End.

Then on t he 17^th of November he told police that he only used “.22 rifles in Africa but in England I only had an air rifle”. He is not explicit about where this rifle was kept.

Anthony becomes more explicit in his later 12^th of December statement by saying that that he did own a BRNO .22 bolt action rifle and says that it was at White House Farm the weekend before the tragedies. He does not state that he took the rifle away from the farm when he left and as he did not attend the farm again until after the incident we can assume that the rifle was at the White House Farm during the tragedies. He also makes no mention that he owned a sound moderator, or that the rifle had one with it at the farm.

At trial he then details verbally again that the rifle was at the farm the weekend before the tragedies, and he also told the court that he left his rifle at the farm, and I quote “I take the bolt with me. I leave the rifle at White House”. [5]  Anthony makes no mention of his sound moderator at this point.

In 1991 after complaints by Jeremy Bamber, the City of London Police seized Pargeter’s rifle and moderator. There are three points at issue here:

Annthony Pargeter’s gun was licensed in 1980 for three years, and renewed in 1983, it was to be used at White House Farm, but the license stipulated that it was to be kept at his home in Bourne End, Bucks, he was also issued with a sound moderator for use with the rifle at White House Farm.  [6]

So, we have established that Anthony did keep his rifle at the farm which was in breach of his license. Secondly that he owned a sound moderator which was also under the same license terms as the rifle.

Anthony Pargeter sued the Sport Newspaper in 1991 after they had misled readers by suggesting that his rifle had been at White Hosue Farm and possibly used during the tragedies.  The Sport lost the libel case and Pargeter was awarded compensation of £40,000 plus costs of £60,000. [7]

The third point that I would like to make is about the moderator is that In 1991 when the police seized the moderator and rifle from Anthony for testing, they detail that it’s the same type and make as the one allegedly used during the tragedies. [8] I quote “Sound Moderator the same make and type as DRB/1” The witness reference exhibit number for the moderator supposedly used the kill the family was DRB/1 (Given this reference because it was David Robert Boutflour who found the exhibit).

It has been repeatedly denied by police that there were two moderators the same. Jeremy Bamber maintains that there were two sound moderators at the farm with DS Stan Jones (initials SBJ) probably finding Anthony’s moderator at the scene on the 7^th of August. It can be shown that DS Davidson fingerprinted a sound moderator on the 9^th of August 1985,[9] which is impossible if David Boutflour did not find the sound moderator in the gun cupboard until the 10^th of August 1985.

It is likely then, that these were switched over as the case progressed, there are many evidential papers and photographs to support this argument including the moderator label’s having the wrong case reference number on it and further tampering of the exhibit witness reference number which evolved from being SBJ/1 to DB/1 to DRB/1 with no supporting explanatory paperwork. There are two forensic scientists, Brian Elliott and Glynnis Howard who both made detailed statements to the City of London police stating that the reference numbers for the sound moderators in their original statements had been altered without their knowledge. [10] Considering how important the moderator was to the conviction of Jeremy Bamber it has had a surprisingly colourful life, evolving from nothing, to have many different names and guises.

The final report from the City of London Police which was officially disclosed pre 2002 has a paragraph missing which addresses whether or not Anthony’s gun was at the farm. One disclosed later in 2004 was obtaned by the Defence has a missing passage in it. Curiously, someone did not  want the Defence to know all there is to know about the rifle, it would then follow by analogy that Anthony’s rifle was present at the farm then the moderator would have been too. Is it suitable that a report of a police review should have whole paragraphs missing from it, and in some cases a number of whole pages are absent? In contrary to the report prepared and given to the Home Secretary and PCA, Anthony Pargeter did not state that he removed his rifle or moderator from White House Farm at any time.

I now return to Anthony Pargeter who met up with Metropolitan police officers in 2002 near his residence in Ibiza. He went to a restaurant for lunch with two of the officers investigating the case during which he said that “If it hadn’t [sic] been for Taff Jones directions we probably wouldn’t be here today.” The reader can draw their own conclusions about what is meant by this statement. [11]

Anthony Pargeter was another key prosecution witness who gave evidence at trial. He and his sister the late Jacqueline Wood also benefitted financially from the Bamber estate upon the conviction of Jeremy Bamber but only after a legal battle with the relatives.

---

[1] 26^th September 1985 Statement, R, S Pargeter

[2] 17^th November 1985 Statement, A C Pargeter

[3] 8^th August 1985 Statement, A C Pargeter

[4] 10^th September 1985 Statement A C Pargeter

[5] 17^th November 1985 Statement A C Pargeter, Trial Transcript A C Pargeter

[6]  28^th May 1985, Brian Stanbrook, Thames Valley Police Firearms License issue A, Pargeter

[7] 11^th October 1991, Officers Report Pargeter v Sport Newspaper Ltd

[8]  12^th July 1991, Statement, David Pryor, Forensic Scientist

[9]  Holmes 76/174, DS Davidson Interview, Evidential Precis,

[10]  10^th August 1991, Statement, G Howard, 3^rd October 1991, Handwritten Statement, Brian Elliott.

[11] Holmes 84/58  21^st November, 2001 Report of DI Supt Bernard.

Jeremy Bamber: David Boutflour

Attrib:  http://jeremybamber.org/david-boutflour/

David Boutflour is the son of Robert and sister to Ann. He had told police in a statement that on the Saturday after the tragedy, the 10^th of August he found the sound moderator at White House Farm when he went there with Ann Eaton, curiously he doesn’t mention in his statement that his father was present but does say he was there in his court transcript:

“I went to a cupboard under the stairs in the den. I found a cardboard box which contained 12 bore cartridges and about 200/300 rounds of.22 ammunition all of which was low velocity ammunition. Also in the box was a sound moderator for a .22 rifle. I picked up the sound moderator and saw what I believe to be blood on it. Also there was red paint or something similar on it as well. There was one quite deep scratch which was bright and appeared to be new. There was a telescopic sight in its box, in the box as well. I took these items together with the other firearms to my sister’s house. I later informed the Police of the finding of the telescopic sight and sound moderator.”

In court he details how he had noticed paint in the knurl of the moderator which appeared to him to match the colour of the mantle surrounding the Aga. It was later during September that his sister Ann Eaton pointed out scratches to police officers and it was this evidence which was also key to the conviction of Jeremy because it was alleged that the moderator was on the rifle during an apparent fight in the kitchen between Nevill Bamber and his assailant. [1]

The Eaton’s and the Boutflour’s had consistently denied that Sheila would have had any knowledge of guns despite her attending shoots as a ‘beater’ she had never been seen firing a gun according to the family. Jeremy had already stated that Sheila had used an air rifle while out shooting with him. Jeremy had told his lawyers that David Boutflour had been shooting with Sheila Caffell and under cross examination David was pressed by Geoffrey Rivlin QC about a shooting holiday in Scotland here is an extract from his trial transcript:

 Q: As regards Sheila: Of course you knew Sheila, did you not?
A : I knew Sheila quite well. In later years, but when she was in her teenage years, when I was unmarried and near, I would often take her to the local village hop or party or dinner dance.
Q : Did you ever take her on a shooting holiday?
A: Jeremy Bamber with his father came on a shooting holiday, but I cannot honestly recollect Sheila coming on one.
Q : Do you remember an occasion when you went to Scotland on a shooting holiday with Sheila?”
A : I do not recollect a shooting holiday with Sheila, but I do recollect a shooting holiday with Nevill Bamber and his son Jeremy, and also my now wife Karen Boutflour.
Q: Are you saying you have never been to Scotland with Sheila and/or others on a shooting holiday?
A : I cannot recollect Sheila being on the shooting holiday you are referring to.
Q: Did you not go on a shooting holiday with Sheila and Jeremy Bamber being present?
A : My mind is somewhat blurred at this time. There may have been and occasion when Nevill Bamber and Jeremy . . . . but this must have been many years before that. 
Q : It may have been some years before. I cannot give you a date, do you understand but doing the best I can, may I suggest to you 1978/79 period, when you went on a shooting holiday with Sheila?
Mr Justice Drake: Where abouts are you putting?
Mr Rivlin: In Scoland
Mr Justice Drake: Just the two of them, it is suggested?
The Witness:  I think I can possibly explain this a little further. It is such a long time ago I am having a lot of trouble recollecting this but, having suddenly put me on the spot, I think I can remember occasions when I have taken members of the family up to Scotland, and I belonged to a shooting party of about eight members, which we invited a guest on one or the second occasion, and we would shoot on August 12^th – The Glorious Twelfth – and sometimes in September shooting on three days on each occasion.
Q: You understand I am not concerned to ask you about just any old holiday that you may have been on, however pleasant, but to ask you about a time when you took Sheila up with you, and there was such an occasion, was there not Mr Boutlfour?
Q: I have a feeling, now you have brought back the grey matter a little, Sheila may have come up with me on one occasion.
Q: Can you tell the court, did she do any shooting?”
A: It’s such a long time ago, I cannot recollect, but she certainly did not carry a gun. She may have fired a gun off in the party perhaps.
Q: She may have, but you cannot recollect?
A: I can recollect somebody firing a 12 bore off and putting it up to their shoulder, but I do not recollect whether it was Sheila or another lady.

 Peter Eaton details in his handwritten draft statements to the City of London Police in 1991 that he saw Sheila using a gun on a shooting holiday in Scotland, but this was crossed out with the word “NO” written over the top of it and did not appear in the final Statement to police. It now surfaces from the evidence presented here that there is some confusion over whether Sheila had actually been seen with a gun or not. [2]  Indeed, both David and Anthony had agreed in front of DCI Taff Jones that Sheila could have been capable of using the gun to kill the family,[3] perhaps this idea came from undisclosed events like the shooting party in Scotland.

David and the rest of the family knew little of Sheila’s mental health problems. For example when David was also asked about Sheila’s mental health he answered the following questions at the trial[4]:

Q: I would like to ask you this about Sheila: I think you knew precious little about Sheila’s mental history or history of mental disorder?
A: I can only record hearsay, and I have very little practical experience of her actual condition.
Q: There was very little talk about it in the family? About Sheila?
A: Mr and Mrs Bamber were particularly secretive about things of that nature.

 In 1991 David Boutflour told the City of London Police in his interviews that he “did not conclude that Jerry had done it, there was a grey area, and didn’t think he had gumption to do it.” He goes on to detail how his sister Ann and father Robert had formed the opinion that Jeremy had committed the murders. [5] Of course David Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter had already agreed together in front of DCI Jones that Sheila could have been capable of carrying out the shootings, this was direct dissent from the argument that Ann Eaton was trying to present. We already know that Ann Eaton had a lot more at stake than David and Anthony.[6] From the evidence presented here, one would conclude that Sheila had been seen with guns, and that she had been capable of carrying out the killings according to witnesses who used guns on a regular basis.

---

[1]  25^th September 1991 DI Cook Statement to COLP

[2] Undated, Draft Statement, P. Eaton

[3] 14^th August 1991, Statement to COLP, C.A Eaton

[4] David Boutflour Trial Transcript pg 37

[5] 19^th July 1991, Handwritten Interview, D Boutflour

[6] 1986 Dickinson Interview, P, Eaton

Jeremy Bamber: Julie Mugford

Attrib: http://jeremybamber.org/

Julie Mugford was Jeremy Bamber’s girlfriend at the time of the tragedy.
Originally from a working class background she must have felt that she had done very well on the social scale when she dated the good looking, intelligent, wealthy and public school educated Jeremy Bamber. At the time Julie was studying to be a teacher at Goldsmith’s college in London, during the summer she worked with young children on a nursery project.(1) After the shootings she even went to the mortuary to identify the bodies of Nevill, June, Sheila and Nicholas and Daniel Caffell on the 7^th of August 1985. (2)
 
Julie had not been very happy in her relationship with Jeremy and towards the end of August she had realised that it was all but over after Jeremy had publicly announced that he would not be getting engaged to her when Brett Collins had jokingly announced that they would be betrothed. Collins was a Homosexual friend of Jeremy’s whom Julie disliked intensely. Collin’s believed that Julie wanted the relationship with Jeremy to move on to a commitment and that Jeremy had not felt the same way. (3)

In her 17^th December 1985 statement she states that by the 1^st September she had said to Jeremy; “I would really love to hurt him and told him that I tried to stab the teddy bear that he had given me as a present.”  Julie goes on to state that that night “We didn’t sleep well and at one point I got a pillow and put it over his head, I took it off and he asked me why I did it, and I said if he were dead he would always be with me.” 

By the 4^th of September 1985 the reality of the relationship ending had become all too real for Julie when she discovered Jeremy talking on the phone to another woman called Virginia, with whom he had planned to start a relationship with. He was making arrangements to meet her and Julie was furious. Julie had realized that her relationship with Jeremy was over and smashed a mirror by throwing an ornament at it in a fit of rage, she then physically attacked Jeremy. After this she saw Jeremy only once more when he and Brett helped her move house in London and she described the parting as being on a “reasonable happy note.” Although clearly Julie had not felt happy about the parting at all. (4)
 
On the 8^th September attended Witham police station, after Stan Jones had ensured she was ”reported for process” she was charged with burglary as detailed by Mr Adams of the DPP the charge was then curiously withdrawn on the 5th of December 1985, he said in a handwritten addendum: “I also agree the burglary charge can be withdrawn”.

She went from Witham police station to the police training School in Chelmsford, in the process claiming expenses from police, where she made statements claiming that Jeremy had told her he had hired a hit man called Matthew McDonald to kill the family for the payment of £2,000. (5) But previously on the 8^th August 1985 she made a statement to the police saying quite the opposite. Her story now shifted to say that Jeremy had called her at home after the hit man had called him to tell him he had committed the killings. She said that when Jeremy rang he just said that there was something wrong at the farm. She took that to mean that the murders had been committed. The tone of the call had changed in Julie’s new description, and in this version the time of the call had now shifted from 3:30am in her original statement to 3:12am. The Defence believe this was done to put Jeremy’s call to her prior to him calling the police. (6)

Julie now claimed that Jeremy had mentioned many times that he intended to kill his family, and yet according to her – she did nothing, even after the killings were carried out, she did nothing. Julie, a trainee school teacher, who had been working with children went and identified the bodies of 6 year old murdered children and said nothing. For a whole month Julie Mugford did nothing. She would have us believe that she still loved, slept with, ate with and took money off of a man who had murdered his whole family in cold blood and her excuse for this was that she “felt sorry for him” and that she “couldn’t believe it was real.” (7)

Julie Mugford told the court that the hit man told Jeremy that Nevill Bamber had been shot 7 times.(8). The newspapers had reported that Nevill Bamber had been shot 7 times and yet the truth was that Nevill Bamber had been shot 8 times. Julie Mugford’s evidence came from local gossip about the tragedy, newspaper articles, and from Ann Eaton who had been given information by police officers. The court was aware of this, and unconvinced by her evidence the trial jury could not reach a verdict. After deliberations the judge asked if they wanted to see any evidence again which might help them make a decision,(9) they asked to see the evidence of the blood in the moderator, when they did they found Jeremy Bamber guilty by a 10-2 majority.
Julie Mugford had been approached by various newspapers with offers of money for her story. She instructed a solicitor months before the trial to negotiate a deal with the highest bidder which was the News of The World. She was already in a hotel paid for by The News of The World as the verdict was given, where she posed for photographs accepting a cool sum of £25,000 for her story which even by today’s standards is a lot of money, in 1985 this would have been a princely sum. She states that she spent the money on an apartment.

If Julie Mugford had signed the contract before giving her evidence she would have been in contempt of court. The fact that she arranged this contract pre-trial did not break the letter of the law. It shows that Mugford had pre-meditated to obtain money, and all but signed a contract for her story upon a guilty verdict this in an unsuitable action by a key prosecution witness.(10)

In 2002 for the appeal (the Metropolitain police investigation being headed under the supervision of John Yates), the Defence tried to obtain a copy of the contract she signed. Apparently her solicitor no longer held a copy of the document and neither did the News of The World. Nevertheless, she made a statement to the police about this contract and states “I clearly skim read the contract and missed a lot of the detail today I read all the small print.” This would be interpreted by you or I that on the day she wrote the statement she read a copy of the contract. But the CPS argued that this is not what she meant.

Paul Close of the CPS states in a letter on the 22^nd of July 2002 to Jeremy’s Defence lawyer:
‘The witness is clearly saying that in 1986 she “skim read” the document but today (as she is no doubt older and wiser) she would always read the small print. “I read” is clearly in the present tense and a general observation. She is not saying “today I have read”.’

The CPS maintains that the contract was NOT in existence in 2002 and that it could not be established when Julie signed the contract, indeed Julie herself says that she “couldn’t remember when it was signed.” 
Back in 1987 the Press Council had ruled that the News of the World had broken their declaration of principle on cheque book journalism. Anyone can see that in this instance the media interfered with the judicial process as Julie’s money spinning deal was signed upon a guilty verdict.

After the trial Julie Mugford went on to live in Canada and even took up a post the Vice Principal of a primary school and in 1991 the City of London Police investigated Essex Police they detailed a list of crimes which Julie had confessed to carrying out undetected. These included, taking cannabis, selling cannabis, accessory to burglary at the caravan park, smuggling drugs back into the UK from Canada, and cheque book fraud. (11) Julie Mugford was never charged with any of these offences officially, but documents newly surfaced show that she was charged with burglary and this was withdrawn with permission from the DPP’s office, in the same document Julie is also advised she will be called as a prosecution witness.

At the 2002 appeal the Defence put forward the suggestion that Julie Mugford and her friend and co-fraudster Susan Battersby had been given immunity from prosecution as a trade off for Julie’s testimony against Jeremy Bamber but the documents relating to this were under Public Interest Immunity. (12)

DCI Dickinson had interviewed Julie Mugford and her mother in 1986 after the trial but the interviews have never been disclosed to the Defence. The City of London Police suspected that Julie Mugford was given immunity from prosecution and after they followed the paper trail to the CPS they discovered that there were documents not to be disclosed to the Defence. Indeed the CPS had in their possession a file known as the “Confidential Crown Prosecution Service File relating to Julie Mugford and Trial preparation by Essex Police.” This file was passed to the Senior Crown Prosecutor known as Mr Stephen Swan. For the 2002 appeal the Metropolitan police tried to trace this file and took a statement from Mr Swan who stated that “I cannot remember who gave me the file, or who I gave it to after I had finished reading it.”

The mystery remains: What happened to the confidential file and what was in it and is it right that the Defence should be denied access to these materials?
The Defence has also suggested that Julie’s statements were not written in the first person, senior police officers even questioned why she was writing in the third person. The grammar used in many of the statements is well below the standard of a student doing a degree at Masters level which further suggests that Julie didn’t write all of the statements herself. For example she told police “Matthew done it.” (13)  During the period when Julie and her friend gave statements she was put up by police at their training centre and claimed expenses.Quite incredibly she was also seen by DS Jones the principal detective in this case no less than 32 times. (14)

We will leave the reader to draw their own conclusions about the reliability of evidence supplied by Julie Mugford. Whatever you decide, there can be no doubt about how much financial benefit she gained from the conviction of Jeremy Bamber, money she would not have received had the jury’s verdict been ‘not guilty.’

Footnotes
1) 17.12.85, J R Mugford Statement
2) 10.9.85, J R Mugford Statement
3) 09.09.85 & 01.10.85 Statements, 8.9.85 Interview, B Collins
4) 8.9.85 J R Mugford Statement
5) 10.09.85 J R Mugford Statement
6) 23.09.85 J R Mugford Statement
7) 23.09.85 J R Mugford Statement
8) Trial Transcript, J R Mugford
9) Judge’s Summing up Trial Transcript
10) 12.04.02 & 11.04.02, J R Mugford Statement
11) City of London Police file notes, Offences Admitted to by J R Mugford
12) Appeal Judgement 2002 & Letter from DDP’s office June 1991
13) Police Action report extract  Folder 1,000 – 1600 & 23.09.85, J R Mugford Statement
14) DS Jones, Listings, J R Mugford Police meetings
THERE IS DOCUMENTAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT EACH STATEMENT ON THIS WEB PAGE IN FOOTNOTES OR IN LINKS ON EACH PARAGRAPH

Jeremy Bamber: Robert Boutflour

Attrib http://jeremybamber.org/robert-boutflour/

The late Robert Boutflour was the husband of Pamela, June’s sister.  

After the tragic events at White House Farm on 7 August 1985, Robert, by his own admission, was immediately dissatisfied with the police investigations and the pathologist’s conclusions that Sheila Caffell had killed the family then herself.

Robert had married well and Pamela’s parents, Mabel and Leslie Speakman gave Robert the tenancy of Carbonells Farm and Burnt Ash Farm.  

After Leslie Speakman died he left Pamela, June, Ann and Jeremy a share each of the Osea Road caravan site. [1] Crime had been a growing concern with intruders at the caravan site and Jeremy had expressed concern about this.  At the time Jeremy had wanted to introduce new technologies such as CCTV.  Jeremy was not convinced the manager of the Camp Site, Jim Carr was doing an adequate job and to prove his point further, he burgled the caravan park with the aid of his then girlfriend Julie Mugford.  He had entered the office by pulling the key through the letter box which was always left there.  Jeremy thought this to be a ridiculous security arrangement and had proven the point that security was extremely lax.  Jeremy had hoped this would warrant heightened security and improve management of the site.  He did not realise at the time that this act would be used as evidence against him in a murder trial as he grieved for his family. [2]

Robert Boutflour jumped at the chance to make Jeremy look bad almost immediately but his badgering of DCI Jones did not work, DCI Dickinson’s post trial investigation later noted that “The Original Investigation officer would have taken the inheritance issue into consideration when he was approached by Mr Boutlfour and so placed little value on his claims that it was Jeremy who had killed the family. [3]

Later in one of his statements Robert Boutflour details that after one of the meetings at Osea Road Caravan Park Jeremy had said to him “I could easily kill my parents”, curiously there were no other witnesses to this statement.   If Jeremy had intended to shoot his parents why then did he tell his uncle?  This is hardly the action of a clever calculating murderer as the prosecution claimed.[4]  At trial the Jury asked the question “If Jeremy Bamber was found guilty and imprisoned for many years, who would benefit financially, could it be his uncle and family.   Motive for his uncle to say he could kill his family.” [5]

Jeremy had told police that he was present in the kitchen on the evening before the tragedies when a conversation between Nevill, June and Sheila took place.  He said that they were discussing the possibility of fostering the twins. Robert Boutflour told police that he believed this to be a lie by Jeremy and Robert described the suggestion of fostering of the children as “unthinkable.”  But Robert Boutflour knew nothing of the Bamber and Caffell affairs, there are statements made by several social workers about the children’s well being[6], also from their nursery teachers[7] and one of the foster mothers to the twins was also interviewed by police.[8]  The statements and diaries of Robert Boutflour can be taken apart paragraph by paragraph and found to be contradicted by other statements and documentation.

Was Robert Boutflour a successful man in his own right as his father had been?  Had there been ‘no love lost’ between Nevill and himself simply because Robert wasn’t a good farmer?  Had Robert continued to receive handouts from his mother in law and did he feel resentful of Nevill who paid rent on most of the land he farmed and probably still managed make more profit than Robert?  Many of these questions remain but Nevill made no provision for Robert or Pamela in his will and the only relatives he provided for were Ann Eaton a sum of £250 and Anthony and Jackie Pargeter the sum of £1,000 each.  Both paltry sums of money considering the estate collectively came in at £425,000.  Nevill had left his entire estate in his will to June, Sheila and Jeremy.  June Bamber had also left her entire estate to Jeremy, not naming Pamela, Robert or Ann at all, she had included the sum of £100 to be left to David Boutflour and had awarded her housekeeper Mrs Jean Bouttell £1,000 for her devoted service. To know that Jeremy was the sole benefactor to the estate must have come as no surprise to Robert Boutfour. [9]

Another bone of contention might have been that Robert probably couldn’t afford to pay for private schooling for David and Ann who attended state schools in contrast to Nevill and June who paid for their adopted children Sheila and Jeremy to go public school.  The Bambers had paid for the best education they could find for their children with Jeremy later attending Gresham’s College and Sheila attending finishing school in London.[10]

Local people tell that Robert felt that Jeremy was a “Cuckoo” in the nest and that Robert Boutflour had cruelly nick named him so, this was a family joke to ridicule the adoptee Jeremy.  Robert Boutflour also described Jeremy as engaging in “Unsavoury homosexual activities.” And in his opinion this suggested that he was a criminal living on the peripherals of society because of the friendships he formed with homosexuals like Brett Collins.[11]

The smudge of watery blood appearing on the kitchen window at white house farm which Robert and Ann discovered when searching for clues in the house actually turned out to be blood from when the police cleaned the house.[12] Robert Boutflour also distastefully suggested that an unused tampon found on a table in the dining room could have been used by Jeremy to clean the barrel of a sound moderator. [13]

Robert Bouflour also made up the idea that Jeremy had used June’s ladies bicycle as a ‘getaway’ vehicle from the scene by riding over farm land in the middle of the night; of course there was no forensic evidence to connect Jeremy to the bicycle or traces of blood on it.[14]  So intent was he that the “cuckoo in the nest” would not inherit the Bamber estate that he says himself that he was “desperate to know what to do” and he discussed this with the manager of Osea Road Caravan Park who suggested that his son, Robert, a Metropolitan police officer, had recommended he go to the Chief Constable to discuss his concerns.

[15]  This meeting was curiously the same weekend that Julie Mugford attended Witham police station with her story; in fact there were only 3 days between Robert’s visit to ACC Simpson and Julie’s attendance at Witham Police station. [16] Jeremy Bamber says that Julie’s father was a manager in a chicken factory and they traded with Ann Eaton although there are no supporting documents to this link.  Having said this, Mugford, the Boutflour’s and the Eaton’s knew each other before and during the tragedy which is well documented.  You can draw your own conclusions about what this coincidence might mean.

Boutflour also states that Essex Police officers told him details of the case in confidence which should never been revealed to a member of the public. He notes in his statements that he was angry that the police had not found any evidence to suggest that the tragedy was anything other than a murder suicide. He also details Jeremy as “resisting family assistance” but this is untrue; Jeremy had given Ann Eaton permission to access White House Farm in his absence with a set of keys he provided for her, he had also sent her a bunch of flowers thanking her for support. [17]

Robert Boutflour details that Jeremy had been trying to get Sheila to load the rifle in front of June and Pamela but Pamela made no such recollection of the incident in her statements.  Jeremy denied ever doing this.  It is now known that Sheila’s fingerprints were found on the bullet cases of the cartridges and this was not disclosed. [18]  One can only postulate that the police told Robert Boutlfour about this and in an attempt to explain it he made a statement of how Shiela’s fingerprints came to be on the bullet cases.  He had been adamant that the farmer’s daughter would not have known how to fire the weapon.  Peter Eaton details in his draft statements to The City of London Police that he saw Sheila with a gun on a shoot in Scotland some years previous.  He also stated that he had seen photographs of Sheila holding a gun. [19]  

In fact most of the relatives in the case made up to three draft statements before submitting their final draft; if not illegal then this is a most unethical practice.  Nevertheless there are no draft statements or statements from Julie Mugford from either the Dickinson Review or the City of London Police Enquiry.  Mugford was certainly interviewed for the former but it is unknown whether she was interviewed for the latter.  In any case these documents remain under Public Interest Immunity. [20]  You may well ask why should this information be hidden?

Robert Boutflour details the afternoon where his son David found the Sound Moderator in the gun cupboard, saying in the exhibit evidence of his diary, that he remembered this occasion well because the late Basil Cock, who was the accountant at the time, had visited the house with them on that day, but took no interest in the moderator and was busy complaining about the finger printing dust.[21] This was the enormous mistake which the Defence never picked up on – the house had not been fingerprinted on the 10^th of August when David found the sound moderator.  The house was not fingerprinted until after the 8^th of September when Jeremy was arrested. 

It is clear that Robert Boutflour did not tell the truth in his statements, or to the court when asked about the inheritance issue. Sady Jeremy’s Defence didn’t challenge the chain of evidence for the moderator other wise so many anomalies would have been exposed.

Robert did not tell the court when they asked the vital question about his motives, that when the tragedy had occurred, he did NOT own all of the Speakman estate; but within a short period after the deaths but before the trial, curiously Mabel Speakman (June’s and Pamela’s mother) disinherited Jeremy and named Pamela as benefactor.  He concealed his motive as a key prosecution witness in giving evidence against Jeremy and ultimately benefitted upon his conviction. [22] Mabel Speakman never gave a witness statement to police as it was considered she was too ill to enter into legal documents, nevertheless she had been well enough to change her will. [23]

---

[1] 10^th September 1985, Statement, R, Boutflour

[2] 10^th September 1985, Interview, J. Bamber

[3] Nov 1986, DCI Dickinson Review

[4] 16^th December 1985, Statement, R Boutflour

[5] Question from the jury about relatives motive to lie in court

[6] 30^th September 1985, Statement, M Abel, Social Worker

[7] 28^th August 1985, Statement, E. Watson, Teacher

[8] Action 1203, Interview, Mrs Lester

[9] 3^rd August 1979, Last Will & Testament Nevill Bamber

[10] DCI Dickinson Review

[11] 18^th June 1991, Officers report, DI Hammett

[12] 2^th June 1986, Officers Report, DI Cook

[13] 10^th September 1985, Statement, R Boutflour

[14] Statement, J, Hawyward, Holmes ref 33/305

[15] 10^th September 1985, Statement, R Boutflour

[16] 9^th September 1985, Statement, J Mugford & 10^th September 1985, R Boutflour

[17] 16^th September 1985, Statement C.A Eaton

[18] 2002, Michael Turner appeal notes official disclosure by CPS

[19] Peter Eaton COLP Draft Statement

[20] DCI Dickinson Review, schedule of interviewees & Swan Confidential CPS file on J Mugford

[21]10^th August 1985, Diary of R Boutflour

[22] Jury question about Relatives motives

[23] Police actions, Bamber estate documents

Jeremy Bamber: Ann & Peter Eaton

Attrib: Jeremy Bamber's Affiliated Site: http://jeremybamber.org/

Christine ‘Ann’ Eaton is Jeremy’s maternal cousin, the daughter of Robert and Pamela Boutflour. After the tragedy at White House Farm Ann and Peter must have been concerned when Jeremy had told them that he had intended to sell off parts of the land he inherited directly from his parents.[1] Unknown to Jeremy, the Eaton’s didn’t own all of the land that they were farming.

Peter’s father had died and left this land to both Peter and his brother John. [2]  But John had plans to sell his share of the land to property developers. In a bid to help Peter and Ann, Nevill Bamber secretly bought this land from John Eaton. There was no love lost between Nevill and John and at a later stage local people recall John and Nevill arguing over land in the local pub. Nevill claimed that John had overcharged him for the land and this resulted (according to witnesses) in a drunken John Eaton punching Nevill Bamber.[3]

You can imagine Ann and Peter’s concern to know that the land that had previously been secured by Nevill was now going into Jeremy’s control and being sold on. Ann was the one driving the argument that Jeremy had killed the family. [4] The jury didn’t know anything of the secret land purchase, but must have had suspicions about the relatives and when they they asked specifically [5] if Robert Boutflour or any of the relatives had motive to say that Jeremy had told them he was going to kill his family they were not told about this purchase. The detail of this secret land purchase was only disclosed to the Defence after the 2002 appeal, but it is noted in these linked documents as part of the Dickinson Review[6] conducted during November 1986, just one month after Jeremy Bamber was convicted.

The question remains: What happened to the land which Nevill purchased from John Eaton? When the estate was eventually settled Anthony Pargeter and Jacqueline Wood inherited Nevill’s share of the estate, did they know that they had, as a result of Jeremy’s conviction, now come into ownership of a large chunk of the farm that Ann and Peter Eaton were farming?

Jeremy was also tied into a business with his relatives at the Osea Road Caravan Park. Ownership of the park was split accordingly before the tragedy, June and Pamela owning 42.5 % each and Jeremy and Ann equally owning 7.5% of shares.

[7] After Jeremy’s conviction a directors meeting was attended by two proxy’s on Jeremy’s behalf. The proxy’s wrote an account of their visit to the meeting[8] detailing that Mr Ainsley (former head of the investigation on the Bamber case as a Supt of Essex Police) was now working there, they also stated that Pamela was asking after Jeremy but this was frowned upon by other members of the family.

During the 2002 Metropolitan Police enquiry, Ainsley was questioned and interviewed in connection with his handling of the investigation, he affectionately refers to Robert Boutflour as “Bobby.”[9]  He doesn’t mention any close ties to the Boutflour’s in his statement of 1991 and 2002. Nevertheless he does detail that he had ordered a Det Supt Kennelly to carry out a review of the Bamber investigation in light of the insistence by Ann and Robert that Sheila could not have been responsible.

 “On my return from annual leave I obviously enquired of Kenneally as to the situation with the murders and he assured me that Sheila Caffell was responsible. At the beginning of September that year following a meeting with the ACC Peter Simpson I instructed Kenneally to carry out a review of the case. On Friday the 6th September at I believe 6pm a meeting was held in my office with the chief Constable R, Bunyard, Mr Peter Simpson (ACC), Det Supt Kenneally and myself. When Kenneally was asked to give us the results of his review, he stated that the evidence indicated that Sheila was responsible.”

Where is the missing report that Kennelly provided at this meeting? What was the evidence indicating that Sheila was responsible and why was this never disclosed to the Defence?

After the tragedies Jeremy sent Ann flowers to thank her for her support, she details Jeremy’s distress at the funeral and that he had been kind to her providing comfort,[10] but during this period Ann had been looking for evidence to connect him with the tragedy, she approached the police saying that she was concerned that Jeremy had killed the family. [11] She asked Jeremy if she could take his mother’s engagement ring and was annoyed that Jeremy had refused. [12] She did later take some other property from the house despite Jeremy asking her not to do so. It is true that June Bamber had not made any provision in her will for Robert, Pamela or Ann but had awarded David £100. June had specified that her jewellery be given to Jeremy and Sheila upon her death. June had also awarded Jean Bouttell £1000 for her services as a housekeeper.[13]

Ann made it clear in her statements to Essex Police, the City of London Police, and contemporaneous note cards that she didn’t like Jeremy and questions his sexuality and further describing his friend Brett Collins as a ‘Ponce’ and a ‘poof’ and further police had made notes calling Jeremy a ‘poof’ and even Suzettte Ford, Jeremy’s ex partner, had detailed that the press and police had suggested to her that Jeremy might be a homosexual.[14]

In Ann Eaton’s City of London Police statement she relays her visit with the family to see the Chief Inspector who originally headed the investigation. At a meeting in his office she had suggested to him that Sheila hadn’t been capable of killing the family and says that DCI “Taff” Jones had responded angrily:

 “I believe it was at this point that DCI (Taff) Jones went very red in the face, stood up and said, in an extremely angry manner ‘I don’t have to put up with this and stop writing.’ [sic] And threatened to throw us out of the police station,” she goes on to say that she remembers David and Anthony talking to DCI Jones: “All I can remember now was David and Anthony talking to them and I do remember the police saying, “Now do you believe Sheila could have done it?” “Anthony or David or both agreed (in front of Jones) there and then that perhaps Sheila could have been capable of carrying out the shootings.”[15]

It is hardly surprising that DCI Jones would not entertain the idea of it being 5 murders, he must have seen convincing evidence the Sheila was responsible. Both DS Jones and DCI Jones had also said to Ann who insisted Jeremy was guilty “But you might be so wrong” and “If you accused him and later found out you were wrong, how would you feel then?” DCI Jones, was later removed from the case, being replaced with Supt Ainsley, later DCI Jones died tragically in an accident in May 1986 before the trial.

Peter Eaton details in his handwritten draft statements to the City of London Police that he saw Sheila using a gun on a shooting holiday in Scotland, but this was crossed out with the word “NO” written over the top of it and did not appear in the final Statement to police.[16

]

Ann Eaton and the Bamber’s housekeeper, Jean Bouttell, cleaned the house after the police cleaners had finished. Ann Eaton details in her 16^th September 1985 Statement,

“12^th August 1985. I took my daughter Sarah Jane to White House Farm, Tolleshunt Darcy by Car. I met my father at the house and Jean, the housekeeper and Barbara Wilson, the farm secretary was also there. About Coffee time, 10:30am to 11am I telephoned Jeremy at Head Street, Goldhanger and asked him if he wanted to come to White House Farm for coffee. Jeremy agreed to come to white House Farm and I recall telling him that all members of the family had been to White House Farm. About 10 to 15 minutes later Jeremy and his girlfriend Julie arrived at White House Farm. Shortly before he actually arrived my daughter and I re-made beds in the twins room.”

Few women would take their own 8 year old child to make up the beds where two children had been shot to death just five days earlier. Usually, after such a tragedy the house would be knocked down out of respect of the memory of those who died. I personally believe the Henry Smith Trust should be criticised for not creating a place of memorial for the Bamber family on the plot where the house still stands. Instead the Eaton family has firmly established themselves in the rented house and farm where they still reside today.

Ann and David said that when the police left an arsenal of guns in the farm house, they took all of these to her house for safe keeping and they informed police that they had done this.[17] What Ann doesn’t say is that she gave Jeremy two weapons, a 12 bore shotgun which was taken to Southerby’s[18] and a.410 shotgun which he took back to the farm house. This baffled DI Cook when he returned to the scene on the 9^th of September 1985, because police didn’t expect to find any weapons there. Ann had been saying she was afraid of Jeremy.[19] And this is documented in statements that she was “afraid for her life.” It is unlikely then, that Ann was as frightened as she says in her statements, as she would hardly take two shotguns around to a man she thought had just shot 5 people to death. The police never recorded how and when the .410 shotgun got back into White House Farm.[20] Even more curiously then is the property register detailing that DS Barlow had the .410 shotgun and put it into the police gun cupboard at the station where it stayed from the 24^th August 1985. One thing is for sure – someone is not telling the truth. [21]

The Eaton’s and Boutflour’s as key prosecution witnesses and main beneficiaries to the Bamber estate, dined with Essex Police [22] and the City of London police[23] at White House Farm which is documented in officers reports.

Peter Eaton describes the how he handed DS Stan Jones one of the sound moderator’s for examination he says that he drank a considerable amount of whiskey with him, then threw the sound moderator into the boot of his car and drove off. The relationship between Essex Police and the family had grown since Robert’s Boutflour’s visit to ACC Simpson, and contrasted sharply with that of the late DCI Thomas Jones. Ann also details in her City of London Police Statement that another uniformed officer called Andrew Skillen was a then a good friend and “still is”.

Before the trial Ann had given details in her statements of information that the police had told her.[24] This is marked in brackets as hearsay evidence and was to be removed before the statements were submitted to the court. These have now been disclosed and reveal a wealth of confidential police information that should not have been repeated to Ann Eaton. For example in her 16^th of December 1985 statement she said “On Friday the 9^th of August I had a discussion with police officers at Witham Police Station where I was told that a total of 24 rounds had been discharged from the rifle.”

In another statement made to the City of London Police Ann details “It was the policeman DC Mick Clark I think, who told me Sheila and Aunt June were on the bed with a gun between them and a bible on Sheila’s Chest.”

This is an unusual statement, firstly, why was a police officer giving a member of the public details about the tragedy? And secondly this position of the bodies contradicts photographs taken by Police, these images show Sheila and June both on the floor either side of the bed, the bible lay next to Sheila and the gun across her body. Ann Eaton also goes on to say “I could have imagined Sheila Blasting everybody with a 12 bore because this was what I had been told.” Curiously Ann had immediately formed realistic images of Sheila killing the family with a shotgun and not the low velocity .22 Anshuttz that was actually used.

By their own admisssion the Eaton’s and Boutflour’s searched White House Farm in an attempt to find evidence to incriminate Jeremy Bamber. They claim that they found the sound moderator for the murder weapon in the gun cupboard on the 10th of August although there are a number of documents to counteract the claim that it was given to the police on the 12^th of August, it is possible that the moderator was only given to the police on the 11^th of September.[25] .

The Moderator would become the key prosecution exhibit as it was claimed by the prosecution that Sheila’s blood was found inside it.

At the 2002 appeal it was confirmed that Sheila’s DNA did not appear in the moderator, but that didn’t mean it never was there, it could have just been swabbed away by the testing over the years, which is a questionable proposition. There were also questions over innocent contamination, nevertheless Sheila’s blood group was never present in the moderator only the enzyme present in her blood, which is also present in some humans including Robert and David Boutflour (who handled the moderator) and Ann Eaton, it is also present in farm vermin such as rabbits. [26]

In 1991 The City of London Police visited Ann Eaton at White House Farm. She called them after their first visit to tell them that she had discovered ‘new evidence’ which police officers must have missed during their investigation.[27]

This new evidence from Ann Eaton was obtained by the City of London Police, the results have never been disclosed as undoubtedly they would not support the prosecution’s case and this would have undermined Ann Eaton’s credibility as a witness.

 

After the trial, the Eaton’s moved into White House Farm, but Jeremy believes it is likely they moved in sooner. In Jeremy Bamber’s Interview with The Times in 2010 David James Smith details that

 “For many years Bamber has hinted at what he is now claiming. He told me he believes his cousins, motivated by the £400,000 estate, manufactured evidence against him, perjured themselves in court and conspired with the police to have him convicted and do him out of his inheritance. Bamber was disinherited on conviction and the estate passed to the Boutflours . . . . Ann Eaton moved into the farm not long after the murders and still lives there with her family. Bamber told me he thought she was a ‘sick puppy’ for doing that. Eaton would not talk to me for this article – indeed, after I wrote her a polite letter I received a “warning” call from an Essex Police Detective Superintendent asking me to leave her alone, which I did – but David Bouflour was generous and spoke to me at length. It is clear he doesn’t understand his sisters actions either, how could she? Boutflour told me he knew Ann’s children had suffered nightmares. As well you might” Smith goes on to detail “Anthony Pargeter has waged his own long legal struggle against the estate, to claim what he believes is his share. . . . Bamber was downgraded some years ago from a Category 'A' prisoner to Category 'B' meaning he was not such a risk of escape his conditions could be slightly relaxed. He was upgraded again to Category 'A' apparently after his cousins received guidance from Essex Police on how they might make their feelings about his change of status known.”

The relatives had made these submissions after the City of London Police Enquiry had shaken them with their endless questioning which Ann had said was making her ill after the police interviewed her in the kitchen at White House Farm where her uncle’s body had been found, odd then that she lived in this house since 1986 but never felt upset until the police came to question her about her involvement in the case.

 

In 2002 the Metropolitan police attended White House Farm to see if they could obtain any DNA evidence from the farm as many of the furnishings, fittings and decorations still remained as they were on the night of the tragedy, indeed in 2004 Ann Eaton showed a camera crew from ITV1 around the house where 5 of her relatives died without her batting an eyelid. The Kitchen was as it had been and so was much of the house. Previously Ann had also worked with a television company to make a drama on the tragedy for ITV1 where she was portrayed by actress Diane Keen, she has also worked with authors of books on the case and other documentary makers. Ann Eaton has actively courted the media and gained notoriety and money as a result of Jeremy Bamber’s conviction.

In the master bedroom of White House Farm the Metropolitan police pulled up carpets and obtained DNA from the floor boards. DS Grater examined the bedroom at White House Farm in 2002 and said:

“I took possession of a bedside lamp which had apparent areas of dark staining on the lampshade. This lamp was in the main bedroom on top of the bedside cabinet to the right of the bed. I recognized this lamp from the scene photographs taken in 1985 as being identical to a bedside lamp which was in the main bedroom on the night of the murders.”[28]

Curiously, for 17 years Ann and Peter Eaton had preserved so much from the tragedy including a potentially bloodied lamp. In addition to this the wall paper was also the same in 2002 as seen in these crime scene photographs the master bedroom has barely changed at all.

 

 

[1] 8^th September 1985, Statement J, Mugford & 16^th September 1985, Statement C. A Eton

[2] November 1986, P. Eaton Interview, DCI Dickinson

[3] Police Action Report 113

[4] Peter Eaton Statement to COLP

[5] Question from the Jury about relatives motive to lie

[6] DCI Dickinson Review Para 44

[7] 13^th December 1985, High Courts of Justice, Probate June & Nevill Bamber

[8] Annual General Meeting, Osea Road Caravan Park, October 1996, Proxy account

[9] Ainsley Handwritten Holmes box 36

[10] 16^th September 1985, Statement C.A Eaton

[11] 16^th December 1985, Statement C.A Eaton

[12] 14^th August 1991, Statement, C.A. Eaton

[13] 16^th September 1985, Statement, C.A Eaton & June & Nevill Bamber’s last will and testament

[14] P06 Ann Eaton’s note cards exhibits, Sue Ford Statement 19th, September 86

[15] 14^th August 1991, Statement to COLP, C.A Eaton

[16] Peter Eaton COLP Draft Statement

[17] 13^th September 1985, Statement, C.A Eaton, 17^th December 1985, Statement, D Boutflour

[18] 18^th September 1985, Statement, J Stancliffe

[19] Ann Eaton IBID

[20] Holmes, 38/75 Forensic Property, .410 recovered from WHF, 24^th October 1985 Statement,

[21] Holmes 5/83 24^th August, 1985, Property register, entry 342

[22] 17^th November 1986, Letter R, Bunyard, Chief Inspector

[23]19^th June, 1991, Officer Reports, DCI O’Connor

[24] 16^th December 1985, Statement, C.A Eaton

[25] Jeremy Bamber Official Website, Two Sound Moderators

[26] 2002 Appeal Court Judgement

[27] 17^th June 1991, Officers Report, Supt Noakes,

[28] 5^th April 2002, Statement, DS Grater

---