Attrib: http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/how-and-why-did-sheila-do-it
There
is absolutely no question that Sheila Caffell killed her family in a
psychotic episode, this page is to detail just some of the major factors
in piecing together how and why she did it. Sheila was not the Media
character of myth, but a modern young woman who loved her children but
as a Paranoid Schizophrenic she had many delusions about them and was
frequently fearful that they might harm her. She was let down by a
system which demonstrably failed to protect her, her children and her
family from her illness. Case documents show that there was no support
for her, no meetings between herself; doctors; psychologists and her
family; or for the children's father to understand her illness. There
was no advice or information given to them or guidance on how to cope
with her condition at a practical day to day level.
Over-powering Nevill
Nevill
Bamber was a tall man at 6ft 4 inches and a healty 61 year old farmer
at that. There is the prevailing argument that Sheila Caffell at 5ft 7.5
inches and at 8.5 stones would not have been able to overpower Nevill
Bamber. We agree with this completely, in fact I would go so far to
suggest that few people would be able to overpower Nevill Bamber even at
the age of 61. Nevertheless, if you speak to a psychiatric nurse or
doctor you will hear stories of very slight and petite women in
psychotic states being so strong and out of control that they have
only eventually been restrained by a number of people.
Regardless
of this, the point that is being missed continually is that that Nevill
had almost certainly been shot before he was hit with the butt of the
rifle by Sheila. Neither has there been the consideration that Nevill
could have been unconscious or dead when he was beaten. This is not
simple conjecture. Nevill had been shot eight times and it is unclear in
which order. The injuries from bullets were to his head, and to his
arms and into the chest. [1]
Other injuries caused by a blunt object which was likely to have been
the butt of the rifle were to his face, these were around the eyes,
forehead, cheekbones and the top rear of the skull. There were some
other injuries to his right forearms and also to his upper chest.
Considering the height of Nevill Bamber’s head it is unlikely that he
was attacked whilst standing up. Nevill was found sitting down and it is
clear that Sheila attacked Nevill with the butt of the gun after he was
incapacitated while he was sitting down. The argument that Sheila
Caffell could not have overpowered Nevill Bamber is demonstrably not a
valid one.
Sheila’s Feet
Much has been made of Sheila’s appearance at the scene. I won’t detail too much about it here as there is a whole page about how the police moved Sheila’s body
and she was photographed in different positions. Crime scene
photographs of Sheila have inappropriately been put on the internet and
much has been made of her ‘cleanliness’ the Defence and some writers
have suggested that she had washed ritualistically. This is of course a
possibility. I however, would like to approach this matter in a
different way. Sheila was photographed next to the bed on the floor. She
has a considerable amount of blood down the right hand side of her body
indicating that she was sitting upright when the first shot was fired
and the blood ran down her body before the second shot entered, and the
pathologist testified she would not have been killed outright after the first shot but would have been able to even stand and walk around for a while.
The
problem with photographs which have appeared on the internet is that
they are of extreme low quality, some are photographs taken of
photographs before the digital age, and it is difficult to pick out any
detail. An example of the quality difference between these and the
recently developed high resolution images (using £60,000 worth of
equipment) is illustrated by the photograph on the right. These socks
were found next to Sheila’s body. It is a possibility that Sheila was
wearing these socks and took them off before shooting herself. Moreover,
this picture shows blood spots on the socks which are light blue. In
pictures seen elsewhere on the internet the socks look dark blue or
black. There is no detail of the blood on them. Passing judgement of the
condition of Sheila's body is difficult without expert forensic advice
and high quality photographs.
Conveniently, the crime scene
pictures and the mortuary pictures do not show the sole of her right
foot at all and the fact that individual photographs were deliberately
cut from the strips before disclosure by Essex Police[2]
is one I won’t go into here, but again the left foot looks relatively
clean apart from some bloodspots. Nevertheless the high resolution
images of Sheila’s feet taken at the scene and at the mortuary show
blood on the sole of Sheila’s left foot, it is clear from these pictures
that she has walked in blood. The argument that there was a large pool
of blood around Nevill Bamber’s body is a valid one, but this amount
would have poured from him for some time, and long after Sheila had
walked away from his body. The kitchen floor outside of this pool was
clear of blood. The overturned sugar was confined to a small area, so
there is no reason why Sheila Caffell would have had sugar or excessive
amounts of blood on her feet.
Location of her body
Sheila
was found on the floor on her father’s side of the bed. What strongly
suggests that Sheila committed suicide is the fact that she had calmly
laid down on the floor. The argument that Jeremy had persuaded Sheila to
sit down or lie down calmly on the floor while he positioned the gun
awkwardly under her chin is quite ridiculous. If as the prosecution
state, Sheila Caffell was not in a psychotic state, then why did she not
fight Jeremy to save the lives of her family and children? Why did
Jeremy not have Defence wounds on his arms like the ones on Nevill
Bamber had which correspond with those on Sheila Caffell’s arm? The
location of Sheila’s body could have had psychological significance for
Sheila at the time she died but we will never know what this was. And
why would Jeremy, an alleged clever and calculating murderer, march
Sheila into her parent’s bedroom shoot her twice and expect to pass it
off as a suicide? It was just illogical and as the pathologist suggested
for Sheila to have been killed by someone else she would have needed to
have been drugged, but tests confirmed she had no sedatives in her
body.
Gun Residue
When
the rifle was fired it gave off lead residue. There were swabs taken at
the mortuary and sent to the lab but these were rejected owing to
contamination issues, but they had their exhibit reference number
altered and then they were sent back by police and accepted.[3]
These showed very low levels of lead when tested and the prosecution
insisted this proved that although there was lead present on her hands,
it was not enough for someone who had fired 25 rounds. But tests show
that just by wiping your hands on a cloth you can reduce the lead levels
considerably. It is not possible to conclude that Sheila did not handle
the rifle. Blood on Sheila’s Hands Sheila’s
hands were not clean as the prosecution claimed. Again there are no
photographs disclosed of the undersides of her hands. One could wonder
why that is? It is possible that she had washed them as people in
psychotic states do undertake cleaning rituals. Nevertheless, high
resolution photographs of her hands show blood on the front of her right
hand and also on the front and sides of her fingers. There is now no
reasonable argument that Sheila’s hands and feet were clean of blood.
Sheila’s Nails
Contrary
to another popular myth, Sheila’s nails were not ‘perfectly manicured’
they were long red painted nails and although it appears they are
intact, the polish has been chipped badly, and the same can be said of
her toe nails. Part of her toe nail polish was found on the floor in the
kitchen below the mantle placing Sheila at the scene of the attack on
Nevill in the kitchen. Forensic expert Peter Sutherst confirmed this
“The red object is not paint from the mantle shelf. It is more likely to
be a particle of red nail varnish from Sheila Caffell’s right foot
since it is a close match in hue to her varnish and also matches damage
to the varnish on her right big toe.”[4] As you can see from the page on the rifle,
it was very easy for anyone to use, it was lightweight and having long
fingernails is not an issue for millions of women who work in a variety
of jobs, clean the house and look after children. The prosecution
argument about Sheila’s nails being an impediment to her dexterity was
simply not a valid one. DNA Exhibits
All
DNA exhibits including Sheila’s night dress (apart from the moderator)
were destroyed in 1996 and dumped at an incineration site off the North
Circular Road in London despite a court order to preserve them,[5]
no one has been investigated or charged for this act in the destruction
of valuable exhibits in a case where a whole life tariff prisoner
maintains innocence.
Sheila Didn’t know how to use a gun
It
is an absurd suggestion that the daughter of a farmer, who grew up on a
farm during the 60’s and 70’s before gun laws were tightened, who had a
brother who used rifles and who herself went to shooting parties did
not know how to fire a weapon. This aside, even if Sheila had never
actually picked up a gun before, there was one sitting on the settle in
front of her in the scullery on the night of the tragedies, the magazine
loaded and ready to fire and more bullets on the side waiting to be
used. The family were are all shot at very close range, most shots
within a few inches, the furthest being 4 feet away. In a phrase similar
to that of author Scott Lomax: “at this distance how could anyone be
expected to miss?” David Boutflour and Anthony Pargeter had already agreed with DCI Jones in a meeting that Sheila was capable of carrying out the killings.[6]
Both of them were experienced in the use of firearms. David told the
court, after being asked repeatedly by Mr Rivlin QC for the Defence,
that he thought he had seen Sheila firing off a gun at a shooting party
in Scotland, though in the first part of the transcript he appears not
to remember it at all! Peter Eaton
told the City of London Police he too had seen Sheila with a gun but
this only appears in his handwritten drafts and is omitted from the
final typed statement. Sheila’s Background
Sheila
Caffell was a divorced mother of two whom previously had a successful
modelling career even having breast enhancements to help pursue her
work. Sheila had had a number of pregnancies, including a miscarriage
and two abortions, the first when she was 15 years old and another one
whilst she was dating Colin Caffell before they married. Her
relationship with Colin had broken down while she was in hospital for a
long period owing to complications whilst carrying the twins and Colin
by his own admission met another woman before the twins were born.
Jeremy say’s that Sheila suffered what he now realizes was post natal
depression. It is well documented that postpartum psychosis can lead to
long-term psychotic disorders, particularly as Sheila had also been a
user of cocaine, amphetamine and cannabis.[7]
Sheila a single parent, the Twins & Social Services
Sheila
has frequently been described as a socialite and part of the “Chelsea
Set.” This might have been true in her earlier days, but Sheila had
become ill and this was beginning to impact upon her relationship with
her friends, family and children.
The
trail of Sheila’s contact with social services can only traced back in
documents as far as the 1st of August 1981, there were concerns by
social workers at this point about her ability to seek medical advice
promptly when the twins were ill and there are references to Daniel
sustaining scalds and a burn to parts of his body including his torso
and face, and having an unattended ear infection. Sheila was described
as forgetful and disorganized but there were no notes made about her
having a psychiatric illness at this time and her GP had confirmed that
she had been taking prescribed sedatives. [8]
The
next conference on file was during March 1982 where it is stated that
the children were being fostered by day foster parents, this is contrary
to what the relatives had told police, although there are no notes as
to the specific reason for fostering, and again there are no details as
to why Sheila was admitted twice to hospital up until this point. One
can’t help feeling that already social services were not investigating
the cause of injuries to the children or assessing the cause of Sheila’s
admissions to hospital which might have alerted them to the fact that
there were issues with Sheila’s mental health and that the children were
in danger. [9]
There are no references to suggest that they might have discussed the
twins well being with their father, it is baffling as to why this was
not done.
Sheila had a number of social workers allocated to her
during this period and they were involved in organizing day nursery
places for the boys. One social worker described Sheila as being
“Nervous, and lacked confidence.” He goes on to note that she was a
heavy cigar smoker although at this time he felt that her care of the
children was “adequate” which would imply she was just about sufficient
in managing to care for the children. During December 1982 the case was
closed.
On the 4th of May 1983, Nicholas sustained a head injury which was caused “it was thought by him falling from a taxi” [10]
The police were involved and confirmed this had happened. Sue Ford,
then girlfriend of Jeremy Bamber, stated that Jeremy had told her
Nicholas has been injured when Sheila had pushed him from the taxi. Sue
Ford also details in her statements that Farhad “Freddie” Emami had told
her that Sheila used to punch the boys in the face and that Jeremy was
concerned that Sheila was unable to cope and had expressed a wish to
help look after the children, but he had little time to do this with him
often working long hours on the farm in Essex and Sheila and the twins
living in London.[11]
On
1st June 1983 Sheila had contacted social services but there are no
records of what this call was about or even if this call and the
problems were followed up.
Sheila Caffell was then referred to a
private psychologist at St Andrews Hospital in Northampton during
August 1983. Dr Hugh Ferguson, stated that this was the first time he
had seen her and diagnosed her “as in a state of acute psychosis.” After
about four weeks of treatment he says she was discharged. Below is an
extract from The SANE.org web site about the condition, this gives us an
insight into how Sheila was thinking, what she was experiencing and the
causes of psychotic episodes. Confused thinking
When acutely ill, people with psychotic symptoms experience disordered
thinking. The everyday thoughts that let us live our daily lives become
confused and don’t join up properly.
Delusions A delusion is a false belief held by a person which is not held by others of the same cultural background.
Hallucinations
The person sees, hears, feels, smells or tastes something that is not
actually there. The hallucination is often of disembodied voices which
no one else can hear.
What causes psychosis?
The
causes of psychosis are not fully understood. They are likely to be a
combination of hereditary and other factors. It is probable that some
people are born with a predisposition to develop this kind of illness,
and that certain things — for example, stress or use of drugs such as
marijuana, LSD or speed — can trigger their first episode.
Some
people experience a brief form of psychosis which lasts only a few days
or weeks. Some people experience a few episodes of psychosis only. Some
people experience psychosis associated with a longer-term illness such
as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.
Listen to this podcast on psychosis.[12]
Sheila
was diagnosed with the condition of Paranoid Schizophrenia. This
illness is chronic, and it needed to be managed in the long term by
medication and contact with a psychiatric nurse. Short term care in
specialist hospitals can be ineffective because, often the patient has a
relapse within a fairly short time period. Dr Ferguson had recommended
that Nevill transfer her to the care of the NHS as he had been paying
for private treatment.
The
Bamber family were worried about Sheila’s condition. Nevill, June and
Jeremy had very little understanding of her illness. This was because of
a number of factors. Firstly, Nevill and June wanted to keep Sheila’s
illness very low key, and it is likely they thought that after a short
spell in hospital the problem would be ‘fixed.’ They had not told the
rest of the family the extent of her condition and socially they were
middle class and affluent, they were considered as pillars of the
community, they would have been subconsciously concerned for Sheila and
her children having to cope with the added social stigma of being
mentally ill as well as suffering from the condition itself.
The
Bamber’s, like many families suffered in silence with little knowledge.
Because of Doctor-Patient confidentiality Nevill, June and Jeremy (and
social services) had no idea that Sheila had thoughts about harming
herself or of harming her children – but these thoughts are very real
and are documented. Jeremy himself knew that Sheila was ill, but he had
no idea of how to cope with her psychotic episodes and again had no
knowledge of the thought’s she was having which she had already shared
with her psychologist.
Returning to Sheila’s contact with social
services, the records log again in September 1983 the nursery for the
twins had contacted them expressing concern for the children as they had
heard that Sheila was in hospital. The twins were then absent from the
nursery for a month and it is noted that Social Services “presumed” the
twins were with Sheila’s parents. Then on the 7th of October Sheila
contacted social services herself by phone and explained that she “had
recovered from a 3 month breakdown” She told them that she was concerned
for the care of her children and stated that at the time her husband
had no suitable accommodation. Social services seldom mention Colin
Caffell the children’s father, and it seems from statements disclosed by
that no attempt was made by Social Services to contact him to discuss
the children’s well being. During 1985 Colin had the children only three
days a week and says in his unedited police statement of the 11th
September 1985, that he was concerned about Sheila's associates and that
her psychologist had contacted him directly to discuss this issue,
Colin was not alerted to the fixed false belief's Sheila held about the
children. Clearly the lack of communication between Sheila’s doctors,
social services and her family, compounded the events building up to the
tragedies.
Dr Ferguson knew that Sheila Caffell had a serious
mental illness having diagnosed psychosis and yet no one had alerted
social services to this fact. Sheila would naturally be concerned over
the care for her children and clearly did not want Social Services to
know about the seriousness of her medical condition, preferring to refer
to her psychosis as a “breakdown” which would imply something less
serious, but she had admitted that she had been in St Andrews
psychiatric hospital. Nevertheless, Sheila was reaching out for help and
trying her best to obtain it from social services.
Sheila
missed a meeting with the social worker on the 23th October 1983, but
she was finally seen at her home on the 21st November 1983. Sheila
wanted to take up a Hotel Receptionist course and was worried about the
care of her children. The social worker did not note any problems or
injuries to the children at this time, but noted that Sheila lacked
confidence and was worried about having another episode of “depression.”
At this point the case was closed.
Maybe
if we were to look comparatively at Social Services handling of
Sheila’s case with the same signs in today’s society we would feel that
social services had not handled Sheila’s case well at all. There are no
documents from Social Services appearing before 1982, and no statements
have been obtained by the Defence from Dr Dodd’s, Sheila’s doctor who
referred her from his Camden practice to Social Services, so we don't
have a clear picture of Sheila's full medical history and cannot trace
her earlier contact with social services.
The
warning signs appear above and social services should have been called
back into the case long before the tragedies in August 1985, but this
never happened.
Sheila & Farhad “Freddie” Emami
Sheila
had met Freddie, a mature 41 year old, back in 1981. Although he is
often described as Sheila’s boyfriend, Freddie was married and called
himself Sheila’s confidant and friend, to whom she turned to for help
and advice. Freddie said that Sheila had a “deep dislike” for her mother
June. [13]
He described Sheila as having “a very quick and violent temper which
she would lose over the simplest things.” He also says that about 10
months before the tragedies Sheila became depressed and withdrawn, he
also said that she would not discuss all of her problems with him, but
whenever she returned from staying at White House Farm she would be even
more depressed because of June preaching to her about her lifestyle.
Colin Caffell also said that Sheila had a quick temper and that Sheila’s
condition always deteriorated rapidly after visiting her parents.[14] According to Freddie, June did not approve with Sheila “making love” with boyfriends and said that she "should remember God."
Freddie
said that before her “first breakdown” she blamed herself for Nicholas
falling out of a taxi because she was not concentrating and only
thinking of her mother’s “religious rantings.” Freddie did not have
contact with Sheila during the period she was being treated. It was
alleged by other witnesses that Freddie was involved in drugs. About a
month after Sheila came out of St Andrews for the first time, she
contacted Freddie and he gave her money. He said she appeared well but
he could see that she had not completely recovered. He goes on to
describe an incident which occurred the following time he went to her
apartment. Freddie describes one of Sheila’s psychotic episodes which
started during a call with a friend. Here is what Freddie says:
“During
the call the phone went dead. Sheila suddenly became hysterical,
mumbling about the phone being bugged. She became like someone possessed
ranting and raving. She was striking herself and beating the wall with
her fists. I tried to calm her but she did not seem to hear me. I became
extremely frightened not only for her but for myself. She kept talking
about the Devil and God, and stated that God was sitting opposite her
and unlike what her step mother said he in fact loved her. I contacted
her ex-mother in law and asked her to come round. This aggravated the
situation and Sheila became even more violent and abusive. Her mother in
law called and found a prescription for Sheila’s drugs and asked me to
get them for her. I went to the chemist and when I retuned I was met at
the front door by the mother in law who was leaving. She told me Sheila
had kicked her out. I went in and tried to pacify Sheila but was unable
to do so. I became extremely concerned for my own safety. I telephoned
Sheila’s Doctor and a short while later one of her partners arrived.
Sheila refused to let him examine her shouting that he was trying to
poison her. By this time she had become completely irrational. The
doctor eventually left without being able to do anything. Being unable
to do anything I contacted another doctor who arrived shortly
afterwards. Again he was unable to do anything because Sheila would not
allow him near her.
He wrote a short note which he handed to me
and asked me to hand to Sheila’s GP and gave her a stronger drug, whilst
the first doctor was there Tara’s husband called to collect his
daughter who was staying with Sheila. I had arranged for this as I felt
something nasty might happen. I was extremely scared for everyone’s
safety. At that time I felt that Sheila may use violence towards
someone."
Freddie goes on to say that after Sheila came out of
hospital he discussed that episode with her and she could not remember
anything about it and that she believed he had made it up. He also
recalled that during the psychotic episode he witnessed ,Sheila could
not recognise anyone who came to the flat and “believed everyone was
trying to hurt or kill her.”
It is very obvious even to an
untrained observer, that Sheila was very ill, it is also clear that her
delusions were very real to her, it would also follow that if one is of
the belief that someone is trying to hurt or kill you then you might
adopt “attack is the best form of Defence.” For a woman who was
seriously ill to be living in a house with an arsenal of weapons and
ammunition (which she definitely knew how to use) I have no doubt in
saying this was a very dangerous situation. Leaving guns around the
house was irresponsible, and we know from individuals independent of
Jeremy that Nevill did leave guns around the house, Michael Deckers for
example stated: “There was always a gun at the farm in the first room as
you walked in.”[15]
Anthony Pargeter had told the court he left his rifle at the farm in
the downstairs toilet, police found weapons in the upstairs and
downstairs office leaning against the wall when they raided the house.[16]
Even if these weapons were not left out they were only in a standard
cupboard under the stairs where Sheila could have accessed them at any
time.
Sheila’s hospitalisation, medication, and the Statements of Dr Ferguson
Part
of client patient confidentiality meant that Nevill and June Bamber
would not have been made aware of the thoughts that Sheila was having.
It is only in Dr Feguson’s Statements, some of which were undisclosed at
trial, as were Sheila’s medical records and diaries, that we start to
understand the thoughts that she was having.
Dr Ferguson had
diagnosed acute psychosis and later confirmed Schizophrenia. He
described her as “a difficult patient to treat but once on medication
and mending well became a completely different person” Dr Ferguson also
said that he was not happy about her leaving the hospital so soon and
felt she needed follow up visits from a psychiatric nurse.
In his statement of the 8th of August 1985 he describes her treatment at St Andrews during 1983:
“I
found that Sheila had bizarre delusions about posesson by the devil and
complex ideas about having sex with her twin sons. She thought the sons
would seduce her and saw evil in both of them. In particular she
thought Nicholas was a woman hater and potential murderer. These
feelings expressed where clear symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia.”
Dr
Ferguson details in his 30th of September 1985 statement, which was not
referred to at trial and was not even typed up, “Her delusional ideas
on admission included her boyfriend Freddie being the devil: there was a
very religious basis to her delusional thinking. Her psychotic symptoms
receded briefly on medication but when this was reduced she again
flared up into paranoid interpretations of the nursing staff, becoming
at times quite hostile and believing that she was being monitored and
televised, and that there was an attempt by the devil to take away her
godliness, with many people around her being seen to be involved in the
conspiracy.”
He goes on:
“I have been shown an
extract from the statement of her boyfriend Freddie in which he
describes her violent conduct immediately preceding her admission on 3rd
March 1985. I had no knowledge of her using physical violence at any
time but someone in her condition faced with what she regarded as real
pressing fears could respond with physical aggression directed to
property, to herself or to others. There is no reason to doubt what
Freddie says.”
When shown the statement of another witness to Sheila’s behaviour he states:
“I
have been shown and have read the statement made by HELEN GRIMSTER in
which Sheila is described on 30th March as having been “very strange”,
talking of having contemplated suicide on more than one occasion and of
her belief that she was a white witch and had to get rid of evil in the
world. Whilst I have no knowledge of this conversation other than what I
have read I would regard these abnormalities as consistent with the
condition from which she suffered.”
In reference to drug abuse and fostering he said:
“I
have referred in my previous statements to Sheila’s use of cannabis and
cocaine. Whilst these drugs themselves would not have any effect upon
the medication prescribed I was concerned about her using them and
advised her strongly not to. Such drugs can alter the perception of the
user, chemically producing disturbed perceptions. In the case of a
schizophrenic patient such drugs can potentially aggravate the existing
psychosis. I have been asked to express an opinion as to how she might
have reacted if she became aware of a proposal to remove the children
from her care. I would expect a very negative reaction. She would resist
it in any way she knew. It would threaten whatever precarious balances
she had. Her precise responses would be difficult to predict: she could
have withdrawn into depression or have become angry and vitriolic.”
“Whilst
in 1983 she expressed fears of harming or doing violence to her
children that fear did not seem to recur. I find it difficult to
conceptualise her harming her children or her father but I could
conceive of her harming her mother or herself. Of course I cannot state
categorically that she was incapable of doing harm to her family.”
The mystery of this 30th September 1985 statement remains: Why was this last statement not disclosed at the trial?
As
we know Sheila had become ill and at times appeared ‘well’ again but
Schizophrenia is an illness which has to be managed effectively by
institutions, psychiatric treatment and psychologists over long periods
and also by including the use of regular medications to stabilize
moods, drugs are not always successful in treating the symptoms of
hearing voices and having delusions. It is a condition which one has to
‘live with’ and it does not just correct itself or go away over night
and the illness has a stronger hold on younger people than those who are
older. It is an illness which has both "positive" symptoms which are
hallucinations, delusion, etc and "negative" symptoms such as social
awkwardness and withdrawal. All of these had been displayed by Sheila.
Sheila's Medication
Haloperidol
is an anti-psychotic medication very commonly prescribed during the 80s
and 90s. The dosage is adjusted for each individual so that the
psychosis is controlled but the patient is not overly troubled with the
well-known possible side-effects like muscle stiffening. However, not
all patients will have these side-effects. Haloperidol can be given by
injection or orally. There is an advantage to giving injection - it
ensures that the patient receives the medication as not all patients
will comply in taking oral medication. If and when side-effects occur
they can be reduced by another medication - Procyclidine which is taken
orally either as a regular medication or on an "if necessary" basis. Dr
Angeloglou stated [16a] that Sheila had been prescribed Procyclidine on
29 April (three months before the killings) when she received 120 x 5mg
tablets which could be taken up to 10mg morning and evening. According
Dr Angeloglou she was not given any more which carries a clear
implication that she was not affected by the Haloperidol side-effects.
It
was common practice to also prescribe an anti-depressant because
anti-psychotic medication can cause the patient's mood to "dip".
Depression and suicide are well-documented as being associated with
Schizophrenia, for this reason Sheila was prescribed Anafranil 10mg x 1
to be taken at night, later increased to 10mg x 3 to be taken at night
but these were last prescribed to her on the 15th of January 1985. Sheila
Caffell was prescribed 200mg IM (intra-muscular) injection on a monthly
basis by Dr Ferguson and this was administered on 2 May and 11 June.
She complained to Dr Ferguson that she was unable to sleep and he then
recommended that she should be given the reduced dose of 150mg at her 11
July appointment. Both Dr Angeloglou and Dr Wilkinson say in their
statements that Dr Wilkinson had only administered 100mg. So Sheila’s
dosage was halved which is not in accordance with usual practice
guidelines - dosages should be adjusted in smaller increments, it is
unclear why the dosage administered was below that recommended by Dr
Ferguson. So by the 7th of August, when the tragedy happened, the
effectiveness of her last injection would have worn off and her
psychotic symptoms would have been poorly controlled and the possibility
of any side-effects would also have diminished, thus she would have
experienced no difficulties with co-ordination. The prosecution had
argued that muscle co-ordination would have rendered Sheila unable to
load the rile and fire it at close range, based on the now fully
disclosed statements above we know that she would have had no physical
problems carrying out the shootings.
Dr Ferguson even stated that she was “fairly erratic in
attendance for appointments and I believe in taking her medicine.” He
also stated that her psychosis on admission to St Andrews the second
time was not drug induced but “would certainly be exacerbated by abuse
of illicit drugs. [17]
Sheila was also menstruating when the tragedy happened, it is thought
that hormonal imbalances could have contributed to the psychotic episode
which caused her to kill the family. The toxicologist reported that he
tested Sheila’s blood and urine for the following: opiates,
barbiturates, amphetamines, Lysergide (LSD), benzodiazepine drugs, and
alcohol and all tests were negative. Sheila tested positive for the
following: Cannabis in her urine, haloperidol in her liver. No drugs
were indicated in her stomach contents. So it seems likely that Sheila
had not been taking all of the the tablets prescribed to her which
included Anafranil, an antidepressant; Noctec to aid sleeping;
Procyclidine used to treat side effects of Haloperidol; Triludan for
allergic reactions. The toxicologist also reported that there would have
been interaction between Cannabis use and Haloperidol.[18]
By
2002 Dr Ferguson had made a statement to the Defence which included the
issue of a letter written by Colin Caffell to Nevill Bamber in which he
presented the scenario that he take over care of the children. Dr
Ferguson said that if Nevill had pleaded Colin Caffell’s case to Sheila
this may have had a catastrophic effect and she “may have projected on
her father a concept of evil.” Dr Ferguson had arranged for Sheila to see a psychiatric nurse
in London when she returned home, but Sheila was staying at White House
Farm in Essex. One wonders why he nor Sheila's GP had not informed
social services about the extent of her illness and advised that she and
her family would need considerable support.
Essex
police had not taken statements from a large number of Sheila's
friends. A handwritten note by DS Stan Jones states that he should take a
statement from Barbara Wilson regarding her relaying to Ann Eaton
that Sheila had told her that "all people are bad and should be killed."
Curiously, Wilson's statements show that she was never asked if Sheila
had told her this and there is no other trace of this event in the
statements of Ann Eaton. [19]
Mentally
ill women do kill their children and their families; it has become more
prevalent over the last three decades particularly in the United States
where a large portion of citizens own guns, this is a large area of
research which I won’t develop here. Moreover, there are recent cases of
mothers killing their children in the news in the UK including mentally
ill Sonia Bellfield
29, who stabbed her two year old toddler to death having been seen two
days previously by social workers. Paranoid Schizophrenic Aisling Murray
23, stabbed her daughter to death 52 times, in this case it was
believed that social services were under resourced and her social worker
was inadequately supervised. Vivian Gamor,
29 killed her children in a psychotic episode, she also had delusions
about religion very similar to Sheila. Vivian thought that Jesus was her
twin, but social services had granted her unsupervised access to her
children when she killed them. It is apparent in all cases including
that of Sheila Caffell, that Social Services inadequately assessed the
risk that these women posed to their children.
For more information on Paranoid Schizophrenia and other mental illnesses visit
References[1] 7th May 1986, Statement, Dr Vanezis
[2] Peter Sutherst report, 01.08.08, 3.1 Film strip ID
[3] Scenes of Crime exhibit list, reference numbers
[4] 22.07.10, Report, Peter Sutherst
[5] 30.03.00 Officers Report, DC Whiddon
[6] 14.08.91 Ann Eaton, COLP, Statement
[7] 30th September, 1986, Dr Ferguson Handwritten Statement.
[8]30th September, 1985, Michael Abel, Statement, Camden Social Services
[9] Ibid
[10] Ibid
[11] 16th September 1986, Statement Suzette Ford
[12] http://www.sane.org/information/factsheets-podcasts/185-psychosis
[13] 8th August 1985, Farhad Emami, Statment
[14] Over the Rainbow, 1992, Colin Caffell, Hodder & Stoughton, London, 1994
[15] Statements: J. Bouttell, Michael Deckers previously undisclosed undated.
[16] Anthony Pargeter trial transcript, 19.09.85 Statement of PC Rozga, SOCO Photographs
[16a] 12.09.85 & 20.09.85 Dr Angeloglou Statement, 09.10.85 Dr Wilkinson, Statement, collective statements of Dr Ferguson.[17] 8.8.85 Dr Ferguson, Statement
[18] 04.10.85 Alexander Allan, Toxicologist, Statement
[19] DS Jones, hand written police actions HOLMES 45/22
|
|
