Jeremy Bamber
Jeremy Bamber has written a highly informative article about his experiences in dealing with the CCRC over a long period of time and he clearly has extensive first-hand knowledge to impart[1].
Among a number of revelations he outlines how the police have successfully infiltrated the CCRC and, in effect, managed the process of controlling the ‘investigations’ into his applications over the years, especially from 2004 onwards. What is astonishing is that the CCRC eventually admitted to Jeremy Bamber that:
“The Commission informed me that working on my case was a former Essex Police officer. They did not give us his name but assured us that he had no connection with the original investigation in 1985/6.”
I had to read that statement twice just to absorb the full impact of what Jeremy Bamber was saying.
How could a body that is supposedly dedicated to correcting wrongful convictions put a police officer from Essex Constabulary in charge of investigating a case that revolves around allegations of malfeasance by Essex Police? Even if the retired officer was the most honest individual imaginable, it is still unfathomable why he should be allowed anywhere near the Jeremy Bamber submission.
This was not any old, retired police officer, but a very senior officer with intimate knowledge and a connection to the original case. As Jeremy Bamber states:
“...an ex-Detective Chief Superintendent who had been in charge of Case 253 (88), in which four key prosecution witnesses against me at trial were allowed to avoid prosecution for fraud”.[2]
It appears from what Jeremy Bamber says that the investigations into his submission to the CCRC lodged in 2004 and not concluded until 2012 were overseen by the former senior Essex Police officer!
This is astounding and the implications are deeply disturbing. What it means is that Essex Police could, in effect, direct how the CCRC would handle any allegations made by Bamber.
Essex Police would also have had knowledge of the documentation and evidence being relied upon by Jeremy Bamber in making his submission and, therefore, had an opportunity to amend or destroy any evidence known to be problematical.
Given this situation it was virtually impossible for any subsequent appeal to be successful. It is unsurprising that the CCRC rather sarcastically dismissed all of Jeremy Bamber’s submissions and refused to refer the case to the Court of Appeal in 2012. How could they make a referral when a former Essex Police officer was influencing every aspect of the investigation?
We highlighted in a previous article how the CCRC has a very cavalier attitude into the employment of former police officers.[3] The appointment of a former Essex Police officer to oversee Jeremy Bamber’s case appears to breach the CCRC’s own guidelines:
Annex Five of the CCRC Code of Conduct covers the rules regards the handling of possible conflicts of interest and/or bias, actual or perceived. It states:
"In casework matters it is not always possible to identify all potential conflicts when an application is first received. Whenever a board member or employee identifies a potential conflict at any stage of a case in which he or she may be involved, he or she should declare the potential conflict to the Director of Casework Operations. The declaration of potential conflict will be recorded in an internal register kept for the purpose" (my emphasis).
It is reasonable to ask, who at the CCRC approved the appointment of the former senior Essex Police officer to orchestrate the Jeremy Bamber submission? What influence did Essex Police bring to bear on the CCRC, or what other organisation pressurised the CCRC to employ the former Essex Police officer? What records exist of any discussions and decisions made to employ this highly biased individual?
Jeremy Bamber also says that:
“It has, so far, taken 3 years for my Case Review Manager and his Manager to review 3 of the 10 grounds of appeal that we submitted to them 36 months ago. Astonishingly, it is only very recently that my Case Review Manager (CRM) has read my submissions in full. He originally stated that, had he read my submissions in full at the beginning, that would have ‘blown his mind’. It was only after an official complaint to the Commission over what he had said to me that he was asked to read all ten grounds of appeal in full.”
Astoundingly, Jeremy Bamber’s current Senior Manager at the CCRC is another an ex-policeman who stands accused of making ‘misleading’ statements to Jeremy Bamber and his legal representatives. As Jeremy Bamber states, his current CRM had not read the submission in full. He stated that had he read my submissions in full at the beginning, that would have ‘blown his mind’.
Okay, so having belatedly read the full submission when forced to do so and having had his mind ‘blown’ by the content, what has happened? Has the CRM, presumably now convinced of Jeremy Bamber’s probable innocence and the necessity of putting the case before the Court of Appeal without further delay, told his supervisors that Jeremy Bamber’s case has great merit and should be expedited, requesting further resources to process the submission faster?
I rather doubt it.
But surely, if the submission is ‘mind-blowing’, as claimed, it supports a huge effort being made to bring the case before the Court of Appeal without any further delay? Especially given the fact that Jeremy Bamber has in effect been waiting for 20 years for the CCRC to take his case seriously.
As also suggested in a previous article[4], the tactics employed by Jeremy Bamber’s legal advisors may have been counterproductive in the sense that a vast submission of every aspect of the original case that was fictitious gives the CCRC endless excuses for delay while they ‘investigate’.
Perhaps, it is time for a tactical withdrawal of some of the grounds submitted so that the submission can be expedited?
After all, a mind-blowing exposure of the work of fiction created by ex-Detective Chief Superintendent Michael Ainsley[5] to convict Jeremy Bamber does not require every single false piece of evidence to be exposed. They could simply concentrate upon the key aspects of the case.
A final thought. CCRC – get your house in order and cease the employment of ex-police officers immediately and part company with any that you currently employ. Your credibility is shot to pieces.
[1] Jeremy Bamber's assessment of the CCRC's handling of his 3rd application: "The Criminal Cases Review Commission are no longer fit for purpose and, perhaps, they never were." (empowerinnocent.wixsite.com)
[2] The allegation of fraud had been made by the conscientious Farm Secretary, Barbara Wilson, who had witnessed how the affairs of White House Farm were being mismanaged after the tragedy. Of particular relevance to the conviction of Jeremy Bamber was ‘misleading’ testimony given by his uncle, Robert Boutflour about a possible motive for him (Boutflour) deceiving the jury about his alleged independent wealth. As Bamber says, the allegations made by Wilson were never investigated thoroughly and his relatives were permitted to asset strip the company, eventually leading to it being wound up. Close to a million pounds of assets had vanished into thin air by the time the company was dissolved and to add insult to injury, Jeremy Bamber received a bill stating that, upon liquidation, he owed almost £16,000, which constituted his 20% share of the costs of winding up the company
[3] Should ex police officers be allowed to work as Case Review Managers at the CCRC? (empowerinnocent.wixsite.com)
[4] Jeremy Bamber case update: Three years on from his latest application to the CCRC and no end in sight (empowerinnocent.wixsite.com)
[5] Retired Detective Superintendent Michael Ainsley has died - CCRC must not let justice die with him (empowerinnocent.wixsite.com)
By Bill Robertson
Bill Robertson has researched alleged miscarriages of justice for around 20 years and advised on several cases, including the most recent application to the CCRC by Jeremy Bamber.
Please let us know if you think that there is a mistake in this article, explaining what you think is wrong and why. We will correct any errors as soon as possible.