The Jeremy Bamber twist: does Britain’s most infamous assassin lastly have an alibi? | Crime

In the tens of millions of pages disclosed to Jeremy Bamber over the many years, in his bid to show his innocence of one of many twentieth century’s most infamous crimes, PC Nick Milbank is barely talked about. But this week, new proof emerged that the late police officer held an important clue to what occurred on the night time of the bloodbath at Whitehouse Farm on 7 August 1985.

In 1986, Bamber, now 64, was convicted of murdering his rich farmer-landowner mother and father Nevill and June, his sister Sheila Caffell, and her twin six-year-old sons, Daniel and Nicholas.

Essex police initially handled the crime as a murder-suicide. Caffell, the adopted daughter of the Bambers, a mannequin who was 28 and often known as Bambi, had lately been in a psychiatric hospital after being identified with schizophrenia. On the night of the murders, her mother and father are thought to have advised her that her twin sons must be fostered as a result of she was not able to taking care of them. This was mentioned to be her best concern. Early newspaper reviews advised she had killed her mother and father and the twins, earlier than killing herself.

Bamber’s kin had been unconvinced. They advised the police that Jeremy, additionally adopted, was behaving surprisingly: he appeared comfortable, went on vacation, introduced he was going to purchase a flowery sports activities automobile, and began promoting off the household valuables. Then his former girlfriend Julie Mugford, whom he had simply dumped, advised the police he had been planning the murders for a 12 months and had contracted an area hitman. When the employed killer turned out to have a cast-iron alibi, Mugford modified her story and mentioned he carried out the murders himself. Bamber was convicted on a 10-2 majority in October 1986.

There had been many issues that had been inconsistent or plain incorrect in regards to the investigation into the murders; in Britain, proving a conviction is unsafe is enough to have it quashed. Many journalists have tried to show Bamber’s conviction is unsafe, together with the Guardian’s former prisons correspondent Eric Allison, who died in 2022, and me. But no matter we found was by no means sufficient.

Two years in the past, New Yorker journalist Heidi Blake began trying into the case. The journal is thought for devoting enormous quantities of time and sources to its investigations, and she or he did an excellent job.

Her preliminary piece was filled with fascinating particulars and revelations, however her largest coup was monitoring down Milbank, the officer who had been manning the strains from Essex police HQ on the night time of the bloodbath. Milbank’s identify didn’t seem wherever in relation to the case till 2002, 17 years after the crime. Yet it seems he’s maybe the one particular person with the proof to definitively clear Bamber.

One of the tens of millions of pages of paperwork disclosed to Bamber over time referred to a 999 name that got here from contained in the farmhouse at 6.09am. If this may be verified, Bamber is within the clear. At that time, he had been standing outdoors the farmhouse with 25 law enforcement officials for greater than two hours.

His hopes had been thwarted in 2002 by a Metropolitan police investigation into the preliminary dealing with of the case previous to Bamber’s enchantment that 12 months, often known as Operation Stokenchurch. Here, Milbank’s identify appeared for the primary time. He wrote a brief assertion wherein he mentioned there was no 999 name; that he had simply been listening in on an open line and had not heard any human voices till the police entered the farmhouse at about 7.30am. Bamber’s authorized workforce subsequently didn’t trouble with the 999 name when he appealed towards his conviction, as a result of Milbank had denied it. Although the enchantment courtroom judges accepted the proof that was introduced – that the crime scene had been contaminated in quite a few methods – they mentioned that was inadequate to vary their minds in regards to the verdict. Bamber’s enchantment was rejected.

But there was one factor lacking from Milbank’s 2002 assertion. A signature.

Almost 40 years after the murders, Blake spoke to Milbank. He nonetheless labored as a civilian officer for Essex police, which made the story he advised her much more astonishing. He mentioned a 999 name had certainly are available in at 6.09am. As Blake wrote in her New Yorker article, which was printed on 29 July 2024: “He recalled hearing what might have been muffled speech – perhaps a ‘voice or a radio’ and noises that could have been ‘a door opening and closing, or a chair being moved’. I asked if this suggested that someone had been alive in the house. ‘Well, obviously,’ Milbank replied.”

She requested him in regards to the 2002 assertion. He mentioned he had by no means made a press release and that she was the primary particular person to have requested him about what occurred that night time for the reason that Eighties.

The story then will get even stranger.

Before Blake’s article, Bamber was already assured his case could be referred again to the courtroom of enchantment by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), the physique liable for investigating alleged wrongful convictions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Now, he was certain. In April this 12 months he was as a result of hear from the CCRC in regards to the first 4 factors he had submitted, which included Milbank’s proof. The fee had already spent 4 years analyzing these arguments and, as a result of it had taken so lengthy, it agreed to report again on its findings to this point. Bamber was satisfied he had greater than sufficient proof for the case to be referred again to the courtroom of enchantment and that he would quickly be free.

April got here and went. Then May. Finally, on the finish of June, the CCRC despatched Bamber its “provisional statement of reasons” explaining its determination to reject his enchantment. Most stunning was its response to Milbank’s interview. It said that as a result of the New Yorker refused at hand over the “source” materials to the fee – the audio of Blake’s interview with Milbank – it had no proof that Milbank had mentioned these phrases. (The New Yorker had refused at hand over the audio as a result of it believes sharing supply materials with third events would represent an moral violation of journalistic independence and set a harmful precedent.)

The CCRC then mentioned that after the article had been printed, Essex police had found the unique handwritten assertion by Milbank, producing a press release not in Milbank’s handwriting, however seemingly signed by him, from 2002. It additionally introduced the CCRC with a brand new assertion from Milbank, dated 10 September 2024, saying: “I have never to my knowledge spoken to the New Yorker.” Milbank mentioned he didn’t keep in mind making the 2002 assertion, but when it was signed by him he should have achieved so, regardless that it gave the impression to be written by someone else. The assertion contradicted every part he had advised Blake. The remaining shock got here when Essex police revealed that Milbank had died of most cancers since making the assertion in September 2024.

Now there’s one more twist within the story. This week the New Yorker launched Blood Relatives, Blake’s podcast sequence in regards to the Bamber case. And guess what? We not solely get to listen to Milbank saying he took a 999 name and that may solely imply someone was alive in the home; he additionally factors out quite a lot of methods wherein the assertion he “gave” to Operation Stokenchurch couldn’t have been made by him.

Earlier this 12 months the CCRC’s chair, Helen Pitcher, and chief government, Karen Kneller, resigned after a sequence of high-profile failings. In 2023, Andrew Malkinson was lastly cleared after serving 17 years in jail for a rape he didn’t commit. The CCRC had twice refused to refer his case again to the courtroom of enchantment. This May, Peter Sullivan had his conviction for homicide overturned after 38 years in jail. Again, the CCRC had refused to refer his case. When Dame Vera Baird was appointed interim chair of the CCRC in June, she mentioned the fee operated in an “arrogant, dismissive way … almost looking for reasons not to refer to the court of appeal”.

Philip Walker of the Jeremy Bamber Innocence Campaign says that the CCRC has failed in its responsibility to guard a whistleblower. “It had an obligation to protect Nick Milbank after he disclosed a potential cover-up by his employer, Essex police.” Walker is adamant that Essex police shouldn’t have been allowed to interview Milbank after he advised the New Yorker that he had taken a 6.09am 999 name from Whitehouse Farm and that he had by no means made a press release about it to Operation Stokenchurch in 2002. Not solely was Essex police his employer – it had additionally carried out the unique controversial investigation into the murders.

“The CCRC put him at risk and compromised his evidence by allowing the force to deal with him directly,” says Walker. “The result is the CCRC’s dereliction of duty of care to Mr Milbank, who by all accounts was seriously ill at the time and was possibly pressured to produce a statement that was not factual. It’s obvious who should have interviewed Mr Milbank. The CCRC!”

The Guardian put to Essex police that Bamber believes the unique 2002 assertion was fabricated and that strain was placed on Milbank final 12 months to make a press release contradicting what he advised the New Yorker. Essex police replied: “In August 1985, the lives of five people, including two children, were needlessly, tragically and callously cut short when they were murdered in their own home by Jeremy Bamber. In the years that followed, this case has been the subject of several appeals and reviews by the court of appeal and the Criminal Cases Review Commission – all of these processes have never found anything other than Bamber is the person responsible for killing his adoptive parents Nevill and June, sister Sheila Caffell and her two sons Nicholas and Daniel.”

Writing from Wakefield Prison, Jeremy Bamber says: “We asked that the CCRC appoint an independent investigator to go and speak to Mr Milbank about what he’d told the New Yorker magazine. The CCRC refused our request, thereby losing the opportunity to hear Mr Milbank’s evidence.

“Not only do I have a rock solid alibi now, but proof that Essex police covered up Milbank’s evidence by faking a witness statement to mislead the courts. The fact that Mr Milbank has sadly died quite recently has further compounded the failures of the CCRC and Essex police.” Well, he would have a rock strong alibi if Essex police had not taken that remaining assertion from Milbank. And now Milbank is not right here to say which model is true.

Bamber believes costs for perverting the course of justice must be introduced in relation to the 2002 assertion. “The CCRC has no choice but to refer my case to the court of appeal.” The Metropolitan police, which carried out Operation Stokenchurch, declined to remark.

The Guardian put Bamber’s allegations to the CCRC, which responded: “A provisional decision on part of Mr Bamber’s application to the CCRC has been issued to his legal representatives. Work continues to consider additional matters which were raised in Mr Bamber’s application.”

Bamber believes that Essex police ought to have an audio document of the 999 name. “Where is the audio recording of that telephone call now?” he writes. “One wonders where it might be.”