# Michael Barrymore.. the body in the pool. Who's going to watch?



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I will be watching. It's on tomorrow night on channel 4 at 9pm. I have read Michaels book, but i will keep an open mind. I for one would love this case to be solved once and for all. And if it was anything other than an accident, then laid to rest.*
*Your Thoughts?*


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

JANICE199 said:


> *I will be watching. It's on tomorrow night on channel 4 at 9pm. I have read Michaels book, but i will keep an open mind. I for one would love this case to be solved once and for all. And if it was anything other than an accident, then laid to rest.*
> *Your Thoughts?*


I heard about the programme on R2 this morning (I think they were going to discuss it on the Jeremy Vine show) so I might do. Tbh I don't know a lot about the case but didn't realise there was only 10 people at the party so I don't understand why the police can't find out what happened.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Not remotely interested to be honest.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

I remember it at the time. Someone knows the truth . What did he say in the book? 
I feel for Stuart Lubbock's dad still trying to find out what happen. It's pretty certain that Stuart was raped so someone should be accountable for that .


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

Someone knows what happened, and MB didn't help himself by running away and refusing to speak to the police, I'm not sure I will watch it, but MB should not be allowed back on telly until someone tells the truth about what happened, but then I could never stand him anyway, and maybe the fact he broke his wrist or hand stopping him from being on Dancing on ice is maybe some kind of karma.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> think they were going to discuss it on the Jeremy Vine show)


 For one heart-stopping moment I thought you said Jeremy Kyle.:Cat


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

I saw it on the tv guide but no idea what it's about.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Digging the dirt again, No I'm not going to watch it.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

MontyMaude said:


> Someone knows what happened, and MB didn't help himself by running away and refusing to speak to the police, I'm not sure I will watch it, but MB should not be allowed back on telly until someone tells the truth about what happened, but then I could never stand him anyway, and maybe the fact he broke his wrist or hand stopping him from being on Dancing on ice is maybe some kind of karma.


*To be fair to MB, he was advised to not speak to the police. He was on Piers Morgan show a while back and as he said, hindsight is a wonderful thing. As for him not being allowed back on television until the truth comes out, i find very unfair. Remember Leslie Grantham ( dirty Den), he murdered a guy but was allowed on telly. Innocent until proven guilty should apply.*


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *To be fair to MB, he was advised to not speak to the police. He was on Piers Morgan show a while back and as he said, hindsight is a wonderful thing. As for him not being allowed back on television until the truth comes out, i find very unfair. Remember Leslie Grantham ( dirty Den), he murdered a guy but was allowed on telly. Innocent until proven guilty should apply.*


But Lesley Grantham had been to prison and served his time before he was even on telly, so not really same.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

MontyMaude said:


> But Lesley Grantham had been to prison and served his time before he was even on telly, so not really same.


I agree. I don't know, I feel that poor Stuart Lubbock's family deserve to know what happened & the men who were involved bought to justice. I honestly don't think MB can be unaware of what happened that night considering it was such a small gathering. Whether he was directly involved or not people in the group must have talked about what happened.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Yes, I will watch as I had no TV when it happened so missed a lot of it, tho' I do remember it happening as MB was a ''celeb'' at the time. Amazing though how these things come back to haunt people. I thought it was a larger gathering too - as the host, MB really had to take some responsibility for what happened. I'm guessing that drugs were involved, but I may be wrong. And I remember wondering how SL actually fit in with the crowd and how he happened to be there.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Cleo38 said:


> I feel that poor Stuart Lubbock's family deserve to know what happened & the men who were involved bought to justice.


I don't disagree but the same can be said for a lot of sudden deaths and I don't believe this one deserves any more or less attention just because of celebrity involvement.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Trial by TV not the way to get to the real truth.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Happy Paws2 said:


> Trial by TV not the way to get to the real truth.


*After all these years HP i'm thinking perhaps media coverage might actually help. I love watching true crime programs and i believe we have some of the best people to deal with cases like this. But i do wonder why it has not been sorted out by now.*


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> * i'm thinking perhaps media coverage might actually help. *


But on Channel 4


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> love watching true crime programs


 Me too . . . ''Killer in the village'' and the like. I love all that.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> After all these years HP i'm thinking perhaps media coverage might actually help


There was plenty when it was a fresh case and it didn't seem to get great results. Are you thinking it will jog a memory?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

havoc said:


> There was plenty when it was a fresh case and it didn't seem to get great results. Are you thinking it will jog a memory?


*I hope so,or somebody will want to clear their conscience.*


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Im not going to watch it. Its two hours and I watch other programmes. The Mail on Saturday has given it 4 stars , It uses unseen footage and witness accounts to forensically explore the story.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

I love true Crime but wasn't interested in this, now I might be persuaded to watch it.. I have become intrigued.


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

Nope
It will just be rehashing of redtop papparazi pictures, and scandal reporting, that quite frankly made me sick when it happened,( they way it was reported) i dont need to reinvite it into my life
A young man lost his life
A tv 'star' lost his career and everyone went for his throat like a pack of hyenas
he has since had many mental and physical problems
and 
the young man is no closer to getting justice tha the was all those years ago
Someone at that party knows what happened to that young man
I dont need a tv show to tell me that, that person or persons, are a coward, as well as a murderer
This is just scandal tv,
and, 
IMHO, so please forgive me if youre planning to watch it,
Its been made for the kind of watchers who would be out watching hangings, knitting at the guillotines and throwing rotten fruit and veg at the stocks. Eager voyeurs wanting their pound of flesh ( should that be 500g?) along with a little more titilation in the canteen gossip tomorrow
Cos this programme will bring no new information to light, 
Nor bring any closure to the young mans family, or to the personality at whose home it happened

my twopennorth anyway


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

mrs phas said:


> Nope
> It will just be rehashing of redtop papparazi pictures, and scandal reporting, that quite frankly made me sick when it happened,( they way it was reported) i dont need to reinvite it into my life
> A young man lost his life
> A tv 'star' lost his career and everyone went for his throat like a pack of hyenas
> ...


*I respect those are your views, but you couldn't be further from the truth when you say, it's been made for people who would be watching hangings ect. As i have said, i love watching all true crime programs, i find them interesting. I for one don't agree with the death penalty. If nobody was interested in the whys and wherefores of crime, then the solving of crimes would still be stuck in the dark ages.*


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Perhaps make judgements after watching the programme?


----------



## mrs phas (Apr 6, 2014)

JANICE199 said:


> *I respect those are your views, but you couldn't be further from the truth when you say, it's been made for people who would be watching hangings ect. As i have said, i love watching all true crime programs, i find them interesting. I for one don't agree with the death penalty. If nobody was interested in the whys and wherefores of crime, then the solving of crimes would still be stuck in the dark ages.*


oh im a true crime aficianado too
i watch real forensic files
and the autopsy programmes where they looked a plague victims etc
i even watched one of the animal autopsy ones found it totally fascinating
its just i dont feel anything will come of this and its just a rehash of old news, not even to keep it in the public eye, just for voyeurs and schlock sake.
IF there was anything to be found, then it wouldve been by now
forensic and detective work may have vastly improved from the days of burke and hare
but not that much on the last decade


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Presumably if the programme makers had uncovered any new evidence it would have been handed over to the relevant authorities some time ago. These programmes are made months before they go to air.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

mrs phas said:


> not that much on the last decade


In the last decade alone they are getting dna from smaller and smaller samples, and therefore more and more cold cases that have been reopened and reopened with hardly any DNA evidence available have been solved

There's been a bigger breakthrough in the use of familiar DNA, this has lead again to cold cases being solved but not only that, Jane and John Doe cases finally been solved too.

So in the last decade, lots has happened, it might not seem a lot but there are many crimes being solved now from the past that couldn't be solved possibly 5 years ago let alone 10.

The only problem now, is resources. If in this documentary, there is new evidence it is handed over to the police. Just because its a well known case doesn't make it priority, doesn't make it top priority to be processed with all the other cold cases. Haven't we got over stretched resources already in our police force.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

That's a good point @lullabydream I knew someone who was murdered by her boyfriend in 1983 but they couldn't prove it until 14 years later.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Incredibly sad ….. I honestly can't believe how much the police f*cked up & didn't treat it as a crime scene from the beginning. And as for items being removed & Micheal Barrymore fleeing the scene …. I don't believe he is innocent at all. I felt quite queasy watching him revel in trying to regain public support & really hope he isn't given any air time until this is resolved.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Incredibly sad ….. I honestly can't believe how much the police f*cked up & didn't treat it as a crime scene from the beginning. And as for items being removed & Micheal Barrymore fleeing the scene …. I don't believe he is innocent at all. I felt quite queasy watching him revel in trying to regain public support & really hope he isn't given any air time until this is resolved.


I agree, he did not come over well, it almost felt like they are trying to flush the other barely mentioned party goers out into coming forward with the truth of what actually happened at the end there with a promise of a cash reward. I also do not know how that reporter for the NOTW can sleep at night or even look himself in the mirror.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

MontyMaude said:


> I agree, he did not come over well, it almost felt like they are trying to flush the other barely mentioned party goers out into coming forward with the truth of what actually happened at the end there with a promise of a cash reward. I also do not know how that reporter for the NOTW can sleep at night or even look himself in the mirror.


Agree. The way that families of victims (as well as victims themselves) are treated by the media at times is disgusting. I honestly don't know how they can do this, I would feel ashamed of myself


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

I saw about half an hour of it on catch up. His poor dad , Terry . I really hope the truth comes out. 
It seems the police messed up like they did with White House farm . 
I was shocked when they said Barrymore was going to be on Dancing on ice. I couldn't watch it .


----------



## Sandysmum (Sep 18, 2010)

I found it really sad, it was heartbreaking to see Stuarts dad still grieving after all these years with so many unanswered questions. But it did bring up some things that surprised me, the main thing being why were there 4 autopsies, were the first three not carried out properly? The police seemed to suspect MB right from the start, there were a few other people who could have been responsible. At such a small gathering others must have known what was going on, but all the emphasis seems to be on convicting MB. I'm wondering if the programme was shown to see if it might jog peoples memory and possibly get someone to tell the truth about what happened that night?


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

jetsmum said:


> I found it really sad, it was heartbreaking to see Stuarts dad still grieving after all these years with so many unanswered questions. But it did bring up some things that surprised me, the main thing being why were there 4 autopsies, were the first three not carried out properly? The police seemed to suspect MB right from the start, there were a few other people who could have been responsible. At such a small gathering others must have known what was going on, but all the emphasis seems to be on convicting MB. I'm wondering if the programme was shown to see if it might jog peoples memory and possibly get someone to tell the truth about what happened that night?


Yes, I think that whilst the emphasis will always be on him due to him being the celebrity & it also being his house. I am amazed that it seemed no thorough investigations appeared to have been carried out on all of them that night. I did also agree that the pay off that several of them received for their 'stories' only made things worse & put more misinformation in to the public domain … was the investigation ongoing at this time? How this be legal? But ….. MB's actions do seem suspicious & not those of someone completely innocent.

Watching Stuart Lubbock's father was so sad, he's obviously not a well man so I really hope he can get some answers soon. I can't imagine how people in these circumstances cope, losing a loved one in such a horrible way must be bad enough but when the people involved are not nought to justice (& in this case one is even on TV!) must add to the enormous pain they must already feel.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*Well after watching it i couldn't get it out of my mind. There is a lot to mull over. The police have a lot to answer for they bodged the whole thing imho. *
*I also think Michael Barrymore has been the easiest target in this case. In the program it was said that 3 men ( MB) being one of them had the opportunity to kill Stewart, but it's only been MB that has been in the limelight. I will be watching it again, because my mind needs to refresh some of the " facts".*


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I didn’t watch it and I don’t watch Dancing on Ice so the only reason I know about either is this forum. It all leaves a sour note with me - all ways round. I do wonder if the making of the programme was prompted by Barrymore being on Dancing on Ice, a determined effort to stop any hope of him appearing on TV again. If it was then the motives could be questionable. I’ve never been a fan of the court of public opinion as we never are shown the ‘whole truth’. On the other hand, had things not been so badly bungled in the first place we wouldn’t be here and relatives would not have been so tortured for so many years.

Nobody involved has been well served.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

I think the main issue was that it was reported as an accidental drowning and treated as such until the next day when the autopsy was carried out and the injuries discovered or at least that is the impression I got, and that the 'scene' was open and that a few select people were allowed to come and go and 'tidy' things up.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

MontyMaude said:


> I think the main issue was that it was reported as an accidental drowning and treated as such until the next day when the autopsy was carried out and the injuries discovered or at least that is the impression I got, and that the 'scene' was open and that a few select people were allowed to come and go and 'tidy' things up.


*Now this is one of the things that baffle me. The first autopsy didn't show any injuries. Why did the pathologist say Stewart had water in his lungs but then another said he didn't? Also there was no mention of blood, why? Too many unanswered questions.*


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

MontyMaude said:


> I think the main issue was that it was reported as an accidental drowning and treated as such until the next day when the autopsy was carried out and the injuries discovered or at least that is the impression I got, and that the 'scene' was open and that a few select people were allowed to come and go and 'tidy' things up.


And as for MB & his PR people trying to suggest that SL's injuries were caused at the hospital or later on that he might have slipped & fell …. really?!!!


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

Cleo38 said:


> Agree. The way that families of victims (as well as victims themselves) are treated by the media at times is disgusting. I honestly don't know how they can do this, I would feel ashamed of myself


I agree with you, @Cleo38 . . . but (I know this sounds awful) I got the impression that Mr Lubbock senior at times seemed to be quite enjoying the publicity that the case was affording him.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> That's a good point @lullabydream I knew someone who was murdered by her boyfriend in 1983 but they couldn't prove it until 14 years later.


 I watch quite often one called ''Cold Cases'' (?? I think that's what it's called) and they find the killers after 20+ years thanks to new techniques. It's fascinating.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

@kimthecat White House Farm is another one that doesn't add up. Am not saying the right man is in prison but it's all very odd.. Police heard people/person inside, thought they saw someone inside. Its always baffled me that one.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Cleo38 said:


> And as for MB & his PR people trying to suggest that SL's injuries were caused at the hospital or later on that he might have slipped & fell …. really?!!!


*To be fair that statement was made by MB's solicitors not MB.*


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *To be fair that statement was made by MB's solicitors not MB.*


MB constantly on the documentary was shown on live TV stating those injuries did not occur at his home, whether his PR thought this was a good idea or not, its very shaky ground especially when 'his public' have always seen him as genuine


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> MB constantly on the documentary was shown on live TV stating those injuries did not occur at his home, whether his PR thought this was a good idea or not, its very shaky ground especially when 'his public' have always seen him as genuine


*My reply was to Cleo ( i think). But as far as i see it, MB believes the injuries occurred after the body was removed from his house.*


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> *My reply was to Cleo ( i think). But as far as i see it, MB believes the injuries occurred after the body was removed from his house.*


 It does seem amazing that those injuries were missed at the first exam, as they were later described as ''horrific''.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Calvine said:


> It does seem amazing that those injuries were missed at the first exam, as they were later described as ''horrific''.


*I agree. Surely the police and ambulance people would have seen "signs". *


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *My reply was to Cleo ( i think). But as far as i see it, MB believes the injuries occurred after the body was removed from his house.*


Yes he seems to, which has been looked in to officially as the documentary showed and as that pathologist stated to claim someone would part take in the act of n******* because that was what MB was claiming, as he wouldn't say his own thoughts to the paps out loud.. Would make this horrendous story even more bizarre. Obviously there will be some dark story somewhere similar am sure of it, people are strange.

For SL family, surely this must have been at the time another massive blow, and then for Terry his father to meet and say he doesn't blame MB. Well obviously his prerogative but no point going round with hate in yourself, it does more harm than good anyway


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

lullabydream said:


> MB constantly on the documentary was shown on live TV stating those injuries did not occur at his home, whether his PR thought this was a good idea or not, its very shaky ground especially when 'his public' have always seen him as genuine


I agree …. so if he is to believed (tho I doubt it could be the case) then by that fact he knows what happened.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Did anyone find his 'friends' a strange bunch. From how they were described surely MB wouldn't have left any of them out of his sight. Just in case something went missing... Am saying that as my friends Dad often bought people back to his home to drink from his well kept bar after the pub closed. Lots of people went with him. He learnt his lesson one year after 2 young gentlemen raided his chest freezer!


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

Calvine said:


> It does seem amazing that those injuries were missed at the first exam, as they were later described as ''horrific''.





JANICE199 said:


> *I agree. Surely the police and ambulance people would have seen "signs". *


I think possibly because reported as a drowning and he wasn't pronounced until he got to the hospital he may have been wrapped in blankets to try and 'warm' him up whilst they possibly did CPR on him, I think the ambulance and hospital were told drowning and that is what he was treated for as that is how he presented, who knows how long he had been in the pool and how long between the injuries and him being put or getting into the in the pool, there was what 3 hours between the taxi dropping them off and the 999 call, just so many questions and no answers from the party goers.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

lullabydream said:


> Did anyone find his 'friends' a strange bunch. From how they were described surely MB wouldn't have left any of them out of his sight. Just in case something went missing... Am saying that as my friends Dad often bought people back to his home to drink from his well kept bar after the pub closed. Lots of people went with him. He learnt his lesson one year after 2 young gentlemen raided his chest freezer!


Yes such a random bunch, a strange man telling MB he would be his bouncer for the night and his sister plus 2 random 17year old girls and Stuart all of them had never met MB before and the only one who knew him was the neighbour and his friend who he left with and hid out at his house, strange bunch just to ask home.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

MontyMaude said:


> Yes such a random bunch, a strange man telling MB he would be his bouncer for the night and his sister plus 2 random 17year old girls and Stuart all of them had never met MB before and the only one who knew him was the neighbour and his friend who he left with and hid out at his house, strange bunch just to ask home.


Agree: one would imagine that MB would have enough ''friends'' to make up a party without inviting a rag tag bunch of strangers. Very odd.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

MontyMaude said:


> Yes such a random bunch, a strange man telling MB he would be his bouncer for the night and his sister plus 2 random 17year old girls and Stuart all of them had never met MB before and the only one who knew him was the neighbour and his friend who he left with and hid out at his house, strange bunch just to ask home.


Definitely but I think at times these people (celebrities) quite like the attention they receive & the 'power' they have over the people who look up to them. Maybe they are more easy to manipulate as well ….

Years ago I was in a pub & a famous footballer came in with his friend, was odd as it was a local sh*tty pub so not the sort you expect people like that to be in. It's not as if he wanted a quiet drink either as he was very willing to show off who he was & make a big fuss of buying everyone drinks (I had no idea who he was as I am not in to football at all). He seemed to just like the attention & flattery he received from men as well as a couple of women …. very odd really IMO but maybe people with such fragile egos like to surround themselves with people who will fawn all over them.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> Definitely but I think at times these people (celebrities) quite like the attention they receive & the 'power' they have over the people who look up to them. Maybe they are more easy to manipulate as well ….
> 
> Years ago I was in a pub & a famous footballer came in with his friend, was odd as it was a local sh*tty pub so not the sort you expect people like that to be in. It's not as if he wanted a quiet drink either as he was very willing to show off who he was & make a big fuss of buying everyone drinks (I had no idea who he was as I am not in to football at all). He seemed to just like the attention & flattery he received from men as well as a couple of women …. very odd really IMO but maybe people with such fragile egos like to surround themselves with people who will fawn all over them.


Oooo that reminds me of an ex soap star that lives in a village not far from me. He swans in to the local pub like he's something important everytime! He hasn't been on TV for years. He's not down to earth like his 'persona'. He's lived in the village years, gone to the pub for years but still swans in making an entrance.


----------



## MilleD (Feb 15, 2016)

Calvine said:


> Agree: one would imagine that MB would have enough ''friends'' to make up a party without inviting a rag tag bunch of strangers. Very odd.


When you can have what you like, the risk of the unknown can be very attractive.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Cleo38 said:


> Years ago I was in a pub & a famous footballer came in with his friend, was odd as it was a local sh*tty pub so not the sort you expect people like that to be in. It's not as if he wanted a quiet drink either as he was very willing to show off who he was & make a big fuss of buying everyone drinks (I had no idea who he was as I am not in to football at all). He seemed to just like the attention & flattery he received from men as well as a couple of women …. very odd really IMO but maybe people with such fragile egos like to surround themselves with people who will fawn all over them.


Yes gone are the days when Football Players lived locally to the ground and used the same buses as the supports to go the the match.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Happy Paws2 said:


> Yes gone are the days when Football Players lived locally to the ground and used the same buses as the supports to go the the match.


A while a go I think I caught a bit of a programme about George Best & they were talking about how footballers were before all the big money & fame …. it was really interesting to watch & how the talked about the love of the game & how that drove them in their dream of playing professionally. How very different from today's prima donnas!!!


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I have a question for all you sleuths out there. Is there anyway a report given to a coroners court can be found online?*


----------



## Boxer123 (Jul 29, 2017)

lullabydream said:


> @kimthecat White House Farm is another one that doesn't add up. Am not saying the right man is in prison but it's all very odd.. Police heard people/person inside, thought they saw someone inside. Its always baffled me that one.


I've been watching the ITV drama and couldn't understand this. Very odd.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

JANICE199 said:


> *I have a question for all you sleuths out there. Is there anyway a report given to a coroners court can be found online?*


Generally not online currently though if you know what you want you can request a copy ..................... unless it may form part of an ongoing criminal investigation so maybe not in this case 

Current and upcoming cases are listed online for every county eg
https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/residents/births-deaths-and-marriages/deaths/coroner-and-inquests


----------



## Guest (Feb 7, 2020)

I missed the beginning but what a bizarre case! I do think MB was part of the crime and definitely the cover up after but I suspect there was somebody much more powerful involved in the murder. Either one of the other 8 or somebody else was there.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

havoc said:


> Generally not online currently though if you know what you want you can request a copy ..................... unless it may form part of an ongoing criminal investigation so maybe not in this case
> 
> Current and upcoming cases are listed online for every county eg
> https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/residents/births-deaths-and-marriages/deaths/coroner-and-inquests


Thank you. I,he been trying to find a report from the male nurse Stuart Nairn.. He treated Stewart at the hospital and says there were no signs of injuries. But explains how they could have happened. It,s in the book I have,but it wash,t mentioned last night.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> Thank you. I,he been trying to find a report from the male nurse Stuart Nairn.. He treated Stewart at the hospital and says there were no signs of injuries. But explains how they could have happened. It,s in the book I have,but it wash,t mentioned last night.


With all due respect a nurse isn't a pathologist and as a pathologist said, if you are working on things such as CPR resuscitation you don't look for injuries on a person. Then after death, you may remove tubing etc so family can see their loved one again you wouldn't be looking for anything else. A man found in a pool, clinging on to life you wouldn't be doing anything else apart from life saving.

I have no knowledge of the book but even doctors/consultants are unclear why people pass away and this is why autopsys exist. Not just for murders and unexplained sudden death. Many doctors may be treating people's symptoms rather than knowing a true cause.

I can't think of any explanation for anal injuries, described as horrific, and from the description last night they were deep.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Boxer123 said:


> I've been watching the ITV drama and couldn't understand this. Very odd.


Everything I have seen on this case never adds up, it's the phone calls that get me.. Can never work out if they were traceable at that time to see if statements were correct.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

JANICE199 said:


> Thank you. I,he been trying to find a report from the male nurse Stuart Nairn.. He treated Stewart at the hospital and says there were no signs of injuries. But explains how they could have happened. It,s in the book I have,but it wash,t mentioned last night.


They did mention it, it was when MB was in Dubai and he called a paper or news programme and gave an interview he said that he had been informed that Stuart Lubbock had no injuries by a nurse that treated him, but the programme went on to say that the hospital fully investigated the claims and found them to be untrue, then he (MB) changed his story again a few years later saying Stuart must have injured himself by falling on the edge of the pool.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

When I,m back on my PC I will reply. I can,t get on with tablets☺


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

MontyMaude said:


> Stuart must have injured himself by falling on the edge of the pool


Which made MB look more ridiculous in my opinion. I know the place had some 'cleaning up by people' but the things missing and the pool itself seems laughable for the injuries caused and wasn't the pool really a 'smokescreen' for what happened to SL.

Ooo I feel like we are on Reddit trying to figure it out!


----------



## Boxer123 (Jul 29, 2017)

lullabydream said:


> Which made MB look more ridiculous in my opinion. I know the place had some 'cleaning up by people' but the things missing and the pool itself seems laughable for the injuries caused and wasn't the pool really a 'smokescreen' for what happened to SL.
> 
> Ooo I feel like we are on Reddit trying to figure it out!


Never fall down a reddit hole.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Boxer123 said:


> Never fall down a reddit hole.


Ooo I won't but if anyone's watched the documentary Don't F*** with cats.. I think they could solve this case given all the court files and the autopsy findings.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

lullabydream said:


> Which made MB look more ridiculous in my opinion. I know the place had some 'cleaning up by people' but the things missing and the pool itself seems laughable for the injuries caused and wasn't the pool really a 'smokescreen' for what happened to SL.
> 
> Ooo I feel like we are on Reddit trying to figure it out!


Apparently the initial pathologist resigned from the Home Office after he was criticised for his conduct in 2 other cases of suspicious deaths. It might be that his initial PM wasn't as thorough as the police might have instructed him to treat it as drowning rather than murder to cover up for their own incompetence regarding not securing it as a crime scene, etc.Just a theory but I can have read accounts from pathologists who have had pressure from police who either want a conviction or want to dismiss a murder as it is 'inconvenient' for them.

So I suppose he would have missed the injuries if he was only looking for injuries related to drowning ….


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> Thank you. I,he been trying to find a report from the male nurse Stuart Nairn.. He treated Stewart at the hospital and says there were no signs of injuries. But explains how they could have happened. It,s in the book I have,but it wash,t mentioned last night.


But would he have been looking "there" if it was thought a drowning with no suspicious circumstances?

Is it possible in PM to tell whether injuries are before or after death? If so, that could discount the suggestion they happened after being taken from the house.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

Lurcherlad said:


> But would he have been looking "there" if it was thought a drowning with no suspicious circumstances?
> 
> Is it possible in PM to tell whether injuries are before or after death? If so, that could discount the suggestion they happened after being taken from the house.


I think I read that he took SL's temperature using a rectal thermometer several times but even so if the injuries were internal then they might not be obvious.


----------



## MontyMaude (Feb 23, 2012)

lullabydream said:


> Which made MB look more ridiculous in my opinion. I know the place had some 'cleaning up by people' but the things missing and the pool itself seems laughable for the injuries caused and wasn't the pool really a 'smokescreen' for what happened to SL.
> 
> Ooo I feel like we are on Reddit trying to figure it out!


Yes because a pool full of chlorine could wash/dilute a lot a things away I guess, and he could have been in there a good while having a good cleansing dunk. The fact MB refused to answer simple questions at the inquest and then came out with two ridiculous quotes of what happened just screams that he is hiding something, and that he always seem to read his statements that he wanted to give seems like he didn't want to slip up in his rehearsed lie.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> Apparently the initial pathologist resigned from the Home Office after he was criticised for his conduct in 2 other cases of suspicious deaths. It might be that his initial PM wasn't as thorough as the police might have instructed him to treat it as drowning rather than murder to cover up for their own incompetence regarding not securing it as a crime scene, etc.Just a theory but I can have read accounts from pathologists who have had pressure from police who either want a conviction or want to dismiss a murder as it is 'inconvenient' for them.
> 
> So I suppose he would have missed the injuries if he was only looking for injuries related to drowning ….


I only know from friends whose relatives have had post mortem, if it's a general post mortem they look at everything still ie my friends mother died from a heart condition but the doctors were unsure which. She had been in icu, for about 5/6 weeks before they realised nothing could be done for her. So post mortem are done with permission of family which was granted. So it was suspected heart... Which it was found to be but on the post mortem notes, which I have seen, they looked at everything in the abdomen. Plus how the body presents from the outside.. Very much as seen on crime dramas. So I don't know how things could have been missed in the 'initial' PM

@Lurcherlad yes definitely can tell injuries caused before and after deaf ie bruising as mentioned as you don't bleed internally if your heart isn't pumping. PMs on bodies found in say open water, under suspicious circumstances they have to work out what was damage before death and afterwards, apparently its pretty easy to do, but am not a pathologist

@Cleo38 that's interesting about the thermometer I would have thought they were obsolete now.


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

lullabydream said:


> I only know from friends whose relatives have had post mortem, if it's a general post mortem they look at everything still ie my friends mother died from a heart condition but the doctors were unsure which. She had been in icu, for about 5/6 weeks before they realised nothing could be done for her. So post mortem are done with permission of family which was granted. So it was suspected heart... Which it was found to be but on the post mortem notes, which I have seen, they looked at everything in the abdomen. Plus how the body presents from the outside.. Very much as seen on crime dramas. So I don't know how things could have been missed in the 'initial' PM
> 
> @Lurcherlad yes definitely can tell injuries caused before and after deaf ie bruising as mentioned as you don't bleed internally if your heart isn't pumping. PMs on bodies found in say open water, under suspicious circumstances they have to work out what was damage before death and afterwards, apparently its pretty easy to do, but am not a pathologist
> 
> @Cleo38 that's interesting about the thermometer I would have thought they were obsolete now.


Oh yes but am thinking more about the police & how they may have had more influence than they should have in what they wanted the PM to show ….. only a thought. I recently read Unnatural Causes by Dr Richard Shepherd & he made references to how the police (at times) tried to influence his findings.

Or maybe he was just incompetent


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> Everything I have seen on this case never adds up, it's the phone calls that get me.. Can never work out if they were traceable at that time to see if statements were correct.


Saw this on wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Farm_murders
After Bamber telephoned the police, a British Telecom operator checked the White House Farm line-at 3:56 am according to the police log, and at 4:30 am according to the Court of Appeal-and found that the line was open. The operator could hear a dog barking.[86] A*ccording to British Telecom (which did not at the time keep records of local calls)*, if Nevill had telephoned Bamber without replacing the receiver, the line between them would have remained open for between eight and 16 minutes. Bamber would therefore not have been able to use his telephone to report the call to the police immediately, as he said he did in one statement; in another statement he said he had first telephoned his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, in London.[87][82][88] That the line would not have cleared is one of several disputed points.[89]


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Cleo38 said:


> Oh yes but am thinking more about the police & how they may have had more influence than they should have in what they wanted the PM to show ….. only a thought. I recently read Unnatural Causes by Dr Richard Shepherd & he made references to how the police (at times) tried to influence his findings.
> 
> Or maybe he was just incompetent


Am sure that taking rectal temperatures would be the last port of call.. I am trained for rectal epilepsy recovery medicine (laymen terms) .. Usually in older patients though and extremely rare

I wouldn't put it past police to be honest.. Months lost on Weirside Jack, when one person had suspicion about Sutcliffe from early in on in the investigation.

Off to look for book now.. Think that's already on my wish list


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

lullabydream said:


> Am sure that taking rectal temperatures would be the last port of call.. I am trained for rectal epilepsy recovery medicine (laymen terms) .. Usually in older patients though and extremely rare
> 
> I wouldn't put it past police to be honest.. Months lost on Weirside Jack, when one person had suspicion about Sutcliffe from early in on in the investigation.
> 
> Off to look for book now.. Think that's already on my wish list


Yes, I remember that. That was awful & he was caught approx. 25 years later through DNA tracing of an envelope (containing a letter) he sent to police.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> I wouldn't put it past police to be honest..


Neither would I but always keep in mind that incompetence is_* way*_ more common than conspiracy. It's actually far more common for evidence favouring an accused to go 'missing' and not be disclosed to the defence.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

havoc said:


> Neither would I but always keep in mind that incompetence is_* way*_ more common than conspiracy. It's actually far more common for evidence favouring an accused to go 'missing' and not be disclosed to the defence.


Am going to get bashed for this but will say this anyway... 
Conspiracy theorists would say how timed it was with Phillip Schofields announcement being the face of ITV and DOI, which MB was due to participate in.. I don't watch daytime/morning TV so I don't know if it was discussed the documentary. However I do read the news online and apart from one tiny news article saying nothing new after a lot of scrolling a lot was Phillip Schofield.



kimthecat said:


> Saw this on wiki
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Farm_murders
> After Bamber telephoned the police, a British Telecom operator checked the White House Farm line-at 3:56 am according to the police log, and at 4:30 am according to the Court of Appeal-and found that the line was open. The operator could hear a dog barking.[86] A*ccording to British Telecom (which did not at the time keep records of local calls)*, if Nevill had telephoned Bamber without replacing the receiver, the line between them would have remained open for between eight and 16 minutes. Bamber would therefore not have been able to use his telephone to report the call to the police immediately, as he said he did in one statement; in another statement he said he had first telephoned his girlfriend, Julie Mugford, in London.[87][82][88] That the line would not have cleared is one of several disputed points.[89]


Yes... This is what confuses me over the phone calls all the time. I knew it didn't add up right.. Have heard a variety of podcasts on this case that have great time lines and not all sourced from Wikipedia but it's frustrating with the phone calls... Not that Wikipedia is all bad, you have to have credible sources though. Plus the police saying someone's there.. It's all very confusing. I think the last I read due to the TV programme he's got new evidence as he always claims, Jeremy that is, to seek a new trial.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

lullabydream said:


> Yes... This is what confuses me over the phone calls all the time. I knew it didn't add up right.. Have heard a variety of podcasts on this case that have great time lines and not all sourced from Wikipedia but it's frustrating with the phone calls... Not that Wikipedia is all bad, you have to have credible sources though. Plus the police saying someone's there.. It's all very confusing. I think the last I read due to the TV programme he's got new evidence as he always claims, Jeremy that is, to seek a new trial.


I think the bit I highlighted in bold in black answers your question about whether the calls made were traceable. It was mentioned in the programme by the detectives that local calls weren't . But who knows if that's correct, it was a long time ago .

I dont think he's innocent but many people do. hes had a lot of support and people signing a petition for a new trial.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

MontyMaude said:


> They did mention it, it was when MB was in Dubai and he called a paper or news programme and gave an interview he said that he had been informed that Stuart Lubbock had no injuries by a nurse that treated him, but the programme went on to say that the hospital fully investigated the claims and found them to be untrue, then he (MB) changed his story again a few years later saying Stuart must have injured himself by falling on the edge of the pool.


*Sorry i should have made it clearer what i meant. The program last night did mention it but not in detail. Reading what the nurse said made a lot of sense.*


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

kimthecat said:


> I think the bit I highlighted in bold in black answers your question about whether the calls made were traceable. It was mentioned in the programme by the detectives that local calls weren't . But who knows if that's correct, it was a long time ago .
> 
> I dont think he's innocent but many people do. hes had a lot of support and people signing a petition for a new trial.


Oh no I don't think he's at all innocent.

@JANICE199 did the nurse mention the other injuries on the body in the book?


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> Oh no I don't think he's at all innocent.
> 
> @JANICE199 did the nurse mention the other injuries on the body in the book?


*If you scroll down to the part where it says 1 was Lubbock assaulted it will give you an idea of what's in the book. *
*https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10887...ool-party-death-mystery-unanswered-questions/*


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> Ooo I won't but if anyone's watched the documentary Don't F*** with cats.. I think they could solve this case given all the court files and the autopsy findings.


*I know one of the team that worked on that case. *


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *If you scroll down to the part where it says 1 was Lubbock assaulted it will give you an idea of what's in the book. *
> *https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10887...ool-party-death-mystery-unanswered-questions/*


Thing is, obviously the rectal thing sounds strange but then remember the rectum has a sphincter on it that works the other way, and really how close do you look while inserting a thermometer? I know a pessary doesn't need to be inserted to far..
if he was in the swimming pool as @MontyMaude stated that washes away evidence. It's hard to say if he would have bruising from manhandling on his body from being pulled out the pool, there should be hypothetically as people lifting a wet dead weight body it's not easy.
Definitely should have bruising from CPR on PM report.

When you read the whole article, it all makes it sound even worse yet again.

The two things to go missing... Well we can all use our imaginations there.

This about they don't know if he was ever in the pool.. There was a murder in the US I think.. It's been on all true Crime podcasts. A wealthy Dr killed his wife claiming she hit her head whilst in the bath. The paramedics sussed that one straight away as the bathroom was really dry, the doctor who had apparently dragged her out of the bath was dry too so am wondering where that theory has come from


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

lullabydream said:


> Thing is, obviously the rectal thing sounds strange but then remember the rectum has a sphincter on it that works the other way, and really how close do you look while inserting a thermometer? I know a pessary doesn't need to be inserted to far..
> if he was in the swimming pool as @MontyMaude stated that washes away evidence. It's hard to say if he would have bruising from manhandling on his body from being pulled out the pool, there should be hypothetically as people lifting a wet dead weight body it's not easy.
> Definitely should have bruising from CPR on PM report.
> 
> ...


Not just bruising: didn't it say also that the towel he was wrapped in was covered in blood (or did I imagine that) when he arrived at the hospital? That would not happen in a straightforward drowning case.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

Calvine said:


> Not just bruising: didn't it say also that the towel he was wrapped in was covered in blood (or did I imagine that) when he arrived at the hospital? That would not happen in a straightforward drowning case.


*He was still alive when he got to the hospital, which meant " if " there was bleeding, lots of people should have picked up on it.*


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *He was still alive when he got to the hospital, which meant " if " there was bleeding, lots of people should have picked up on it.*


Again it's a sphincter, meaning it will hold and stop blood leaving. SL was still alive when at the hospital so clotting factors.. 
How a pathologists specifies 'bleeding' and our perception of bleeding are probably two different things. I think we might be getting lost in translation.

To be honest how did a nurse and MB 'talk' and for the nurse to then go on and write a book. We saw on the documentary how the paps acted with the family, no doubt they would do the same to nurses, but so no doubt would MB's 'clear up team'


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

lullabydream said:


> Again it's a sphincter, meaning it will hold and stop blood leaving. SL was still alive when at the hospital so clotting factors..
> How a pathologists specifies 'bleeding' and our perception of bleeding are probably two different things. I think we might be getting lost in translation.
> 
> To be honest how did a nurse and MB 'talk' and for the nurse to then go on and write a book. We saw on the documentary how the paps acted with the family, no doubt they would do the same to nurses, but so no doubt would MB's 'clear up team'


*I'm not sure if we are talking about the same book. I'm talking about MB's  The nurse's report was read at the inquest. That's why i wanted to know if there would be a copy online.*


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

JANICE199 said:


> *I'm not sure if we are talking about the same book. I'm talking about MB's  The nurse's report was read at the inquest. That's why i wanted to know if there would be a copy online.*


Ah I get you.. I still think he's part of the clean up though the nurse because as said if there was blood on the towels that would have been reported to the police.. There's probably few places that could come from in a male so talking about a thermometer isn't that helpful.. As I said sphincter is possibly important here and clotting occurring


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I gave in and watched the repeat last night, as I said before Trail by TV, I don't think they have managed to proof anything.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Happy Paws2 said:


> I gave in and watched the repeat last night, as I said before Trail by TV, I don't think they have managed to proof anything.


Who had a trial by media.. MB seemed quite content to talk to an 'audience' many clips of him saying the same thing over and over again on 'talk shows' and the media itself not so open when it came to where it really mattered where he uttered the words 'no comment'. So who really was controlling the TV and media surrounding this case. Its hard to say they came 'hard' on MB when he did talk to TV, more than once. No idea if that was his idea or bad management, and he did talk to the papers.


----------



## rottieboys (Jan 16, 2013)

MontyMaude said:


> Yes such a random bunch, a strange man telling MB he would be his bouncer for the night and his sister plus 2 random 17year old girls and Stuart all of them had never met MB before and the only one who knew him was the neighbour and his friend who he left with and hid out at his house, strange bunch just to ask home.


MB sister was not there.


----------



## rottieboys (Jan 16, 2013)

MB, wants to get back on telly..I hope he never comes back...He must know who was with whom at the time. Denial is a wonderful thing.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

He wasn’t entertaining imo either


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

rottieboys said:


> MB sister was not there.


 I read that as the ''bouncer's'' sister, not MB's


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

rottieboys said:


> MB sister was not there.


*I think the sister of the guy who said he would be bounce was meant, not MB's sister.*


----------



## Sandysmum (Sep 18, 2010)

I wish they had used the team from 'Faking it, tears of a crime' to give analysis on MBs interviews, but I suppose they couldn't because the case is still open.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

The last episode of Whitehouse farm is on tonight at 9. Its about Jeremy Bambers trial. It might clear up a few points.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

kimthecat said:


> The last episode of Whitehouse farm is on tonight at 9. Its about Jeremy Bambers trial. It might clear up a few points.


It might not.. Am still confused! No matter how much I go over this case I get more confused everytime.
There's actually a YouTube channel that are supporters of Jeremy and I was more baffled listening to that.. It's all the technicalities they are trying to get a new trial and of course Julie is just a spurned lover. Am sure some of what was said contradicted some parts but it was confusing really and couldn't listen much to all the monotone voices to be honest


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

@lullabydream It was as clear as mud. There are supporters on Twitter too. there's a petition too , for anew review or trial. 
I dunno. Such a shame that the police messed up. Im glad that Sheilas ex husband managed to start a new life and have a family .


----------



## Boxer123 (Jul 29, 2017)

lullabydream said:


> It might not.. Am still confused! No matter how much I go over this case I get more confused everytime.
> There's actually a YouTube channel that are supporters of Jeremy and I was more baffled listening to that.. It's all the technicalities they are trying to get a new trial and of course Julie is just a spurned lover. Am sure some of what was said contradicted some parts but it was confusing really and couldn't listen much to all the monotone voices to be honest


I'm still confused as well just watched the final episode.


----------



## lullabydream (Jun 25, 2013)

Boxer123 said:


> I'm still confused as well just watched the final episode.


From everything have watched/listened to before.. I still think Jeremy is guilty. Lots of information was cut out to how he was supposed to have done it.. So looking at it, as a TV drama it seemed a bit odd I suppose, and fairly slow TV drama too.
I was hoping it would clear some finer details but it did say it was a drama for TV!


----------



## Boxer123 (Jul 29, 2017)

lullabydream said:


> From everything have watched/listened to before.. I still think Jeremy is guilty. Lots of information was cut out to how he was supposed to have done it.. So looking at it, as a TV drama it seemed a bit odd I suppose, and fairly slow TV drama too.
> I was hoping it would clear some finer details but it did say it was a drama for TV!


He definitely is odd the actor who played him did an amazing job I thought.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

kimthecat said:


> The last episode of Whitehouse farm is on tonight at 9. Its about Jeremy Bambers trial. It might clear up a few points.


 Was it worth watching, Kim?


----------



## Cleo38 (Jan 22, 2010)

I watched it … it was ok, nothing special really. I remember the case when it happened


lullabydream said:


> From everything have watched/listened to before.. I still think Jeremy is guilty. Lots of information was cut out to how he was supposed to have done it.. So looking at it, as a TV drama it seemed a bit odd I suppose, and fairly slow TV drama too.
> I was hoping it would clear some finer details but it did say it was a drama for TV!


Yes, am the same. I remember the case when it happened & it was shocking. Not sure what I thought of the drama, it was ok but as I too was expecting some new details, etc but nothing.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Calvine said:


> Was it worth watching, Kim?


Yes .


----------

