Forensically Speaking

Forensics and DNA in the case of Jeremy Bamber

For a man to be sentenced to 25 years in prison - even for murder - and to have that sentence then upgraded in secret to a whole-life tariff, you would expect the case against him to be overwhelming and water-tight.

After all, fewer than 50 criminals in the history of British law have been deemed dangerous and depraved enough to be told they're to be locked up for life - but almost certainly, there is at least never, ever any doubt about their guilt.

In those cases you'd have found, for instance, murderer stood over victim with a blooded knife in hand and DNA galore.  You see, you just can't get around DNA evidence - it's the finest example of technological advancement in all of our times.

So, you'd ask, what is the boat load of DNA evidence that links Jeremy Bamber to the murders of his entire family in 1985 - either from the time or as a result of a breakthrough since. The answer? None. Not "very small amounts," either, I actually mean none. 

A flimsy shot at trying to use DNA evidence supposedly belonging to his sister, Sheila, to suggest Bamber's guilt purely by process of elimination was suggested back at trial but even as long as a decade ago, this was shown to be highly inconclusive and certainly not decisive.

The simple truth is that you cannot link a man to a crime through DNA evidence if he did not actually commit the crime - no matter how hard you try. Jeremy Bamber is an innocent man.