The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?

[Caroline]

I'm not really sure what you mean by released and accepted?  Released and accepted by whom? 

I believe JB innocent based on my own research.  If I just sat around reading/listening to other 'supporters' I would probably think him guilty! 

I believe I have 10 rock solid points for a successful appeal.  Afaik these points originate from my research.  This excludes:

-  The claim JM signed NOTW deal pre trial/verdict.
-  Criticism of trial/appeal lawyers
-  Criticism of FSS particularly Fletcher and Elliot

I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit.

JM didn't have any deal when she made her statements to EP so that cannot be construed as a motive. If the issue is when she 'signed' the contract then it's really neither here nor there. If the arrangement of a story isn't unlawful pre verdict, then I fail to see what difference the signing makes. It wasn't her motivation for coming forward and as such - makes no odds. Even if we were to accept that it would make her testimony inadmissible - how would that affect the case now? Do we erase everyone's memory or pretend she didn't testify that Bamber plotted to kill his family? It can't be taken back and there would be an absolute uproar if the powers that be decided to let him out based on this criteria!

[Nicholas]

I think it's more likely June sustained 8 gsw's whereby 1 was a graze only wound independent of the other 7 and accounts for spent bullet DRH/5.  This also accounts for the 12 casings found in the main bedroom and landing excl. the 2 that pertain to SC.  At trial Fletcher agreed with Lawson this was the case through a process of elimination.

I don't think there's any evidence NB called EP.

No it doesn't but it does undermine her testimony. 

My 10 points don't necessarily make JB innocent. But it's not about innocence is it? At trial it's 'not guilty' or 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt'.  At appeal it's about finding 'fresh evidence' which had jurors heard at trial may have caused them to return a different verdict rendering the conviction unsafe.

   

You are right Holly; it's not about innocence.

It's about Jeremy Bamber attempting to beat the criminal justice system. But it won't happen!

[Nicholas]

No one is forcing the CT to supposedly act on JB's behalf.  They are a group of 6 females and 2 males I believe.  I'm assuming they plan together events like graveside reading and bake-off.  What sort of people could ever think these ideas are good ones to be acted upon?

Jeremy Bamber is behind it all Holly! The CT have been manipulated to such an extent their brains are scrambled when it comes to Bamber, they can't see the wood through the trees. Many of them will be acting out of character.
I implore you to read up on psychopaths and their relationships with others. You cannot truly understand it unless you've experienced it; and I suspect you may have?

[Nicholas]

Interesting though that the jeremybamberforum is down to around 10 posters a day and ngb has decided to bring this up. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9398.0.html

Ngb states: "I have not revealed what I know and others here have also maintained confidences, but frankly this character should be exposed."

Reminds me a bit of David's FEB (as Holly refers to it).

Why now? Why bring this up when the forums dead? And why keep turning a blind eye to the quite apparent psychopath Mike Tesco, and others?

It's clear David started the thread in order to take the heat off himself because Holly has further exposed his sneaky, irrational behaviour.

David, you should have listened to your dad and gone to the newspapers. Your credibility is nought!

Actions speak louder than words ngb, anyone with a modicum of common sense knows this. Will be interesting however to see where this all leads or whether it's another ploy; like David's FEB.

I note NGB's one hit wonder came to nothing.

Psychopaths like Jeremy Bamber suffer from boredom. http://psychopathsandlove.com/the-nemesis-of-the-psychopath-boredom/
 
They need regular challenges and that's what I imagine Bamber's case has been to him these past 3 decades; along with the challenge of the strong characters he comes up against.

Simon Hall would often say he saw me as a challenge.    Comments like this are red flags!

"When a psychopath is bored, he may recognise that his grandiosity is only an illusion. This recognition is unbearable, according to Reid Melloy PhD, and he experiences a need for immediate and aggressive gratification to restore his grandiosity.

[Nicholas]

No one is forcing the CT to supposedly act on JB's behalf.  They are a group of 6 females and 2 males I believe.  I'm assuming they plan together events like graveside reading and bake-off.  What sort of people could ever think these ideas are good ones to be acted upon?

I sometimes think they see JB as a caged pet.

The creepy campaign to free Jeremy Bamber
"Bamber’s defence has always been inherently implausible. Even Bob Woffinden, a veteran journalist who specialises in miscarriages of justice and who spent 20 years arguing for Bamber’s release, bravely wrote last year that he has changed his mind and is now sure of Bamber’s guilt. In running his campaign from his maximum security prison cell, said Woffinden, ‘Bamber still has all the cunning and ingenuity that he displayed in planning the crime.’ The calls to overturn his conviction are a disgrace, based on nothing more than lies, distractions and hollow theorising. The real affront to our justice system would be another pointless appeal for this monstrous killer. https://www.spectator.co.uk/2012/04/lack-of-appeal/

[Nicholas]

I didn't say she alienates JB I said she alienates a lot of sensible people who are able to contribute something worthwhile.  Perhaps alienates is too strong a word but if others come along who are not the type to be controlled and dictated to they will not be embraced as such.  And yes I do have evidence but I'm not prepared to divulge it.

See Andrew Green's email to me http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9392.msg457498#msg457498

"I don't want to take sides in any dispute that doesn't concern me directly, but you do seem to have alienated a lot of people who would otherwise be willing to give support to Simon, simply because they want to see an innocent person exonerated.


What you are witnessing Holly is what Jeremy Bamber has created. It is he who has alienated Sarah Hanover and others. From the email posted on the previous page you can see quite clearly her paranoia. This isn't normal behaviour; it's how victims of abuse behave. It's what Bamber has turned her into. She really believes all the lies he's told her. She's clearly got trust issues; again caused by Bambers mind games. She's been brainwashed.

Dr Andrew Green's email to me was total BS and told me all I needed to know about him. I couldn't possibly have stopped anyone from contacting Hall but people like Andrew Green are also abusers. They use what they perceive to be their power to do and say as they please and they target individuals in vulnerable situations.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/law/staff/agreen

[Angelo222]

The creepy campaign to free Jeremy Bamber
"Bamber’s defence has always been inherently implausible. Even Bob Woffinden, a veteran journalist who specialises in miscarriages of justice and who spent 20 years arguing for Bamber’s release, bravely wrote last year that he has changed his mind and is now sure of Bamber’s guilt. In running his campaign from his maximum security prison cell, said Woffinden, ‘Bamber still has all the cunning and ingenuity that he displayed in planning the crime.’ The calls to overturn his conviction are a disgrace, based on nothing more than lies, distractions and hollow theorising. The real affront to our justice system would be another pointless appeal for this monstrous killer. https://www.spectator.co.uk/2012/04/lack-of-appeal/

I totally agree.   

[Angelo222]

See Andrew Green's email to me http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9392.msg457498#msg457498

"I don't want to take sides in any dispute that doesn't concern me directly, but you do seem to have alienated a lot of people who would otherwise be willing to give support to Simon, simply because they want to see an innocent person exonerated.


What you are witnessing Holly is what Jeremy Bamber has created. It is he who has alienated Sarah Hanover and others. From the email posted on the previous page you can see quite clearly her paranoia. This isn't normal behaviour; it's how victims of abuse behave. It's what Bamber has turned her into. She really believes all the lies he's told her. She's clearly got trust issues; again caused by Bambers mind games. She's been brainwashed.

Dr Andrew Green's email to me was total BS and told me all I needed to know about him. I couldn't possibly have stopped anyone from contacting Hall but people like Andrew Green are also abusers. They use what they perceive to be their power to do and say as they please and they target individuals in vulnerable situations.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/law/staff/agreen

Do you think the Bristol Innocence Project has any credibility after what occurred with Simon Hall?

[Nicholas]

Do you think the Bristol Innocence Project has any credibility after what occurred with Simon Hall?

The Bristol Innocence Project in no longer running, which is a shame in many ways because their mistakes, especially in relation to the Simon Hall case, have been brushed under the carpet, therefore making it more likely they will be repeated by other similar projects in the future.

It truly amazes me how the likes of Dr Michael Naughton carry on regardless, presumably believing in his previous work, when it's quite clear to people like me that his work is outdated and requires immediate revision.

I mean, look at the quite apparent double standards here:

Michael J. Naughton
@mjnaughton_
·
12 Apr
This book shows that miscarriages of justice as evidenced by successful appeals against criminal conviction are a routine and mundane feature of the criminal justice system which cause extensive and profound forms of harm to direct and indirect victims: (link: http://michaeljnaughton.com/?page_id=875) michaeljnaughton.com/?page_id=875

University innocence projects: where are they now?
Only one conviction has ever been overturned on the strength of a university innocence project’s work in the UK – what’s going on? And what’s next for these projects?
"The innocence movement itself has been in a state of disarray following the 2014 disbanding of the umbrella group Innocence Network UK. Its outspoken founder Dr Michael Naughton unilaterally pulled the plug on the scheme, accusing some universities of jumping on the bandwagon, using projects as “a recruiting tool” to attract students to their courses and playing lip service to its main mission of overturning convictions.
But before that, some universities had abandoned the network over concerns about a lack of democratic accountability, and a genuinely radical and exciting project had become mired in infighting.

Prisoners in denial don’t get parole or better conditions yes they do!  – they can’t all be making it up. Why can't they? A point made by the Guardian’s Eric Allison recently: “It just doesn’t make sense that so many would make false claims. Why doesn't it make sense? Because Eric Allison says so? Who is Eric Allison? https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/apr/27/university-innocence-projects-where-are-they-now

"Jon Robins is a freelance journalist who writes about the law and justice. He runs thejusticegap.com and is the author of The First Miscarriage of Justice (Waterside Press, 2014)

Notice the ELEPHANT in the room!  and that ELEPHANT will remain in the room until such time that all those people and organisations involved in the miscarriage of justice movement acknowledge their previous mistakes, understand how, why and where it went wrong and apply those lessons learned going forward.

Speaking of which, this was recently tweeted by Dr Michael Naughton

"A herd of elephants is needed in the criminal justice system room - police & prosecutors are not disclosing vital evidence; defence lawyers are failing to investigate cases properly; juries are convicting innocent people; the appeal courts & the CCRC are failing the innocent too. https://mobile.twitter.com/mjnaughton_/status/981433818103123969

Michael Naughton appears oblivious, but we know he isn't! It's a facade, self preservation possibly?

A heard of elephants are running amok within the miscarriage of justice movement and there's one sat on Michael Naughtons lap.

[Nicholas]

Do you think the Bristol Innocence Project has any credibility after what occurred with Simon Hall?

Do you think any of these projects have any credibility?


https://l2b.thelawyer.com/issues/l2b-online/white-case-joins-innocence-pro-bono-network/
https://www.whitecase.com
http://www.innocencenetwork.org.uk/springconferenc

https://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/features/Innocence-Projects-–-Green-Shoots

Mark Alexander writing on the resurgence and growth in universities
"Over the past nine months I’ve been trying to get a sense of the health of the innocence project movement in the UK. Between 2005 and 2014, 36 British universities signed up to the Innocence Network (INUK) (www.innocencenetwork.org.uk).  Far from dying back after the dissolution of the INUK scheme in September 2014, there has been a resurgence of growth, aspiration, and zeal in universities across the country. Ironically, it seems that many projects felt stifled by INUK membership and are now experiencing the benefits of liberation. As Professor Claire McGourlay (University of Sheffield) described it to me, “INUK folding was not the end, for us it was the start of great things, for example being able to take on joint enterprise cases”. 

Under the aegis of British Convict Criminology (run by Dr Sacha Darke and Andy Aresti from the University of Westminster, and Rod Earle of the Open University – www.convictcriminology.org/bcc.htm,  I set out to discover just how many projects had survived the breakup to go it alone. With legal aid cuts forcing more firms out of the criminal appeals industry, and mounting confusion about who we can turn to for help, my primary focus has been to establish exactly what support is available to prisoners like myself maintaining innocence and then to see how this can be built upon. In this article, I bring together views from various academics about why INUK folded, in order to make the case for cooperation between all projects in a new, democratic “Innocence Committee”. It is hoped that this will encourage more universities to get involved not only in the fight against miscarriages of justice after the fact, but in developing policy to prevent future injustices occurring in the first place.

Going Solo
The results of my research, whilst by no means exhaustive, show that there are at least 19 universities and two charitable organisations running independent criminal appeals clinics  (I use the terms “project', “criminal appeals clinic”, “innocence project”, and “justice project” interchangeably throughout this essay to refer to groups of volunteers and students who, under professional supervision, investigate potential miscarriages of justice on a pro bono basis,) in the UK. Between them they have the capacity to investigate at least 58 cases at any one time where potentially innocent men and women have been wrongly convicted. Full details can be found in the accompanying table. Although all of the projects are currently operating at full capacity, anyone who has been a victim of a miscarriage of justice can contact them for help. You may be placed on a waiting list if they have one, and are likely to be sent an application form to fill out. Those prisoners lucky enough to have a solicitor already can still apply for extra support. Solicitors tend to lack the time that innocence projects have to invest in a case, and conversely, innocence projects tend to lack the expertise of a law firm – so collaboration between the two can improve the prospects of an investigation considerably.
Author details
Mark is a final year LLB candidate and a member of British Convict Criminology. He has been in prison since February 2010. HMP Coldingley.
The author wishes to thank Professor Julie Price and Dr Sacha Darke for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article

Mark Alexander murdered his "controlling" 70 year old father, chopped him up then buried him in the garden.

He writes: "My own firm of solicitors were forced to close their criminal appeals department at the beginning of 2015. Those of us struggling with exhausting and lengthy appeals know how easy it would be to just give up in the face of obstacle after relent- less obstacle

http://www.thejusticegap.com/2015/05/we-need-our-innocence-projects-now-more-than-ever/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1310848/Law-student-Mark-Alexander-murdered-controlling-father-jailed-16-years.html

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7710.0

http://www.mojuk.org.uk/MOJUK%202015/Mark%20Alexander.html


You really couldn't make this BS up if you tried 

[Daisy]

Just to put the record straight, Mark’s father was not chopped up. This was alleged by the prosecution but was retracted at trial as it had been found to be entirely untrue.  Of course that thought had by then been implanted in the minds of the jury. Manipulation!!!

[Nicholas]

Just to put the record straight, Mark’s father was not chopped up. This was alleged by the prosecution but was retracted at trial as it had been found to be entirely untrue.  Of course that thought had by then been implanted in the minds of the jury. Manipulation!!!

I apologise Daisy, what words would Mark like us to use to describe how his fathers remains were found?

"He was found guilty of murdering his 70-year-old father, he dismembered his body and buried him under concrete in his garden.
The judge said: "The relationship to some extent involved fear of his father or at least fear of going against his father's wishes. You might have killed him because you couldn't face telling him of your future plans or because you tried to tell him and he disagreed... Not only did you end your father's life in early September last year, you ruined all of your own future prospects."http://www.thelawpages.com/court-cases/index.php?res=1

"Passing sentence at Reading Crown Court, Judge John Reddihough said he accepted that Alexander may have been in fear of his father, but added that, after his death, he acted in a "despicable, callous and sometimes cunning manner".
Alexander remained impassive as he was taken down to the cells.
Officers found his badly decomposed remains buried under mortar and concrete in the garden. His son had attempted to burn parts of the body in a bid to disguise its identity.
During the course of a six-week trial it emerged that Mark Alexander, who was studying law and French at King's College, London at the time, faked his father's signature in Christmas cards as part of a plan to conceal the murder.
The court was also told of the extent to which his father dominated his son's life.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/student-jailed-for-16-years-for-murdering-father-2075994.html

Mark Alexander appears to be a psychopath. I imagine his pre sentence report will refer to anti social personality disorder or one of the other cluster b personality disorders. He's another con artist and coward.

Why are you wasting your time defending him Daisy? He's a law student. He can defend himself.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3819029/

[Nicholas]

Manipulation!!!

I suspect this is second nature for Mark

https://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/dangerous-mind-games-how-psychopaths-manipulate-and-deceive/

Just like it is for Bamber

But the innocent projects and miscarriages of justice organisations won't tell you that because they are only interested in technicalities of law and promoting themselves; furthering their careers etc

Why would psychopathy matter to these people?

And what's the betting Mark wrote the following https://innocent.org.uk/2016/10/16/there-is-little-evidence-as-to-precisely-what-happened-the-murder-of-samuel-alexander/

Just to put the record straight, Mark’s father was not chopped up. This was alleged by the prosecution but was retracted at trial as it had been found to be entirely untrue.  Of course that thought had by then been implanted in the minds of the jury. Manipulation!!!

Daisy, Mark is having you on.

If you re-read much of what you have posted on his behalf; his guilt (and character) is laid bare for all to see.

[Daisy]

I suspect this is second nature for Mark

https://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/dangerous-mind-games-how-psychopaths-manipulate-and-deceive/

Just like it is for Bamber

But the innocent projects and miscarriages of justice organisations won't tell you that because they are only interested in technicalities of law and promoting themselves; furthering their careers etc

Why would psychopathy matter to these people?

And what's the betting Mark wrote the following https://innocent.org.uk/2016/10/16/there-is-little-evidence-as-to-precisely-what-happened-the-murder-of-samuel-alexander/

Daisy, Mark is having you on.

If you re-read much of what you have posted on his behalf; his guilt (and character) is laid bare for all to see.

I will comment on the Mark Alexander thread but we have to bear in mind that there are only two people who know the truth - the victim and the perpetrator. The victim can’t speak as he is dead and the perpetrator may or may not be Mark. None of us know as we weren’t there. There are still many unanswered questions in this complex case.

[Nicholas]

I will comment on the Mark Alexander thread but we have to bear in mind that there are only two people who know the truth - the victim and the perpetrator. The victim can’t speak as he is dead and the perpetrator may or may not be Mark. None of us know as we weren’t there. There are still many unanswered questions in this complex case.

Like Jeremy Bamber, Mark Alexander was found guilty in a court of law. If we were all to think this way there would be no need for a criminal justice system.

It's not a "complex case" btw Daisy, that's just the impression Marks wants to portray to his unsuspecting public.

Take away all the smoke and mirrors and what lurks beneath is a dangerous and dysfunctional individual who puts on a mask of sanity.