Time for guilters to change stance ?

[adam]

A supporter said recently, if Bamber wanted to stage the scene to make it look like murder/suicide, he would have killed himself at WHF !

Bless there hearts.

[John]

Fair play to some supporters. They put themselves out there, on Youtube, the internet, radio and television. Donating their hard earned money and free time to the cause.

I am not sure why, apart from having to do this to get him released. Every piece of evidence points to Bamber. While everything put forward from supporters have straight forward answers.

After all this time and several forums later I still fail to understand why Mike Teskowski has devoted such a large part of his life attempting to flog what is basically a dead horse.  He and his wife were declared insolvent not so long ago so one cannot but help wondering if he had let things slip due to his perceived obsession with the case and all things Jeremy Bamber?

The question has become all the more valid since Jeremy decided to distance himself from Mike and the blue forum.

[adam]

It is strange how people interpret information.

I took an interest because it was a famous case and there were pictures & Youtube clips of Bamber looking dapper in a suit.

The information online and on Youtube is very 50/50 and Wilkes's book is the least biased. But I never for a second thought he was innocent.

When first looking into the case,  aware there had been an arrest, conviction and failed appeals, it would have had to have been something pretty mind blowing to believe they all got it wrong. Julie lying because she was apparently jilted or two bodies at first being reported in the kitchen etc, was never enough.

Posting on two forums, just made his guilt more certain to me.

[ActualMat]

It is strange how people interpret information.

I took an interest because it was a famous case and there were pictures & Youtube clips of Bamber looking dapper in a suit.

The information online and on Youtube is very 50/50 and Wilkes's book is the least biased. But I never for a second thought he was innocent.

When first looking into the case,  aware there had been an arrest, conviction and failed appeals, it would have had to have been something pretty mind blowing to believe they all got it wrong. Julie lying because she was apparently jilted or two bodies at first being reported in the kitchen etc, was never enough.

Posting on two forums, just made his guilt more certain to me.

Same here, Adam. When you post on forums the evidence can be looked at a lot more closely than a book. When I read something in a book, whether it is a guilt or innocence book - I still think it's best to read the actual document yourself to make sure no spin has been put on it.

It's why I won't be reading Scott Lomax's book - his last one was enough awful BS for a liftetime and I'd rather read forum posts where the poster actual seems to know what they are talking about.

[John]

I agree, books should only be used for cross referencing purposes.

Julie Mugford's substantial statements and trial testimony are without doubt central to the case of Jeremy Bamber and the White House Farm murders.  Just think about it for a moment.

Had the murders not taken place, was it normal for someone to spend so much time and energy plotting to murder ones family and burn down the family home with them in it?  Was it normal to experiment with sleeping tablets to see what effect they would have on your victim?  The murders aside, it is very clear that Jeremy Bamber had some very serious psychological problems.

[Holly Goodhead]

I agree, books should only be used for cross referencing purposes.

Julie Mugford's substantial statements and trial testimony are without doubt central to the case of Jeremy Bamber and the White House Farm murders.  Just think about it for a moment.

Had the murders not taken place, was it normal for someone to spend so much time and energy plotting to murder ones family and burn down the family home with them in it?  Was it normal to experiment with sleeping tablets to see what effect they would have on your victim?  The murders aside, it is very clear that Jeremy Bamber had some very serious psychological problems.

Was it normal for a girlfriend to repeatedly listen to her boyfriend talk in such terms?  I'm pretty certain I would be off sharpish...whoosh....gone...

[Myster]

You weren't Julie Mugford.  She was infatuated, maybe insecure with first serious boyfriend syndrome and hence scared of letting go.

[John]

Was it normal for a girlfriend to repeatedly listen to her boyfriend talk in such terms?  I'm pretty certain I would be off sharpish...whoosh....gone...

I don't think Julie believed for a moment he would carry out his threats, she probably hoped he would come good in the end.