J B Campaign Ltd - Much Ado About Nothing...

[John]

I haven't heard from JB since the beginning of the year.  No acknowledgment whatsoever of the invitation to the CT to join in a debate. 

Why not make all docs available on the OS.  Sure many lay people will probably misunderstand, misinterpret but it doesn't really matter as only experts meeting the criteria of expert witness will have any sway.  If such and such said JB was a horrible man blah, blah who cares it's not going to change anything either way.  I can understand JB/CT not wanting to release SoC sensitive photos/images but other than that I want to see everything pleeze!

So is that a refusal by default Holly?

[scipio_usmc]

To prove this allegation you will have to A prove mike has those documents in his possession and then B prove he is aware he has them and understands the content.

If the Campaign team has proof to refute their own claims that would mean they are stupid. The likes of Andrew Hunter, Michael O'Brien and Flo Krause are not stupid people so if what you are saying is true then they are deliberately misleading the public, a rather bold accusation to make.

Hunter is not so bright if you ask me, as for O'Brien he is biased and going on bias not anything substantive to believe in Jeremy.

Mike intentionally refused to post everything and despite saying at one time or another he woulf post the entire report he hasn't wand why is obvious it refutes his lies.

The Campaign team are propagandists like Mike they assert many untrue things and misrepresent what materials say in order to support their nonsense. I gave you one example with Jeapes.  They do that with many witnesses. They even assert Nevill phoned police and that Bonnett's log proves it because it is the log of Nevill's call even though it clearly states the message was passed to West from Jeremy and then passed by West to him. Even though it was a trial exhibit they claim it was lost and suddenly found.

Letting everyone see everything will just allow people to understand even more what evidence goes against Jeremy and refutes the campaign team it would not be in their interest to release everything.  Just as it would not be beneficial for Jeremy or his advocates to release the CCRC rejection so people can see just how bad the smackdown was which not only would make Jeremy look bad but the advocates who put on such pathetic showing.

Researchers want access to everything to try to learn the truth. Propagandists desire to shape people's perceptions of what the truth is by limiting what information is available and trying to get people to believe their rendition. Lawyers do the same in trying to keep evidence out of court such as confessions and suppression of damning evidence.  If someone is arrested and not read their rights and tells where a body is then they obviously are guilty. Suppressing the evidence that he lead them to the body would be hiding the truth that he did it.  But that is done to deter the government from ignoring rights that they would have no motivation to follow otherwise.  Of course there are other ways to handle it such as to punish the police but the courts made up their own exclusion rule instead to deter.  In addition to deterring the rule prevents the government from being able to profit from violations.  So it is not just a raw search for the truth in court but a contest where adversaries oppose eachother using set rules and have to prove their case under those restrictions.

Propagandists do not conduct a search for the truth they want to pretend things are how they wish them to be and try to convince others to believe such by using any means at their disposal.

2 quotes from Joseph Goebbels:

“That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”

“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” 

[david1819]

Hunter is not so bright if you ask me, as for O'Brien he is biased and going on bias not anything substantive to believe in Jeremy.

Mike intentionally refused to post everything and despite saying at one time or another he woulf post the entire report he hasn't wand why is obvious it refutes his lies.

I do find it interesting that the relatives have not taken libel action against Hunter or the producers of the documentary that say his family framed him.

https://youtu.be/WOC7xxz_PQE?t=37m9s

Propagandists do not conduct a search for the truth they want to pretend things are how they wish them to be and try to convince others to believe such by using any means at their disposal.

2 quotes from Joseph Goebbels:

“That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”

“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Dictatorships need propaganda in order to survive.

The propaganda of Joseph Goebbels only worked because the Nazis had a master orator of supreme charisma

By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise - Adolf Hitler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFNUdCtMXWE

[John]

The list of high profile supporters of Jeremy Bamber must be extremely tiny because association with a double child killer who also murdered his adoptive parents and sister must do little to enhance their credibility but can anyone list them for the sake of completeness?

Remember that any names put forward must be accompanied by supporting material.

[Caroline]

The list of high profile supporters of Jeremy Bamber must be extremely tiny because association with a double child killer who also murdered his adoptive parents and sister must do little to enhance their credibility but can anyone list them for the sake of completeness?

Remember that any names put forward must be accompanied by supporting material.

Errrrrrm ....................... &%+((£

[Holly Goodhead]

Hunter is not so bright if you ask me, as for O'Brien he is biased and going on bias not anything substantive to believe in Jeremy.

Mike intentionally refused to post everything and despite saying at one time or another he woulf post the entire report he hasn't wand why is obvious it refutes his lies.

The Campaign team are propagandists like Mike they assert many untrue things and misrepresent what materials say in order to support their nonsense. I gave you one example with Jeapes.  They do that with many witnesses. They even assert Nevill phoned police and that Bonnett's log proves it because it is the log of Nevill's call even though it clearly states the message was passed to West from Jeremy and then passed by West to him. Even though it was a trial exhibit they claim it was lost and suddenly found.

Letting everyone see everything will just allow people to understand even more what evidence goes against Jeremy and refutes the campaign team it would not be in their interest to release everything.  Just as it would not be beneficial for Jeremy or his advocates to release the CCRC rejection so people can see just how bad the smackdown was which not only would make Jeremy look bad but the advocates who put on such pathetic showing.

Researchers want access to everything to try to learn the truth. Propagandists desire to shape people's perceptions of what the truth is by limiting what information is available and trying to get people to believe their rendition. Lawyers do the same in trying to keep evidence out of court such as confessions and suppression of damning evidence.  If someone is arrested and not read their rights and tells where a body is then they obviously are guilty. Suppressing the evidence that he lead them to the body would be hiding the truth that he did it.  But that is done to deter the government from ignoring rights that they would have no motivation to follow otherwise.  Of course there are other ways to handle it such as to punish the police but the courts made up their own exclusion rule instead to deter.  In addition to deterring the rule prevents the government from being able to profit from violations.  So it is not just a raw search for the truth in court but a contest where adversaries oppose eachother using set rules and have to prove their case under those restrictions.

Propagandists do not conduct a search for the truth they want to pretend things are how they wish them to be and try to convince others to believe such by using any means at their disposal.

2 quotes from Joseph Goebbels:

“That propaganda is good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the desired result. It is not propaganda’s task to be intelligent, its task is to lead to success.”

“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”

Blimey Scipio that's a bit of a tenuous link isn't it?  Third Reich, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda and JB's CT, OS and Trudi Benjamin?!   &%+((£

Mike has recently admitted to mental illness.  Other than Mike why would anyone lie, distort etc for a 'child killer'?  People genuinely misunderstand, misinterpret and perceive things differently that are open to interpretation.  Only evidence/data that is measurable in scientific terms really counts for anything in this case imo such as the pathological evidence, firearms/ballistics, biological (blood 'evidence') and psychological and psychiatric reports for June and Sheila. 

Eg take a look at this image.  Some people see an old female and some a young female.  Some can see both straight away (rare) and some will see both when a.n other points out both can be seen.  Others are unable to see both.  This imo can be applied to all aspects of the case that are open to interpretation:

[Holly Goodhead]

The list of high profile supporters of Jeremy Bamber must be extremely tiny because association with a double child killer who also murdered his adoptive parents and sister must do little to enhance their credibility but can anyone list them for the sake of completeness?

Remember that any names put forward must be accompanied by supporting material.

Those that 'support' JB will see him as the victim of a MoJ.  I can't imagine anyone of sound mind knowingly supporting a 'child killer'.  I'm sure most, like myself, would want JB to spend the rest of his days behind bars if guilty of the crimes he has been convicted of. 

It's difficult to gauge what support JB has past and present.  Some might operate under the radar too.  My definition of 'high profile' is someone most of the population would recognise and I don't believe JB has anyone who fits this description.  He does have some supporters who some will recognise and others that are in a position of some influence to some degree:

Susan Penhaligon - Actress
Michael O'Brien - Victim of MoJ - Widespread news coverage
Michael Turner - QC
Andrew Hunter - Former Tory MP
Peter Tatchell - Human Rights Campaigner
Eric Allison - Journalist/Guardian
Scott Lomax - Author
Flo Krause - Barrister
Diana Lady Waterlow - JP
George Galloway - MP

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/patrons-and-supporters

https://www.change.org/p/michael-gove-secretary-of-state-for-justice-essex-police-release-all-documents-withheld-under-pii-to-jeremy-bamber-s-legal-defence/u/14868482

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/israel-must-answer-for-dubai-killing-1051233#4PusLtDXJBMMF1ll.97

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9716069/Devils-advocate-Michael-Turner-prepares-for-his-toughest-case.html

http://www.sclomax.co.uk/

Are there any other convicted criminals claiming they are innocent serving life sentences or long sentences with support such as the above? 

[scipio_usmc]

Blimey Scipio that's a bit of a tenuous link isn't it?  Third Reich, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda and JB's CT, OS and Trudi Benjamin?!   &%+((£

Mike has recently admitted to mental illness.  Other than Mike why would anyone lie, distort etc for a 'child killer'?  People genuinely misunderstand, misinterpret and perceive things differently that are open to interpretation.  Only evidence/data that is measurable in scientific terms really counts for anything in this case imo such as the pathological evidence, firearms/ballistics, biological (blood 'evidence') and psychological and psychiatric reports for June and Sheila. 

Eg take a look at this image.  Some people see an old female and some a young female.  Some can see both straight away (rare) and some will see both when a.n other points out both can be seen.  Others are unable to see both.  This imo can be applied to all aspects of the case that are open to interpretation:

It doesn't matter that Goebbels was a Nazi his quotes pertained to propaganda not the validity of the Nazi regime.  The first notes how people who engage in propaganda believe.  Propaganda is only bad if it fails to achieve their objective.  Trying to get people to believe you way of thinking by hook or by crook is totally acceptable to them.

Moreover, they feel they can twist anything if repeated enough and aiming it at the right people.

They can't find anything legitimate to use to try to convince the public of Jeremy's innocence so they make up all sorts of things from proof of Nevill phoning police to general attacks on the police to create an air of suspicion that they and the family framed him.  When all that smokescreen crap is taken away they have nothing. It is just worthless bogus propaganda.

Hunter among others cited this worthless propaganda and that is why the efforts of these high profile people went no where.

Propagandists are so hell bent on getting people to believe what they want others to believe that they will say anything. 

Why do they do it?  That requires examining them in great detail.  Why do so many women throw themselves at convicts?  Recently it was revealed that some woman fell in love with the Unabomber while he was in prison and even tried to say he did nothing wrong.  What is wrong with such people?  Obviously you would have to examine her in great detail to find out what her problems were.  Some of them have severe mental defects others emotional problems that leave them short of being insane but still damaged.   There is not enough time to talk about all the screwed up people out there whose issues manifest in a host of different ways.

I don't have a horse in this race I only care about the truth of whether Jeremy is innocent or not based on the evidence and facts.  They are emotionally invested in Jeremy being innocent and will twist anything they can to use in support of their position.

Take an issue we just discussed the casings. Someone acting like them who is emotionally invested in Jeremy being guilty would post the statement about the casing being found under her body and say this is proof that  her body was moved and dumped on top of it. Such person would ignore the other evidence that it was not directly under her body but simply close to it.  Someone objective will note all the evidence surrounding it and discuss which one they think is accurate and why. Someone biased will not disclose the rest and pretend that there is just one account and it is thus fact.  Sometimes they do more and outright lie and say a square is a circle.

The Dr Phil show has had on numerous people, men and women, who got scammed by Nigerian scammers pretending to be in love with them who got the to give tons of money.  He proved the documents they sent were forged and fake and yet these people still refused to admit and face they were being scammed because they did not want to face the truth.  Some people hide from the truth in fantasy worlds they create because they are less ugly.  Some people don't want to admit they were fooled and wasted so much time supporting someone who didn't deserve it.  Some use Jeremy's case for their own ends, mike definitely does so to obtain attention no one would otherwise give him.  You would have to look hard at each campaign team member to find out what their deal is.  For some of them it is like a religion almost.  They have a group of people they like to socialize with and they care about having a cause to push to help occupy their time.  There are malcontents who don't care what the cause is they just go city to city taking part in demonstrations no matter what they might be. The possibilities are endless of why one can end up joining a cause.

[Myster]

Why do they do it?  That requires examining them in great detail.  Why do so many women throw themselves at convicts? Recently it was revealed that some woman fell in love with the Unabomber while he was in prison and even tried to say he did nothing wrong.  What is wrong with such people?  Obviously you would have to examine her in great detail to find out what her problems were.  Some of them have severe mental defects others emotional problems that leave them short of being insane but still damaged.   There is not enough time to talk about all the screwed up people out there whose issues manifest in a host of different ways.

Wherever there's a fanciable murderer, there's also a queue of desperate hybristophiliacs...

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/evil-killer-neil-entwistle-admits-7235381

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oe9a-_not24

... and deluded relatives.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3410614/Father-Briton-convicted-killing-family-claims-son-innocent.html

[Holly Goodhead]

Propaganda is literally everywhere.

But surely you could say the same about any 'cause' whether it be politics, religion, football team, animal welfare, etc, etc there are always those at the extreme end who to most are irrational to the extent some even turn to violence? 

Supporting a convicted child killer who has been behind bars for 30 years and had numerous failed appeals/CCRC applications is always going to be highly contentious as the Democratic/legal system, rightly or wrongly, has deemed him/her guilty. 

Lots of people persist in the face of overwhelming opposition for years:

Mother of Stephen Lawrence
Families of Hillsborough Victims
Mother of Stefan Kiszko
Mother of Michael Hickey
Father and husband of Sally Clark
Families of Guildford Four
Families of Birmingham Six
Family of Stephen Downing

If we were discussing these cases now I wonder how many would be for MoJ and how many guilty?  The first two on the list are slightly different but involve state cover ups/wrongdoing/incompetence. 

I don't think the CT have anything on the OS that they know to be untrue but use it anyway as it supports JB.  Perhaps I'm naive.  Where they use things such as the phone call from NB to EP I think they really believe it happened based on the documents.  I think it's unlikely NB called EP but I can't prove it didn't happen no more than I can prove NB's phone call to JB did happen.

Scipio I think you might find these amusing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udnA0IkLTTM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T396I1jfhNA

This sort of thing isn't just restricted to females!  I know a guy who has to my mind a very odd relationship with a woman he met in Thailand some 12/13 years ago!  The woman is some 30 years his junior and he sends her £000's of pounds every year for tickets, etc to visit him (this happens about 6 times a year, every year).  She turns up once every 3/4 years.  You simply wouldn't believe the reasons she gives for not turning up.  Everyone tries to tell him including his family but no he will not have it.  The average Thai earns about sterling equivalent 3k a year and he sends about 12k a year on average.  The etc = apparently she claims she needs to show the officials issuing a visa to travel to England that she needs X thousand in her bank account so she can support herself when she arrives.  Even though on the odd occasion she turns up she stays with the guy and he pays for everything.  The guy is personable, intelligent, attractive looking and has money!  Now people have given up trying to talk sense into him.
   

[Holly Goodhead]

It doesn't matter that Goebbels was a Nazi his quotes pertained to propagandanot the validity of the Nazi regime.  The first notes how people who engage in propaganda believe.  Propaganda is only bad if it fails to achieve their objective.  Trying to get people to believe you way of thinking by hook or by crook is totally acceptable to them.

Moreover, they feel they can twist anything if repeated enough and aiming it at the right people.

They can't find anything legitimate to use to try to convince the public of Jeremy's innocence so they make up all sorts of things from proof of Nevill phoning police to general attacks on the police to create an air of suspicion that they and the family framed him.  When all that smokescreen crap is taken away they have nothing. It is just worthless bogus propaganda.

Hunter among others cited this worthless propaganda and that is why the efforts of these high profile people went no where.

Propagandists are so hell bent on getting people to believe what they want others to believe that they will say anything. 

Why do they do it?  That requires examining them in great detail.  Why do so many women throw themselves at convicts?  Recently it was revealed that some woman fell in love with the Unabomber while he was in prison and even tried to say he did nothing wrong.  What is wrong with such people?  Obviously you would have to examine her in great detail to find out what her problems were.  Some of them have severe mental defects others emotional problems that leave them short of being insane but still damaged.   There is not enough time to talk about all the screwed up people out there whose issues manifest in a host of different ways.

I don't have a horse in this race I only care about the truth of whether Jeremy is innocent or not based on the evidence and facts.  They are emotionally invested in Jeremy being innocent and will twist anything they can to use in support of their position.

Take an issue we just discussed the casings. Someone acting like them who is emotionally invested in Jeremy being guilty would post the statement about the casing being found under her body and say this is proof that  her body was moved and dumped on top of it. Such person would ignore the other evidence that it was not directly under her body but simply close to it.  Someone objective will note all the evidence surrounding it and discuss which one they think is accurate and why. Someone biased will not disclose the rest and pretend that there is just one account and it is thus fact.  Sometimes they do more and outright lie and say a square is a circle.

The Dr Phil show has had on numerous people, men and women, who got scammed by Nigerian scammers pretending to be in love with them who got the to give tons of money.  He proved the documents they sent were forged and fake and yet these people still refused to admit and face they were being scammed because they did not want to face the truth.  Some people hide from the truth in fantasy worlds they create because they are less ugly.  Some people don't want to admit they were fooled and wasted so much time supporting someone who didn't deserve it.  Some use Jeremy's case for their own ends, mike definitely does so to obtain attention no one would otherwise give him.  You would have to look hard at each campaign team member to find out what their deal is.  For some of them it is like a religion almost.  They have a group of people they like to socialize with and they care about having a cause to push to help occupy their time.  There are malcontents who don't care what the cause is they just go city to city taking part in demonstrations no matter what they might be. The possibilities are endless of why one can end up joining a cause.

What do you think was valid about the Nazi regime?

[Myster]

This sort of thing isn't just restricted to females!  I know a guy who has to my mind a very odd relationship with a woman he met in Thailand some 12/13 years ago!  The woman is some 30 years his junior and he sends her £000's of pounds every year for tickets, etc to visit him (this happens about 6 times a year, every year).  She turns up once every 3/4 years.  You simply wouldn't believe the reasons she gives for not turning up.  Everyone tries to tell him including his family but no he will not have it.  The average Thai earns about sterling equivalent 3k a year and he sends about 12k a year on average.  The etc = apparently she claims she needs to show the officials issuing a visa to travel to England that she needs X thousand in her bank account so she can support herself when she arrives.  Even though on the odd occasion she turns up she stays with the guy and he pays for everything.  The guy is personable, intelligent, attractive looking and has money!  Now people have given up trying to talk sense into him.
   

What's she called... Polly Poontang?

There's method in his madness though, because if he lived with her in a block of flats in Thailand he might end up as pavement pizza after being 'suicidally' thrown out of a window by Polly's other boyfriends... as many lonely white European men are.

[Holly Goodhead]

What's she called... Polly Poontang?

There's method in his madness though, because if he lived with her in a block of flats in Thailand he might end up as pavement pizza after being 'suicidally' thrown out of a window by Polly's other boyfriends... as many lonely white European men are.

Few!All the girls take on short names to assist the farangs!  He does visit Thailand but rarely stays with her.  He is usually resigned/banished to a hotel. 
 

[Myster]

Few!All the girls take on short names to assist the farangs!  He does visit Thailand but rarely stays with her.  He is usually resigned/banished to a hotel.

Pheeeww!  I think Few's having more than a few farangs!

[Holly Goodhead]

So is that a refusal by default Holly?

I've recently received a very small card probably so he didn't have to write much!  I don't really feel comfortable disclosing the contents of private communication that I've initiated.  However as I said on the forum I copied the invitation to JB I thought I should follow through on the outcome.  Here's the copy invitation sent to CT and JB:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6903.msg296943#msg296943

As you will see I signed it Holly as I'm pretty certain the CT will read this forum and that is what they will know me as.  When I communicate with JB I use my authentic name.  I sent an email to JB literally copying the invitation with the following sentence only added "I've just sent a copy of the following to your campaign team and hope you will agree it is a good idea".  He responded by querying why I was using the name Holly!  Fair enough as I dont think he really understands social media and the internet in practice.  He then said debates are fine but some info is confidential.  I get the feeling he is always having to deal with warring factions of 'supporters' and tries to keep the peace. 

If the CT don't want to enter into debate fine but I would like to see them make an add-on to the OS which contains all case related material.  If there's any material they deem unsuitable for whatever reason eg SoC photos or info that really has to be kept out the public domain for an impending appeal etc then I would like to see some reference to this material and the fact it is being withheld. The CT want full disclosure of docs they claim are still being withheld under PII and so do we!  We want access to all the material currently in the CT's possession along with anything still held under PII.  PLEASE!