David there is not a single piece of evidence that proofs Mugford was telling the truth. Nothing. She has a long record of dishonesty i.e. cheque fraud on numerous occasions and the caravan robbery.
Who knows when she tells the truth?
She was hardly destitute when she carried out the cheque fraud it was pure greed.
Who knows what she would do or say for money ?
I will never believe she would have gone anywhere near that mortuary to see her boyfriends handiwork.
Never in a million years
I don't believe a word she said
If the jury had know Mugford had done a deal with a newspaper IF JB WAS FOUND GUILTY I believe the jury would have doubted her testimony against Jeremy
Knowing she was due a payment on conviction
Forensic tests on tampered evidence????
You know Jackie, what you have just said there applies to Jeremy Bamber umpteen times over.... whose idea was the Osea robbery in the first place? I suppose that wasn't motivated by greed.... no, it was only to demonstrate to the family that security was poor.
Did he give the £900+ back???
As for the mortuary, he wasn't all that keen on going to see his own handiwork... he was too busy visiting his accountant and getting to know how much he was worth,
and that just after the murders to boot!!!
And what if the jury had known about Bamber's very own lucrative NOW deal if he was aquitted... £40,000, and even then he complained that it wasn't enough!
What tampered evidence?... photo on the bed with one wound, blood planted in the moderator, scratching of the AGA surround?... you've been brainwashed by
Teskowski's madcap theories.
Ok, that's it then... shut the shop... we might as well not bothering answering any more questions, because it's obvious that there is no way of convincing you of his guilt, and I don't think any of us here want to spend the next "million" years trying to do so.