Author Topic: Communication With JB  (Read 897 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4366
  • How cute am I?!
Communication With JB
« on: February 28, 2017, 12:00:12 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7064.msg386291#msg386291

I think Jeremy will be more familiar than most with the injuries sustained by the victims and would know that June did indeed have a black eye and yet, he denied knowing about it when I asked - I can see no reason for him to deny it and find it suspicious. As far as AE's claim goes, I believe he did mention the black eye, just as he mentioned the cash in his dads wallet and then denied that. There are just too many of these instances - of course people can forget various elements but not these kinds of details.

48
« Last Edit: March 04, 2017, 07:16:56 PM by John »
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 531
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #1 on: February 28, 2017, 12:21:01 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7064.msg386291#msg386291

I think Jeremy will be more familiar than most with the injuries sustained by the victims and would know that June did indeed have a black eye and yet, he denied knowing about it when I asked - I can see no reason for him to deny it and find it suspicious. As far as AE's claim goes, I believe he did mention the black eye, just as he mentioned the cash in his dads wallet and then denied that. There are just too many of these instances - of course people can forget various elements but not these kinds of details.

?

Online Holly Goodhead

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4366
  • How cute am I?!
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #2 on: February 28, 2017, 12:41:45 PM »
?

I first wrote to JB early 2012 so about 5 years ago.  At this point in time he had been in prison some 26 years so I thought it pointless asking about any details that relied upon memory.  There were long gaps in my replies eg many months.  However after an exchange of a couple of letters it became apparent to me that he had a poor understanding of what I consider to be the important aspects of his case.  Instead he would focus on what I consider seemingly trivial aspects: two silencers, info held under pii and of course an imminent release! 

I asked for his help in making available soc photos for casings in the main bedroom and landing.  His response was that NB wasn't shot upstairs and the police made it all up.  I also put something to him about the blood flake which was dismissed out of hand.  At this point I knew that I was wasting my time.

Imo his mind has been truly scrambled not only by his long incarceration but by listening to the likes of Mike and the CT.  When JB has an opportunity to communicate with the outside world eg DM and Guardian interviews he waffles on about aspects of his case that are at best weak and imo have no substance to them eg a call from NB to the police or police communicating with someone inside the farmhouse.  He really is his own worst enemy.  His blogs etc are imo completely inappropriate, irrelevant and a total embarrassment.   If he had a consistent spokesperson throughout eg a solicitor or the like I don't believe he would be in the position he is in today.     

My communication is now limited to greeting cards wishing him well.  I doubt very much if he considers me a 'supporter' as he knows that I don't support many aspects of the case he holds dear.  I did send him a little pic of myself and I wouldn't be surprised to find it on the prison dartboard  @)(++(*   
Justice for Sheila and Jeremy. Victims of poorly arranged baby scoop era adoptions. Australia has apologised. Time for the UK to do the same?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hVbokTpYeg http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/92

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1448
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #3 on: February 28, 2017, 01:33:50 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7064.msg386291#msg386291

I think Jeremy will be more familiar than most with the injuries sustained by the victims and would know that June did indeed have a black eye and yet, he denied knowing about it when I asked - I can see no reason for him to deny it and find it suspicious. As far as AE's claim goes, I believe he did mention the black eye, just as he mentioned the cash in his dads wallet and then denied that. There are just too many of these instances - of course people can forget various elements but not these kinds of details.

If you mean he denied knowing June had a black eye and was acting as if you were the first person to tell him that she had a black eye then I agree that is suspicious.

On the one hand it is quite possible to forget details after a long period.  I have to refresh my memory about the facts of cases I handled years ago to regain a strong command of the facts.  On the other hand when people keep asking you about such details-thus reminding you about such details- it is not credible that you would forget.  By people constantly asking him that basically refreshes his memory.


Telling you he didn't know June had a black eye would be a great way to avoid having to answer further uncomfortable questions like when and how he first found out she had a black eye and if he really told police that June had a black eye prior to the murders.  How did you know she had a black eye before the police revealed such to you if you are not the killer would be a pretty damning question.  Much like saying how did you know how much money your father had in his wallet unless you looked.  I have no idea what my dad carries in his wallet I never looked in it ever my entire life.  The only reason I would ever look is if I had a notion to steal...  But you never know a father could say here is my wallet pay the man for me. My dad never did that with me but it could happen.  But if that did happen shortly before the murders there would not be a need to avoid saying it happened and instead being elusive...

“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 531
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #4 on: February 28, 2017, 08:59:48 PM »
If you mean he denied knowing June had a black eye and was acting as if you were the first person to tell him that she had a black eye then I agree that is suspicious.

On the one hand it is quite possible to forget details after a long period.  I have to refresh my memory about the facts of cases I handled years ago to regain a strong command of the facts.  On the other hand when people keep asking you about such details-thus reminding you about such details- it is not credible that you would forget.  By people constantly asking him that basically refreshes his memory.


Telling you he didn't know June had a black eye would be a great way to avoid having to answer further uncomfortable questions like when and how he first found out she had a black eye and if he really told police that June had a black eye prior to the murders.  How did you know she had a black eye before the police revealed such to you if you are not the killer would be a pretty damning question.  Much like saying how did you know how much money your father had in his wallet unless you looked.  I have no idea what my dad carries in his wallet I never looked in it ever my entire life.  The only reason I would ever look is if I had a notion to steal...  But you never know a father could say here is my wallet pay the man for me. My dad never did that with me but it could happen.  But if that did happen shortly before the murders there would not be a need to avoid saying it happened and instead being elusive...

I understand how you could forget cases, because I guess there are a lot of similarities between them, there are lots of them and you aren't emotionally involved. He had been through one murder of his family, you don't forget something like that but even if (by some stretch) he had forgotten the black eye, my asking about it should have brought it back. His actual words were "I don't believe my mum had a back eye, she didn't attend bible class as she wanted to sort out Sheila's problems"

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 531
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #5 on: February 28, 2017, 09:07:12 PM »
I first wrote to JB early 2012 so about 5 years ago.  At this point in time he had been in prison some 26 years so I thought it pointless asking about any details that relied upon memory.  There were long gaps in my replies eg many months.  However after an exchange of a couple of letters it became apparent to me that he had a poor understanding of what I consider to be the important aspects of his case.  Instead he would focus on what I consider seemingly trivial aspects: two silencers, info held under pii and of course an imminent release! 

I asked for his help in making available soc photos for casings in the main bedroom and landing.  His response was that NB wasn't shot upstairs and the police made it all up.  I also put something to him about the blood flake which was dismissed out of hand.  At this point I knew that I was wasting my time.

Imo his mind has been truly scrambled not only by his long incarceration but by listening to the likes of Mike and the CT.  When JB has an opportunity to communicate with the outside world eg DM and Guardian interviews he waffles on about aspects of his case that are at best weak and imo have no substance to them eg a call from NB to the police or police communicating with someone inside the farmhouse.  He really is his own worst enemy.  His blogs etc are imo completely inappropriate, irrelevant and a total embarrassment.   If he had a consistent spokesperson throughout eg a solicitor or the like I don't believe he would be in the position he is in today.     

My communication is now limited to greeting cards wishing him well.  I doubt very much if he considers me a 'supporter' as he knows that I don't support many aspects of the case he holds dear.  I did send him a little pic of myself and I wouldn't be surprised to find it on the prison dartboard  @)(++(*   

I agree, he does go on about irrelevant things and stuff that wouldn't get through the CCRC because it's been used before or wouldn't prove he was innocent. I think every letter I have contains the sentence (or as near as damned it) "We now know everything, they all lied and it won't be long before I'm free". However, I did ask him lots of stuff about the case, most of the time when it was questions I asked him, he was evasive, dismissive or just ignored it. Then there is the wallet, I still say his reaction and later explanation was/is suspicious.

Offline adam

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 604
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #6 on: February 28, 2017, 09:19:26 PM »
Thank goodness for Jeremy that David has made his 'forensic evidence breakthrough'. I was not convinced at all with Mike's suggestion that a hit man team carried out the massacre.

It won't be long now.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 09:23:44 PM by adam »

Offline scipio_usmc

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1448
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #7 on: February 28, 2017, 10:13:13 PM »
I understand how you could forget cases, because I guess there are a lot of similarities between them, there are lots of them and you aren't emotionally involved. He had been through one murder of his family, you don't forget something like that but even if (by some stretch) he had forgotten the black eye, my asking about it should have brought it back. His actual words were "I don't believe my mum had a back eye, she didn't attend bible class as she wanted to sort out Sheila's problems"

It's easy to forget at one point he lied and suggest she had the black eye prior to the murders. He told a number of different stories to different people, trying to keep track of lies is hard telling the truth is easier. Still after years details blur anyway.

Incidentally today I had jury duty. I was dismissed as a juror in a murder case because the trial will last for weeks which would interfere with my current caseload.  An ex-cop went to break up with his girlfriend and she took his gun and shot him. He was on the phone talking to his daughter as she was shooting at him and he told her so she called police. When police responded she told them he gave her the gun for protection and she thought he was an intruder so it was not intentional. Now she is claiming they had an abusive relationship and she did it to protect herself from future violence. Since he was going there to break up with her that defeats that though...She's lucky I got dumped I see little chance of being swayed to her side.

 

“...there are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, the third is useless.”  Niccolò Machiavelli

Offline Myster

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • "Open the pod bay doors, HOL!!!"
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #8 on: March 01, 2017, 06:03:58 AM »
Her name wasn't Olga Pistorius by any chance, was it?
‘Somebody in this case is lying, and lying their heads off.’ Anthony Arlidge QC, closing speech at the Bamber trial, 22 October 1986

Offline mrswah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #9 on: March 01, 2017, 08:29:32 AM »
Thank goodness for Jeremy that David has made his 'forensic evidence breakthrough'. I was not convinced at all with Mike's suggestion that a hit man team carried out the massacre.

It won't be long now.


I cannot pretend to know as much about the case as the rest of you, and I haven't read anything by Mike Tesko, but I have always wondered whether Jeremy employed a hit man. I know he gave Julie the name of one, but this claim turned out to be false.  Has it been proved that no hitman was used?  If someone else carried out the massacre on Jeremy's instructions, this might cause Jeremy to think he's innocent.

Offline Myster

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • "Open the pod bay doors, HOL!!!"
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #10 on: March 01, 2017, 09:00:56 AM »

I cannot pretend to know as much about the case as the rest of you, and I haven't read anything by Mike Tesko, but I have always wondered whether Jeremy employed a hit man. I know he gave Julie the name of one, but this claim turned out to be false.  Has it been proved that no hitman was used?  If someone else carried out the massacre on Jeremy's instructions, this might cause Jeremy to think he's innocent.

Jeremy Bamber claimed that he received a phone call from his dad during the night saying  - "Please come over. Your sister has gone crazy and has got the gun".  (He has also stated recently that he recognised his dad's voice).  So at trial there was only a choice of two people who could have done it - either Jeremy or his sister Sheila.  No hitman involved, that was simply a ruse he told to girlfriend to deflect attention from himself.

As for Tesko, this tells you all you need to know... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmCART1vcCo
« Last Edit: March 01, 2017, 09:03:30 AM by Myster »
‘Somebody in this case is lying, and lying their heads off.’ Anthony Arlidge QC, closing speech at the Bamber trial, 22 October 1986

Offline mrswah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #11 on: March 01, 2017, 09:13:59 AM »
Thanks Myster.

Am I right in thinking that no record was found of Nevill having phoned Jeremy?

Offline Caroline

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 531
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #12 on: March 01, 2017, 09:16:41 AM »

I cannot pretend to know as much about the case as the rest of you, and I haven't read anything by Mike Tesko, but I have always wondered whether Jeremy employed a hit man. I know he gave Julie the name of one, but this claim turned out to be false.  Has it been proved that no hitman was used?  If someone else carried out the massacre on Jeremy's instructions, this might cause Jeremy to think he's innocent.

Because of the phone call he claimed to have received, the killer could only be Jeremy ot Sheila.

Offline Myster

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2207
  • "Open the pod bay doors, HOL!!!"
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #13 on: March 01, 2017, 09:20:48 AM »
Thanks Myster.

Am I right in thinking that no record was found of Nevill having phoned Jeremy?

Yes, spot on. Had there been such a call, Jeremy and his relatives would have heard about it from the police soon after the murders.
‘Somebody in this case is lying, and lying their heads off.’ Anthony Arlidge QC, closing speech at the Bamber trial, 22 October 1986

Offline mrswah

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 293
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Communication With JB
« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2017, 10:07:38 AM »
Thanks for clarifying things, Myster and Caroline.  I followed the case some years ago, but am now somewhat out of date, and am re-learning!!