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

[jelgoon]

Newby and Co. pissing in the wind...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/11/jeremy-bamber-lawyers-say-new-evidence-undermines-conviction

The Guardian are pathetic for publicising this desperate crap. What’s the suggestion- there was only one wound on first examination and then the police (or family) shot her again by accident - like you do.

[Nicholas]

The Guardian are pathetic for publicising this desperate crap. What’s the suggestion- there was only one wound on first examination and then the police (or family) shot her again by accident - like you do.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7992683/Jeremy-Bambers-legal-team-new-evidence.html

[jelgoon]

Well today’s the last episode, so its too late. The press just print anything. We had all this in 2012. ‘He'll be out in a few months’  his solicitors and The Guardian told us.

Bamber's lawyers do not dispute that Caffell had two gunshot wounds - which was recorded by crime scene photographs at the scene.

But one theory is that the gun went off as police entered the scene, according to the publication.

[steve_trousers]

I'm really disappointed in the Guardian, it just goes to show they are nothing more than a clickbait tabloid wasting bandwidth with this nonsense. It's just more waffle that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

It's insulting, all this time and money wasted. Only for them to once again hear the sound of leather on willow in the courtroom as their lame effort is batted away. Last time it took under an hour.

[Holly Goodhead]

Only one visible gunshot wound was discussed here about 2 years ago:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9438.msg459087#msg459087

What it does show is that SC was moved at soc between first respondents finding her and soc images taken.  Certainly not a get out of jail card but a formidable appeal point.

[Caroline]

Only one visible gunshot wound was discussed here about 2 years ago:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9438.msg459087#msg459087

What it does show is that SC was moved at soc between first respondents finding her and soc images taken.  Certainly not a get out of jail card but a formidable appeal point.

No it doesn't, if her head was propped against the bedside table and Craig examined her, it may have just called to one  side. As one conspiracy closes, another opens.

[Holly Goodhead]

No it doesn't, if her head was propped against the bedside table and Craig examined her, it may have just called to one  side. As one conspiracy closes, another opens.

Dr Craig confirms he did not interfere with the victims other than ascertaining the gender of the twins.

A number of those first at soc refer to seeing one gunshot wound.

First respondent, A/PS Woodcock describes SC's head raised against the bedside cabinet.  Some 3/4 hours later in soc images the head is flat to the floor.

Fast forward some 17 years to the 2002 appeal and forensic scientist, Martyn Ismail, confirms SC's head would have fallen back against the bedside cabinet.

No conspiracy theory here.  Not only is it supported by expert testimony but it had the backing of the appeal court judges too!

519. Having studied with care the statement of Mr Ismail, we concluded that this was expert evidence capable of belief.

[Nicholas]

Holly you claimed Aunt Agatha would have needed a gun licence

Aunt Agatha stated:
Re: Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath
« Reply #737 on: April 13, 2016, 09:25:PM »
I do understand where you're coming from.

This was all a very long time ago - he gave me loads of things.

The police arrived with rifle, wetsuit, camera, all granny's paperwork and granny's handmade box, and over the years he's made many things for me.
Paintings (numerous), books, cassette tapes...and more.

Must find that watch! It's not where I thought it would be. Hmm!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358280.html#msg358280

So did she have a gun licence?

More importantly why did Bamber allegedly hand out exhibits seemingly from his murder trial?

When I asked her,‘Why didn't the police process the film in his camera?’

She replied,

‘I have no idea. Why give me a rifle? I don't know!’

What rifle was it and why give it to AA?

I asked her,

Didn't you ask them why?

Her reply,

No. We were stunned that they even agreed to give them in the first place. Once I had received them we never mentioned them in writing (I don't think). Maybe they overlooked it....I really don't know and I was not going to ask.

Something else Bamber allegedly told AA,

“Based on what we knew at the beginning we believed the silencer was used........upon revelations he changed his mind.  When we last spoke he believed the silencer was not used.”
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358367.html#msg358367

[Nicholas]

Holly you claimed Aunt Agatha would have needed a gun licence

Aunt Agatha stated:
Re: Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath
« Reply #737 on: April 13, 2016, 09:25:PM »
I do understand where you're coming from.

This was all a very long time ago - he gave me loads of things.

The police arrived with rifle, wetsuit, camera, all granny's paperwork and granny's handmade box, and over the years he's made many things for me.
Paintings (numerous), books, cassette tapes...and more.

Must find that watch! It's not where I thought it would be. Hmm!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358280.html#msg358280

So did she have a gun licence?

More importantly why did Bamber allegedly hand out exhibits seemingly from his murder trial?

When I asked her,‘Why didn't the police process the film in his camera?’

She replied,

‘I have no idea. Why give me a rifle? I don't know!’

What rifle was it and why give it to AA?

I asked her,

Didn't you ask them why?

Her reply,

No. We were stunned that they even agreed to give them in the first place. Once I had received them we never mentioned them in writing (I don't think). Maybe they overlooked it....I really don't know and I was not going to ask.

Something else Bamber allegedly told AA,

“Based on what we knew at the beginning we believed the silencer was used........upon revelations he changed his mind.  When we last spoke he believed the silencer was not used.”
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358367.html#msg358367

This creates problems for Bamber and his solicitor Mark Newby, especially given the fact he’s publicly claimed Bamber’s narrative has stayed the same. Aunt Agatha clearly states Bamber claimed to once believe ‘the silencer was used.’

And given Bamber is allegedly godparent to her children the problems get bigger - there will be a record of this

[Nicholas]

Were some of the items Bamber handed out to AA exhibits at one time?

My understanding is that all exhibits have been destroyed apart from rifle and silencer which can be found in EP's museum.

So which rifle did Bamber allegedly hand out to Aunt Agatha?

AA has said in the past she received JB's wetsuit which I understand was examined by EP although I haven't seen any formal docs to this effect.  I don't believe AA received anything which was included in trial.

[Holly Goodhead]

Maybe it was a low powered air rifle from JB's cottage that didn't require a licence.

[Holly Goodhead]

Maybe it was a low powered air rifle from JB's cottage that didn't require a licence.

See the link in the following about firearms that don't require a licence.

[Holly Goodhead]

See the link in the following about firearms that don't require a licence.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11187.msg570644#msg570644

[Nicholas]

Maybe it was a low powered air rifle from JB's cottage that didn't require a licence.

See the link in the following about firearms that don't require a licence.

There’s no need to speculate Holly when Aunt Agatha is capable of answering; as is Bamber.

Where did the alleged rifle originate from?

She was handed a wetsuit as well apparently and a Cartier watch that she claimed was an original - where did that come from?

[Nicholas]

Holly you claimed Aunt Agatha would have needed a gun licence

Aunt Agatha stated:
Re: Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath
« Reply #737 on: April 13, 2016, 09:25:PM »
I do understand where you're coming from.

This was all a very long time ago - he gave me loads of things.

The police arrived with rifle, wetsuit, camera, all granny's paperwork and granny's handmade box, and over the years he's made many things for me.
Paintings (numerous), books, cassette tapes...and more.

Must find that watch! It's not where I thought it would be. Hmm!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358280.html#msg358280

So did she have a gun licence?

More importantly why did Bamber allegedly hand out exhibits seemingly from his murder trial?

When I asked her,‘Why didn't the police process the film in his camera?’

She replied,

‘I have no idea. Why give me a rifle? I don't know!’

What rifle was it and why give it to AA?

I asked her,

Didn't you ask them why?

Her reply,

No. We were stunned that they even agreed to give them in the first place. Once I had received them we never mentioned them in writing (I don't think). Maybe they overlooked it....I really don't know and I was not going to ask.

Something else Bamber allegedly told AA,

“Based on what we knew at the beginning we believed the silencer was used........upon revelations he changed his mind.  When we last spoke he believed the silencer was not used.”
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3851.msg358367.html#msg358367

Bamber didn’t have an ‘online presence’ until around 2001

How may ‘supporters’ did he have around the time Aunt Agatha was ‘involved’ with him?

Aunt Agatha has clearly stated Bamber once believed the silencer was used and I don’t believe she would lie about this.

But Bamber would and especially to a new legal team and new ‘supporters’