Lookout from the Jeremy Bamber forum.

[Jerry]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

[Milly]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

 

Who cares about a fake name anyway???

If they feel so insecure about it get another fake name....simples.   

[puglove]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

"Lookout" was named (and shamed, sadly    ) on the blue forum, by someone called Quackers, I think. Dreadful behaviour. I was shocked.   

[John]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

I tend to agree, if we were to allow every Tom Dick and Blumpkin to post whatever they wanted anonymously and didn't respond to them we would be failing in our task.  Lookout stays because the name means nothing to me and most posters on here.  If they are so concerned they should use a different name as suggested.  This applies to every other anonymous name which appears over on the blue forum, they will be responded to in the strongest of terms whenever they post anything which smears the integrity of real people whether they be alive or since deceased.

[puglove]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

I tend to agree, if we were to allow every Tom Dick and Blumpkin to post whatever they wanted anonymously and didn't respond to them we would be failing in our task.  Lookout stays because the name means nothing to me and most posters on here.  If they are so concerned they should use a different name as suggested.  This applies to every other anonymous name which appears over on the blue forum, they will be responded to in the strongest of terms whenever they post anything which smears the integrity of real people whether they be alive or since deceased.

Tom Dick and Blumpkin!! Oh dear, that did make me laugh!!   

But it's sad to see Jo still being attacked. I'm not sure if that is adhering to our truce.

[Mervyn]

Lookout is having a moan over on the other place but they are quite content to slate the Eaton/Boutflour family. Under those circumstances they become fair game in my opinion and this threrad should remain.  These people must realise that they cannot hide behind their computers and hope that nobody takes notice of their defamatory comments.  The sooner coward lookout is outed the better as far as I am concerned.   

I tend to agree, if we were to allow every Tom Dick and Blumpkin to post whatever they wanted anonymously and didn't respond to them we would be failing in our task.  Lookout stays because the name means nothing to me and most posters on here.  If they are so concerned they should use a different name as suggested.  This applies to every other anonymous name which appears over on the blue forum, they will be responded to in the strongest of terms whenever they post anything which smears the integrity of real people whether they be alive or since deceased.

 

I completely concur with that mate as there is no room for apathy here.   


If this lookout wants to abuse the family at white house farm then so be it but she will not be let off to any extent as far as I am concerned anyway.   

[Holly Goodhead]

Lookout may I suggest you try engaging your brain before you post.

Your post from yesterday:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8610.msg412649.html#msg412649

Where were Sheila's morals to have allowed pics like that to be taken ? Sickening !!

1. Have you seen the said photos?  No
2. Is there a reliable source detailing the photos?  No
3. Even if the photographs are very revealing, and there's no proof they were other than claims JB made smutty comments, it isn't illegal if the woman consents.
4. Whatever the exact nature of the photos SC realised she had made an error in judgement and asked the photographer for the negs.
5. SC was short of cash and according to CC's mother's WS (Mrs Doris Brencher) SC was trying hard to find paid work.
6. At the time SC was the main carer to the twins and obviously trying to manage/cope with her mental illness.
7. If SC turned to burglary for monetary gain as JB did when he broke into OCP would that be ok in your eyes?

You claim to have a background in mental health and nursing and yet you show a complete lack of empathy and
understanding of a deceased woman who suffered serious mental health issues.

The only sickening thing I see are your comments.

If you want to say something constructive in JB's favour in this regard you could highlight the nonsense claims that JB was supposedly jealous SC was leading some sort of enviable lifestyle in London.  She wasn't.  She was struggling all round. 

You bang away all day at your keyboard without thinking through what you're saying.  Try asking yourself:

- Is it offensive to the victims of WHF?
- Is it relevant?
- Does it assist JB?
- Does it further understanding of the case?
- Is it accurate?
- Do you have a reliable source for your assertions?

[puglove]

Lookout may I suggest you try engaging your brain before you post.

Your post from yesterday:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8610.msg412649.html#msg412649

Where were Sheila's morals to have allowed pics like that to be taken ? Sickening !!

1. Have you seen the said photos?  No
2. Is there a reliable source detailing the photos?  No
3. Even if the photographs are very revealing, and there's no proof they were other than claims JB made smutty comments, it isn't illegal if the woman consents.
4. Whatever the exact nature of the photos SC realised she had made an error in judgement and asked the photographer for the negs.
5. SC was short of cash and according to CC's mother's WS (Mrs Doris Brencher) SC was trying hard to find paid work.
6. At the time SC was the main carer to the twins and obviously trying to manage/cope with her mental illness.
7. If SC turned to burglary for monetary gain as JB did when he broke into OCP would that be ok in your eyes?

You claim to have a background in mental health and nursing and yet you show a complete lack of empathy and
understanding of a deceased woman who suffered serious mental health issues.

The only sickening thing I see are your comments.

If you want to say something constructive in JB's favour in this regard you could highlight the nonsense claims that JB was supposedly jealous SC was leading some sort of enviable lifestyle in London.  She wasn't.  She was struggling all round. 

You bang away all day at your keyboard without thinking through what you're saying.  Try asking yourself:

- Is it offensive to the victims of WHF?
- Is it relevant?
- Does it assist JB?
- Does it further understanding of the case?
- Is it accurate?
- Do you have a reliable source for your assertions?

It's absolutely terrifying to even IMAGINE her being allowed anywhere near a poorly person, she makes Nurse Ratched look like Winnie the Pooh. Thank goodness that we live in more enlightened times - no more leeches and Bedlam.       

[puglove]

In answer to Adam on blue.....yes, I do think that Bamber is the unluckiest man ever. With the exception of Holly, Jackie and Aunt Ags, he really has got the unbelievably crappest, dodgiest, inneffectual bunch of supporters imaginable. Randy, dumpy women and ancient, angry old women, chippy little men who get a mard on instead of a hard-on, and computer cavaliers who should know better and get a life. Bamber gets his rocks off by playing all of those misfits like a kipper purely because it pleases him and he's got nothing else to do. A tatty little Christmas card from him is like winning the lottery when your entire family has moved to the other side of the world and hope you haven't done the equity release thing on a damp old house in Liverpool.

 

[puglove]

And can you believe it's almost Christmas again? I can feel another sprout and bacardi-fuelled ode in the offing......

 

[puglove]

Holl, I meant to say that Bamber expected that his prints would be found on the bible because he "might have threatened Crispy with it." Really? Was he covering his arse? And doesn't that sound like the lamest excuse ever? He's basically saying that he regularly spent time in his parents' bedroom, waving a bible at Crispy, and possibly hitting her with it. For reasons known only to himself.

Oh Holl. Come on.

[puglove]

Holl, I meant to say that Bamber expected that his prints would be found on the bible because he "might have threatened Crispy with it." Really? Was he covering his arse? And doesn't that sound like the lamest excuse ever? He's basically saying that he regularly spent time in his parents' bedroom, waving a bible at Crispy, and possibly hitting her with it. For reasons known only to himself.

Oh Holl. Come on.

Anyhoo. I'll leave you in peace, but you need to know this. If you look at Sheila, she had no muscle tone on her upper arms. BT gave me a gun to scare off the magpies that were stealing the swallow babies. It was the exact same gun involved in the WHF murders. It's not huge, but it's cumbersome. And long, without a silencer. My arms are strong, but when I tried to aim, I waved the gun all over the place. It seriously isn't something you can just pick up and be precise with. If you don't know what you're doing, and if you're not used to the weight and length, you would be all over the place. It's almost double the length of your arm. And I had no idea how to reload.

Holl, the gun involved is heavy and long. I know you've done your homework, but I doubt if you've handled said gun. Sorry to preach, but I doubt that anyone (much less Sheila) would find a loaded gun left on the settle and execute the family without having knowledge of previous shootings and re-loadings. And a loaded gun wouldn't have been left out, anyway. Sheila (even if she was tired and poorly), June, or Nevill would have made the gun, that didn't exist, safe.

Bamber is such a flake. And you are far too bright to fall for his crap. Are you still going with Sheila shooting herself twice?

[Holly Goodhead]

It's absolutely terrifying to even IMAGINE her being allowed anywhere near a poorly person, she makes Nurse Ratched look like Winnie the Pooh. Thank goodness that we live in more enlightened times - no more leeches and Bedlam.       

I bet even 50 years ago folk would only ever pay Lookout to keep her kit ON! 

[Holly Goodhead]

Holl, I meant to say that Bamber expected that his prints would be found on the bible because he "might have threatened Crispy with it." Really? Was he covering his arse? And doesn't that sound like the lamest excuse ever? He's basically saying that he regularly spent time in his parents' bedroom, waving a bible at Crispy, and possibly hitting her with it. For reasons known only to himself.

Oh Holl. Come on.

Well according to June's housekeeper, Jean Boutell, June had several bibles.  The one in question June often carried with her to refer to and make notes in.

I don't see anything untoward in JB's responses re the bible:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1294

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1310

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=296.0;attach=1312

What I find odd is that no one seems to know whose blood stained the pages. 

[Holly Goodhead]

In answer to Adam on blue.....yes, I do think that Bamber is the unluckiest man ever. With the exception of Holly, Jackie and Aunt Ags, he really has got the unbelievably crappest, dodgiest, inneffectual bunch of supporters imaginable. Randy, dumpy women and ancient, angry old women, chippy little men who get a mard on instead of a hard-on, and computer cavaliers who should know better and get a life. Bamber gets his rocks off by playing all of those misfits like a kipper purely because it pleases him and he's got nothing else to do. A tatty little Christmas card from him is like winning the lottery when your entire family has moved to the other side of the world and hope you haven't done the equity release thing on a damp old house in Liverpool.

 

I've never received a Christmas card from JB