Julie Mugford (girlfriend)

[buddy]

John, I think you will have to start a new thread if you want to discuss Julie. I have much to say on this, but I doubt that many of your members have any knowledge on this. I would be more than happy to enlighten them.

This is the Julie Mugford thread.  I don't think you can tell us anything that we haven't heard previously buddy but feel free to carry on.

You might be surprised just how much the girls on here know about the case and Julie in particular. 

Don't hold your breath John.  There isn't anything which can change my mind at this stage unless she recants the entire testimony.

I think buddy is on a wind-up operation on behalf of the blue forum otherwise he wouldn't be allowed to post here and return.   

Alan. G  Dovey the bank manager of the Barclays bank that Battersby, and Mugford tried to defraud made a statement that was never used at trial.
He stated that he recieved a call from the Chief Inspectors Dept.
The gist of the message was I was to exspect Miss Battersby in relation to a loss in her account.
On the the arrival of Miss Battersby I also met Miss Julie Mugford, and a man identifying himself as a police officer.
The officer was in plain clothes.
All three of us sat down and the officer then suggested that Miss battersby had something to say.
She then admitted to the cheque book theft, The officer [Stan Jones] made it clear that the girls were pivitol in a murder inquiry. The bank took no further action. The bank manager was never called to give evidence.
The debt was cleared within weeks according to the manager.
Now Mugford never went to the police in the first place . it was Battersby. It was only after the rejection by jeremy that she decided ko come clean. Bah.
All charges were dropped with this pair, and a handsome price was given to Mugford.
Now Mugford, and battersby insisted that they went to to the bank because they were wracked with guilt, and e than happywanted to wipe the slate clean is obvioustly a lie, as is the police claim they had no involvememnt.
If any of you guilty camp can disprove me than I welcome your comments.
You had better read up before you post. I am more tha happy to answer.
remember of course that Julie was complisite in the caravan burgerly, and drug smuggling, and supplying drugs, so she was no angel

[buddy]

No wind up. The bamber forum are fully suppotive.

[John]

Alan. G  Dovey the bank manager of the Barclays bank that Battersby, and Mugford tried to defraud made a statement that was never used at trial.
He stated that he recieved a call from the Chief Inspectors Dept.
The gist of the message was I was to exspect Miss Battersby in relation to a loss in her account.
On the the arrival of Miss Battersby I also met Miss Julie Mugford, and a man identifying himself as a police officer.
The officer was in plain clothes.
All three of us sat down and the officer then suggested that Miss battersby had something to say.
She then admitted to the cheque book theft, The officer [Stan Jones] made it clear that the girls were pivitol in a murder inquiry. The bank took no further action. The bank manager was never called to give evidence.
The debt was cleared within weeks according to the manager.
Now Mugford never went to the police in the first place . it was Battersby. It was only after the rejection by jeremy that she decided ko come clean. Bah.
All charges were dropped with this pair, and a handsome price was given to Mugford.
Now Mugford, and battersby insisted that they went to to the bank because they were wracked with guilt, and e than happywanted to wipe the slate clean is obvioustly a lie, as is the police claim they had no involvememnt.
If any of you guilty camp can disprove me than I welcome your comments.
You had better read up before you post. I am more tha happy to answer.
remember of course that Julie was complisite in the caravan burgerly, and drug smuggling, and supplying drugs, so she was no angel

This is no secret Buddy but thank you for reminding us.

Lets just say Julie was left in no doubt what would happen to her if she told any lies. 

[abs]

John, I think you will have to start a new thread if you want to discuss Julie. I have much to say on this, but I doubt that many of your members have any knowledge on this. I would be more than happy to enlighten them.

This is the Julie Mugford thread.  I don't think you can tell us anything that we haven't heard previously buddy but feel free to carry on.

You might be surprised just how much the girls on here know about the case and Julie in particular. 

Don't hold your breath John.  There isn't anything which can change my mind at this stage unless she recants the entire testimony.

I think buddy is on a wind-up operation on behalf of the blue forum otherwise he wouldn't be allowed to post here and return.   

Alan. G  Dovey the bank manager of the Barclays bank that Battersby, and Mugford tried to defraud made a statement that was never used at trial.
He stated that he recieved a call from the Chief Inspectors Dept.
The gist of the message was I was to exspect Miss Battersby in relation to a loss in her account.
On the the arrival of Miss Battersby I also met Miss Julie Mugford, and a man identifying himself as a police officer.
The officer was in plain clothes.
All three of us sat down and the officer then suggested that Miss battersby had something to say.
She then admitted to the cheque book theft, The officer [Stan Jones] made it clear that the girls were pivitol in a murder inquiry. The bank took no further action. The bank manager was never called to give evidence.
The debt was cleared within weeks according to the manager.
Now Mugford never went to the police in the first place . it was Battersby. It was only after the rejection by jeremy that she decided ko come clean. Bah.
All charges were dropped with this pair, and a handsome price was given to Mugford.
Now Mugford, and battersby insisted that they went to to the bank because they were wracked with guilt, and e than happywanted to wipe the slate clean is obvioustly a lie, as is the police claim they had no involvememnt.
If any of you guilty camp can disprove me than I welcome your comments.
You had better read up before you post. I am more tha happy to answer.
remember of course that Julie was complisite in the caravan burgerly, and drug smuggling, and supplying drugs, so she was no angel

JM has claimed in a written statement that she herself and Battersby went to the bank on their own - that there was no policeman with them. That is in direct contrast to the bank manager´s detailed statement. A police officer arranged this meeting and accompanied the girls to the bank, was in on the meeting and even stayed and talked some more to the bank manager after the girls had left.
How can I trust anything else she has said?

[John]

John, I think you will have to start a new thread if you want to discuss Julie. I have much to say on this, but I doubt that many of your members have any knowledge on this. I would be more than happy to enlighten them.

This is the Julie Mugford thread.  I don't think you can tell us anything that we haven't heard previously buddy but feel free to carry on.

You might be surprised just how much the girls on here know about the case and Julie in particular. 

Don't hold your breath John.  There isn't anything which can change my mind at this stage unless she recants the entire testimony.

I think buddy is on a wind-up operation on behalf of the blue forum otherwise he wouldn't be allowed to post here and return.   

Alan. G  Dovey the bank manager of the Barclays bank that Battersby, and Mugford tried to defraud made a statement that was never used at trial.
He stated that he recieved a call from the Chief Inspectors Dept.
The gist of the message was I was to exspect Miss Battersby in relation to a loss in her account.
On the the arrival of Miss Battersby I also met Miss Julie Mugford, and a man identifying himself as a police officer.
The officer was in plain clothes.
All three of us sat down and the officer then suggested that Miss battersby had something to say.
She then admitted to the cheque book theft, The officer [Stan Jones] made it clear that the girls were pivitol in a murder inquiry. The bank took no further action. The bank manager was never called to give evidence.
The debt was cleared within weeks according to the manager.
Now Mugford never went to the police in the first place . it was Battersby. It was only after the rejection by jeremy that she decided ko come clean. Bah.
All charges were dropped with this pair, and a handsome price was given to Mugford.
Now Mugford, and battersby insisted that they went to to the bank because they were wracked with guilt, and e than happywanted to wipe the slate clean is obvioustly a lie, as is the police claim they had no involvememnt.
If any of you guilty camp can disprove me than I welcome your comments.
You had better read up before you post. I am more tha happy to answer.
remember of course that Julie was complisite in the caravan burgerly, and drug smuggling, and supplying drugs, so she was no angel

JM has claimed in a written statement that she herself and Battersby went to the bank on their own - that there was no policeman with them. That is in direct contrast to the bank manager´s detailed statement. A police officer arranged this meeting and accompanied the girls to the bank, was in on the meeting and even stayed and talked some more to the bank manager after the girls had left.
How can I trust anything else she has said?

Why ever not?  Was there a police officer with her when Bamber told her he wanted to kill his parents or when she received a telephone call from him on the morning of the murders.  You are being somewhat selective here abs.

[abs]

I don´t think I am being selective, I just have a problem with believing what proven liars say- in real life too. 

[goatboy]

I think I can say I speak for everyone on this board when I say that anyone from the blue forum is more than welcome here-if they are willing to provide coherent arguments rather than wild conjecture (which I think even Buddy would admit that forum has been guilty of from time to time!). I'm sure no one thinks of JM as an angel, I think opinion is divided here about how involved she was. Some say she was just a naive young girl who fell in love with a murderer and eventually managed to break free. I personally think if she lied in her statements it was purely to cover up her own possible involvement-perhaps she was willing to lie to protect him and gain from the crime financially with him but when she realised Bamber was going down the only way to save her own skin was to implicate him. He could hardly then use her involvement as his defence, that he wasn't acting alone. I don't buy the whole "woman scorned" argument that she wanted to get back at the partner who had spurned her-how convenient that his whole family had been murdered and she could frame him for this? I don't think your average jilted lover would go as far as to commit perjury in a high profile murder case just to annoy their ex. And if the story of Bamber's confession was a work of fiction from start to finish, knowing that the prosecution argued that Bamber committed the murders, why invent a story about a hitman? Why not just say he had done it?

[John]

Somebody mentioned on another thread yesterday that Julie could still be faced with the serious charge of perjury if she was ever found out to have lied at Jeremy Bamber's trial.  Given that she was terrified in relation to the consequences which could have overtaken her following her part in the cheque frauds I find it impossible to believe that she would set herself up for a potential perjury charge and all that that would bring for her.

Julie was too scared of the repercussions to tell lies.

[starryian]

Somebody mentioned on another thread yesterday that Julie could still be faced with the serious charge of perjury if she was ever found out to have lied at Jeremy Bamber's trial.  Given that she was terrified in relation to the consequences which could have overtaken her following her part in the cheque frauds I find it impossible to believe that she would set herself up for a potential perjury charge and all that that would bring for her.

Julie was too scared of the repercussions to tell lies.

Absoluetly right John. Julie Mugford would not have lied on the stand. The law courts take a very dim view of perjury and this would be something both Essex Police and Julie Mugford would have been highly aware of.
It makes it far more likely that she told the absolute truth on the stand. Her evidence has stood the test of time - Bamber's most certainly did not.

[John]

Somebody mentioned on another thread yesterday that Julie could still be faced with the serious charge of perjury if she was ever found out to have lied at Jeremy Bamber's trial.  Given that she was terrified in relation to the consequences which could have overtaken her following her part in the cheque frauds I find it impossible to believe that she would set herself up for a potential perjury charge and all that that would bring for her.

Julie was too scared of the repercussions to tell lies.

Absoluetly right John. Julie Mugford would not have lied on the stand. The law courts take a very dim view of perjury and this would be something both Essex Police and Julie Mugford would have been highly aware of.
It makes it far more likely that she told the absolute truth on the stand. Her evidence has stood the test of time - Bamber's most certainly did not.

Its not as if Julie wouldn't have been well aware of the repercussions.  There can be no doubt that Julie spent a lot of time with Essex Police and in the company of Stan Jones.  Julie was his star witness and there can be no question of this.  She stayed in a dorm belonging to the Police College while she was being interrogated over those several days when her 32 page statement was put together.  Stan Jones was experienced enough to know if he was being sold a pack of lies, he would have sussed her within hours.

I have no doubt that Stan laid it on the line for her and left her in no doubt what would be the consequences for her if she was found to be telling lies. She would have been absolutely petrified of falling foul of the police.

For Jackie to keep saying that she was lying just indicates to me that Jackie hasn't really thought through what was going on at this point.  Does Jackie really expect us to believe that young Julie would have jeopardised her career and indeed her freedom just to get back at a murderer? Not in a million years Jackie!!

[jackiepreece]

John how about if she started off accusing Jeremy because the relationship ended but didn't realise how serious perjury was.

If Julie had been caught for the cheque fraud wouldn't that have affected her future career plans. Doesn't something like cheque book fraud go straight to crown court

[Joanne]

Why did Julie Mugford emigrate? I say emigrate, I don't know if she has but why has she left the country was it anything to do with Jeremby Bamber? Why didn't the cheque fraud go to court?

[jackiepreece]

If a boyfriend of mine had said he had executed 3 adults and 2 children or paid to have that done I would have left him rightaway away, I wouldn't have ever slept in the same house as him, got in the same car as him, never let him come anywhere near me again.

You could be right about Mugford John or I could be right but I will never make out I understood what went on in her head when Jeremy used to say he was  going to kill his parents or tonight's the night

[jackiepreece]

Joanne
I think Mugford was let off the cheque fraud for giving evidence at Bambers trial

[John]

Joanne
I think Mugford was let off the cheque fraud for giving evidence at Bambers trial

I have no doubt she was Jackie just as I have no doubt whatsoever that she then had to tell the truth of what went on with her and Jeremy Bamber in the lead up to the 5 murders.

Julie Mugford didn't need to tell anyone about these events Jackie but she chose to do so, firstly with Liz Rimington and then with Stan Jones.