UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: John on March 23, 2013, 02:16:21 AM
-
On the morning of the murders Jeremy Bamber telephoned his girlfriend Julie Mugford at around 3am. The timing of this call was the subject of much investigation and was attested to by Julie and two of her flatmates.
According to Julie, Jeremy told her on the telephone that his father had telephoned him to say that his sister had the gun and that he was to phone the police. Julie said that she told him to go back to bed.
We also know that Jeremy did telephone the Essex Police control room at Chelmsford some time later at approx 3.26am and reported the same telephone call from his father.
During his interview shortly after the murders Jeremy mixed up the timings of the telephone calls.
And in 2003 he claimed that, "I did not speak to Julie prior to speaking to the police, but spoke to her after I had spoken to them. The principle reason I spoke to her was because I was concerned about phoning the police and getting them involved in a private family matter."
-
On the morning of the murders Jeremy Bamber telephoned his girlfriend Julie Mugford at around 3am. The timing of this call was the subject of much investigation and was attested to by Julie and two of her flatmates.
According to Julie, Jeremy told her on the telephone that his father had telephoned him to say that his sister had the gun and that he was to phone the police. Julie said that she told him to go back to bed.
We also know that Jeremy did telephone the Essex Police control room at Chelmsford some time later at approx 3.26am and reported the same telephone call from his father.
During his interview shortly after the murders Jeremy mixed up the timings of the telephone calls.
And in 2003 he claimed that, "I did not speak to Julie prior to speaking to the police, but spoke to her after I had spoken to them. The principle reason I spoke to her was because I was concerned about phoning the police and getting them involved in a private family matter."
Eureka!! JB called Julie to say "something has gone wrong at the farm." Meaning.....the two shots to Sheila. Change of plan. Invent a call from Ralph to place JB at the cottage, because two shots won't look like suicide. Especially as the silencer was used for the first shot but not the second!
-
Does Mike know Bamber denied calling Julie before the police? Because he reckons Jeremy's call to the police happened at 3:36 and went on for 11 minutes, meaning his arrival at the farm at about 3:52 was pretty quick. Yes, incredibly quick, especially if he also found time to call Julie. 8(0(*
And the blue forum have the nerve to call Julie a liar!
-
Does Mike know Bamber denied calling Julie before the police? Because he reckons Jeremy's call to the police happened at 3:36 and went on for 11 minutes, meaning his arrival at the farm at about 3:52 was pretty quick. Yes, incredibly quick, especially if he also found time to call Julie. 8(0(*
And the blue forum have the nerve to call Julie a liar!
Mike denies facts even when they slap him in the face
-
Does Mike know Bamber denied calling Julie before the police? Because he reckons Jeremy's call to the police happened at 3:36 and went on for 11 minutes, meaning his arrival at the farm at about 3:52 was pretty quick. Yes, incredibly quick, especially if he also found time to call Julie. 8(0(*
And the blue forum have the nerve to call Julie a liar!
This would have had Jeremy driving at 90 MPH to get there in time but the police overtook him and said he was driving slow. 8-)(--)
Oh I suppose that means the police were driving at at a lethal 200 MPH in their 1.3L Ford Escorts. Again demonstrating the reckless disregard for life that they usually have and of course their bloodlust in wanted to shoot innocent members of the public.
On the other hand Jeremy could have called the police on his mobile phone as he drove there...
But then again mobile phones did not exist in 1985 but that is a minor matter and stranger things have been claimed on "Blue" such as digital recorders and digital phone logging and the dead walking and doing the washing without inhaling their own blood.
-
On the morning of the murders Jeremy Bamber telephoned his girlfriend Julie Mugford at around 3am. The timing of this call was the subject of much investigation and was attested to by Julie and two of her flatmates.
According to Julie, Jeremy told her on the telephone that his father had telephoned him to say that his sister had the gun and that he was to phone the police. Julie said that she told him to go back to bed.
We also know that Jeremy did telephone the Essex Police control room at Chelmsford some time later at approx 3.26am and reported the same telephone call from his father.
During his interview shortly after the murders Jeremy mixed up the timings of the telephone calls.
And in 2003 he claimed that, "I did not speak to Julie prior to speaking to the police, but spoke to her after I had spoken to them. The principle reason I spoke to her was because I was concerned about phoning the police and getting them involved in a private family matter."
The thing I found interesting and a new discovery for me, was that when Stan Jones visited Sue Batte(r)sby on two separate occasions (one unannounced), he checked the time on her digital clock with his own watch to see if it was around 10 minutes fast as she claimed it to be on the morning in question.... and it was.
There was originally some confusion about the timing of Jeremy Bamber's call to Julie Mugford , with flatmates giving different times - Sue (3:12), Joanna Woad (between 2:00 & 2:59) and Helen Eaton (3:00 to 3:30). So in the end they settled on around 3 a.m., a good twenty to thirty minutes before Bamber called the police.
-
On the morning of the murders Jeremy Bamber telephoned his girlfriend Julie Mugford at around 3am. The timing of this call was the subject of much investigation and was attested to by Julie and two of her flatmates.
According to Julie, Jeremy told her on the telephone that his father had telephoned him to say that his sister had the gun and that he was to phone the police. Julie said that she told him to go back to bed.
We also know that Jeremy did telephone the Essex Police control room at Chelmsford some time later at approx 3.26am and reported the same telephone call from his father.
During his interview shortly after the murders Jeremy mixed up the timings of the telephone calls.
And in 2003 he claimed that, "I did not speak to Julie prior to speaking to the police, but spoke to her after I had spoken to them. The principle reason I spoke to her was because I was concerned about phoning the police and getting them involved in a private family matter."
The thing I found interesting and a new discovery for me, was that when Stan Jones visited Sue Batte(r)sby on two separate occasions (one unannounced), he checked the time on her digital clock with his own watch to see if it was around 10 minutes fast as she claimed it to be on the morning in question.... and it was.
There was originally some confusion about the timing of Jeremy Bamber's call to Julie Mugford , with flatmates giving different times - Sue (3:12), Joanna Woad (between 2:00 & 2:59) and Helen Eaton (3:00 to 3:30). So in the end they settled on around 3 a.m., a good twenty to thirty minutes before Bamber called the police.
Yes I thought that was clever of Stan Jones. I must remember that if I have to lie about time to the police, that they might come back and check unannounced.
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didn't know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
Oh my. That is creepy. It is almost as if Jeremy "knew" that something awful was going to/had happened.
You do not think he is Psychic do you?
Then also Dr Vanezis says that Mr Bamber was so badly injured that he would not be able to carry out a meaningful conversation so then Jeremy had to play Charades over the telephone.
What a night! No wonder he needed a cuddle from Julie.
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
But why wake her up (and the others) in the middle of the night anyway, far away in London when she probably had to be up early for her college course and had no transport anyway there and then to get over to Goldhanger..., surely one of his cousins would have to travel only a short distance if any help was needed, or even one of the Foalkes family close by in the farm cottages.
Bamber must have been so pumped up with adrenaline that he just had to break the news to the one who he'd bragged to for so long about what he'd planned.
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
But why wake her up (and the others) in the middle of the night anyway, far away in London when she probably had to be up early for her college course and had no transport anyway there and then to get over to Goldhanger..., surely one of his cousins would have to travel only a short distance if any help was needed, or even one of the Foalkes family close by in the farm cottages.
Bamber must have been so pumped up with adrenaline that he just had to break the news to the one who he'd bragged to for so long about what he'd planned.
Spot on Myster, that's the only reason why he would have called her. And if he supposedly got on so well with his relatives why not call them first if they actually could have come along to help? And assuming Nevill would have made a call to a relative wouldn't he have been more likely to call David, Ann or someone like that?
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didn't know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
Oh my. That is creepy. It is almost as if Jeremy "knew" that something awful was going to/had happened.
You do not think he is Psychic do you?
Then also Dr Vanezis says that Mr Bamber was so badly injured that he would not be able to carry out a meaningful conversation so then Jeremy had to play Charades over the telephone.
What a night! No wonder he needed a cuddle from Julie.
Jeremy is something that begins with a 'p' but it isnt psychic
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didn't know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
And yet he really felt that his father had already been injured when he supposedly answered the phone... "oh, what a tangled web we weave, etc."
What the Bamber Incisively Didn't Do It (or BIDDI) Brigade have to explain is why, according to JB's timings, he called Julie BEFORE Ralph called him. >@@(*&)
Oh my. That is creepy. It is almost as if Jeremy "knew" that something awful was going to/had happened.
You do not think he is Psychic do you?
Then also Dr Vanezis says that Mr Bamber was so badly injured that he would not be able to carry out a meaningful conversation so then Jeremy had to play Charades over the telephone.
What a night! No wonder he needed a cuddle from Julie.
Jeremy is something that begins with a 'p' but it isnt psychic
That's true. But is does start with the same 5 letters...
-
even though 25 doctors ? cant find anything wrong with him apparently
-
I think the time of the call was pretty much independently verified as being some considerable time before Jeremy's call to the police. I also thought at trial he didn't dispute that he called Julie first? His reasoning behind it was that he didnt know if the incident at the farm was serious enough to warrant calling the police.
Julie told him to go back to bed so he couldn't have told her that he had already phoned the police and was to meet them at the farm. The longer this goes on the weaker his story seems to get.
I think he's pretty well shot that particular bolt..(oops) ?{)(**
-
I've had a look at the 8th September 1985 police interview and what do you know? He clearly states he received the phone call from Nevill sometime around 3am or after, then he tried to ring back but the number was engaged, then he called Julie, then he called Chelmsford police. It was nothing to do with Stan Jones being clever, Jeremy had the opportunity to put it all in the correct chronological order and confirmed it was that way round. Mike is full of sh*t.
Are Bamber's police interview transcripts on the blue forum? I feel they are pretty damning, firstly they expose his lies (about the caravan park robbery and on 9th September he tried to change his story to say he called the police before Julie) and secondly his "no comment" replies to difficult questions, attempts to say things off record or consult with his solicitor in private before answering are evidence of his guilt. If you have nothing to hide why say "no comment"?
-
I've had a look at the 8th September 1985 police interview and what do you know? He clearly states he received the phone call from Nevill sometime around 3am or after, then he tried to ring back but the number was engaged, then he called Julie, then he called Chelmsford police. It was nothing to do with Stan Jones being clever, Jeremy had the opportunity to put it all in the correct chronological order and confirmed it was that way round. Mike is full of sh*t.
Are Bamber's police interview transcripts on the blue forum? I feel they are pretty damning, firstly they expose his lies (about the caravan park robbery and on 9th September he tried to change his story to say he called the police before Julie) and secondly his "no comment" replies to difficult questions, attempts to say things off record or consult with his solicitor in private before answering are evidence of his guilt. If you have nothing to hide why say "no comment"?
That is quite correct, evidence in true MoJs show us that innocent people normally go overboard trying to help the police and offer all kinds of unnecessary information. Stephan Kiszko, Colin Stagg, Stephen Dowling and others. Strangely the police tend to suspect these helpful people probably because they are so used to criminals being uncooperative or "fitting" each other up. That said sometimes they do get it right. Ian Huntley was a classic case of the murderer being helpful although in his case I understand it was the press that picked up on him first. Chris Jefferies they got totally wrong.
In this case note "Taff" Jones' total rejection of Ann Eaton being helpful and yet Stan Jones carefully unpicking Jeremy's and Bent Colon's criminal past in theft, drug dealing, burglary and yet giving JB every opportunity to correct himself under interrogation, he did not take Julie's flat mates timings for granted but went back unannounced and checked their clock timings. His notes show a careful methodical approach which stand up to critical examination after nearly 30 years. Yet JB and his handful of deranged supporters still cannot get their story even consistent in the same time.
-
even though 25 doctors ? cant find anything wrong with him apparently
This again is an article of faith among the six or less supporters that JB actually has but medical records are strictly confidential. Therefore we only have his word for it that 25 plus doctors have found him "sane." On the other hand what sane person goes to so many doctors to find out if you are sane?
So can we suppose this evidence of sanity has been released to his supporters? Is it on Mike's famous hard drive?
-
Note to the blue forum.
Wasn't the rifle found lying on Sheila? Might that have been a bit of a clue?
-
If you have to resort to telling outright lies just so that a handful of people will talk to you on a forum, it's time to go back to standing on the side of the road with a set of trade plates and your thumb in the air.
-
He admits as well that Sheila was shot with the silencer on. At last, something we can all agree on. ?{)(**
-
Bamber has apparently been assessed many times by physchiatrists. They have all, so the bamberettes claim, concluded that he is not a physco. Does anyone have an opinion on this?
-
Bamber has apparently been assessed many times by physchiatrists. They have all, so the bamberettes claim, concluded that he is not a physco. Does anyone have an opinion on this?
As Andy has pointed out Peter Sutcliffe, of all people, was for a long time assessed as sane. It really does depend on which expert, and which test, is used. He who pays the piper....
And Julie, the Eatons and the Boutflours have gone on to lead exemplary lives. Bamber, on the other hand, never misses a chance to denigrate his "family." And he's happy to be supported by a handful of people who do the same. It's difficult to respect someone whose main supporter calls members of his forum "vomit breath." But I suppose you get the "friends" you deserve.
-
There's no point in me posting on blue ( even if I'm not banned at the moment, I never know) because Roch will jump on and delete me (apparently I make him CRINGE) but the facts are Bamber rang Julie to say that something had gone wrong at the farm. I think he meant that he had to shoot Sheila twice, which f..ks up the suicide theory. Why he rang Julie's house, wasting time, knowing that at least 4 people could pick up the phone, if they heard it, is just silly. Then he plummed about, looking through the local phone book, KNOWING that one station was unmanned. Bearing in mind that Ralph had apparently begged "come quick, your sister has gone crazy with THE gun." At no stage did Ralph ask Bamber to call the police. The whole thing was an alibi. Bamber actually asked the police to collect him. And if Ralph had been shot so severely, as is being suggested today on blue, wouldn't he at least have warned him of the danger? Why would Ralph have invited Bamber into certain danger, when shots had been fired? Ambulances were needed. June was shot, Ralph was shot, the boys (sadly dead, but Ralph didn't know that for sure) were in danger. A terrible, unimaginable situation. But Bamber, who had spent months planning this, spent vital minutes calling Julie to say "love you Honey" and tw..ting about with the local phone book.
-
And we have the indistupable evidence of Sheila's image on the floor. Sheila who shot herself in the kitchen, then ran around the house barking like a dog, then threw herself on the bed, unscrewed the silencer, and shot herself again. No blood was spilt, or gagged. But there IS an image of Sheila when her body was moved and bagged. Mike is awfully quiet about that. All the blood collected in her throat was disturbed. When she was lifted from the floor. You forget, Mike, that I've been reading your shite for 3 years, now. I'm not one of your sad groupies. I might be a bit pissed, but I can also see that the emperor has got a horribly bare ar$e. Even ngb won't front up to you.
But I will.
-
Explain to me, Mike, how Sheila was shot in the kitchen by the police, when her body is in the bedroom, with no expirated blood and no blood flow pouring down the front of her nightie?
-
Explain to me, Mike, how Sheila was shot in the kitchen by the police, when her body is in the bedroom, with no expirated blood and no blood flow pouring down the front of her nightie?
And when you've got the odd minute, can you justify how, within 3 days of the murders, Bamber was getting the goodies valuated? Did he forget how much he loved his dad?
-
Explain to me, Mike, how Sheila was shot in the kitchen by the police, when her body is in the bedroom, with no expirated blood and no blood flow pouring down the front of her nightie?
And when you've got the odd minute, can you justify how, within 3 days of the murders, Bamber was getting the goodies valuated? Did he forget how much he loved his dad?
But, of course, he loved his dad so much....he stole from him.
-
And we have the indistupable evidence of Sheila's image on the floor. Sheila who shot herself in the kitchen, then ran around the house barking like a dog, then threw herself on the bed, unscrewed the silencer, and shot herself again. No blood was spilt, or gagged. But there IS an image of Sheila when her body was moved and bagged. Mike is awfully quiet about that. All the blood collected in her throat was disturbed. When she was lifted from the floor. You forget, Mike, that I've been reading your shite for 3 years, now. I'm not one of your sad groupies. I might be a bit pissed, but I can also see that the emperor has got a horribly bare ar$e. Even ngb won't front up to you.
But I will.
Oh Jesus, indistupable.
Bamber's still a lying, murdering psychopath though. IEO.
-
I just happened upon the Crime Investigation channel on Sky last night 553 and the White House farm murders case was on again. Having looked into this case in great depth I am amazed at the inaccuracies in this programme and the amount of lies being promoted as fact. I must say, a lot of those comments by Andrew Hunter are pure speculation and add absolutely nothing to any proper investigation. I get the impression that if Bamber said the sky was green he would believe him? @)(++(*
-
I just happened upon the Crime Investigation channel on Sky last night 553 and the White House farm murders case was on again. Having looked into this case in great depth I am amazed at the inaccuracies in this programme and the amount of lies being promoted as fact. I must say, a lot of those comments by Andrew Hunter are pure speculation and add absolutely nothing to any proper investigation. I get the impression that if Bamber said the sky was green he would believe him? @)(++(*
We should complain to them as that documentarty or whatever they call it is well past its sell by date. All it is doing is confusing viewers as to what is truth and whtat is fantasy.
-
I just happened upon the Crime Investigation channel on Sky last night 553 and the White House farm murders case was on again. Having looked into this case in great depth I am amazed at the inaccuracies in this programme and the amount of lies being promoted as fact. I must say, a lot of those comments by Andrew Hunter are pure speculation and add absolutely nothing to any proper investigation. I get the impression that if Bamber said the sky was green he would believe him? @)(++(*
We should complain to them as that documentarty or whatever they call it is well past its sell by date. All it is doing is confusing viewers as to what is truth and whtat is fantasy.
There is a danger with many of these repeats which are so old that false and superseded information is being passed as being confirmed or factual when this is not the case. I certainly agree that CI need to re-evaluate the content of their programmes if they are to have any credibility in the field of crime investigation.
-
I just happened upon the Crime Investigation channel on Sky last night 553 and the White House farm murders case was on again. Having looked into this case in great depth I am amazed at the inaccuracies in this programme and the amount of lies being promoted as fact. I must say, a lot of those comments by Andrew Hunter are pure speculation and add absolutely nothing to any proper investigation. I get the impression that if Bamber said the sky was green he would believe him? @)(++(*
We should complain to them as that documentarty or whatever they call it is well past its sell by date. All it is doing is confusing viewers as to what is truth and whtat is fantasy.
You might as well add YouTube to that list because the same doc. is on there, and whatsmore it's available to be viewed anytime (unlike the tv) to mislead those like bigdaveglasgow, who made a fleeting appearance on blue not long ago....,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-OlvzCVrmc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-OlvzCVrmc)
-
Wrong thread, but...
I'm trying to figure out Julie's diary entry for Jan. 2nd (yes, I know it wasn't written then) where she refers to Jeremy having Thrush in the mouth, spots on his middle wicket, lumps etc., cancers.... arrrgh!, and then a side reference to Sue Ford.
What was that all about.... was she having a dig at Suzette for giving him all those infections ?
And then was there a burglary at K + A's ? (Karen and Andy Bishop?)... and if so was she hinting that Jeremy was involved?
-
I just happened upon the Crime Investigation channel on Sky last night 553 and the White House farm murders case was on again. Having looked into this case in great depth I am amazed at the inaccuracies in this programme and the amount of lies being promoted as fact. I must say, a lot of those comments by Andrew Hunter are pure speculation and add absolutely nothing to any proper investigation. I get the impression that if Bamber said the sky was green he would believe him? @)(++(*
We should complain to them as that documentarty or whatever they call it is well past its sell by date. All it is doing is confusing viewers as to what is truth and whtat is fantasy.
You might as well add YouTube to that list because the same doc. is on there, and whatsmore it's available to be viewed anytime (unlike the tv) to mislead those like bigdaveglasgow, who made a fleeting appearance on blue not long ago....,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-OlvzCVrmc (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-OlvzCVrmc)
Has bigmikesheffield changed his name again?? @)(++(*
-
Oh Jesus, indistupable.
Shonaisms are well-known phemonena affecting skribblerz... they occur when the fusserer visits forums that support a lack of pies.... and used to be common once among the Suffering-gets before they got the vote. ?{)(** (http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/7293/couchfast.gif)
-
Wrong thread, but...
I'm trying to figure out Julie's diary entry for Jan. 2nd (yes, I know it wasn't written then) where she refers to Jeremy having Thrush in the mouth, spots on his middle wicket, lumps etc., cancers.... arrrgh!, and then a side reference to Sue Ford.
What was that all about.... was she having a dig at Suzette for giving him all those infections ?
And then was there a burglary at K + A's ? (Karen and Andy Bishop?)... and if so was she hinting that Jeremy was involved?
I think you may be correct on both counts Myster. Julie was not slow at coming forward when she had to as the jury at the Bamber trial later came to realise.
-
Has bigmikesheffield changed his name again?? @)(++(*
He's about as good at spelling riffle as Tesko is at spelling Anslutz !
-
Has bigmikesheffield changed his name again?? @)(++(*
He's about as good at spelling riffle as Tesko is at spelling Anslutz !
That's indisputababble @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
-
Wrong thread, but...
I'm trying to figure out Julie's diary entry for Jan. 2nd (yes, I know it wasn't written then) where she refers to Jeremy having Thrush in the mouth, spots on his middle wicket, lumps etc., cancers.... arrrgh!, and then a side reference to Sue Ford.
What was that all about.... was she having a dig at Suzette for giving him all those infections ?
And then was there a burglary at K + A's ? (Karen and Andy Bishop?)... and if so was she hinting that Jeremy was involved?
Quite so, I put some notes on the Julie Mugford Diary Thread recently. Her notes clearly show her state of mind at the time. The Wet Suit business, Pest - Dog (That is Crispy, June's dog that JB later killed probably early September). The sexual diseases, and I must admit I did not know about the burglary at K and As?
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
John, it still amazes me how much proof people need.
Sheila couldn't have shot herself the second time (Even Mike admits this now) - you'd think that would be the case closed. But no.
They need even more proof that Bamber did it.
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
John, it still amazes me how much proof people need.
Sheila couldn't have shot herself the second time (Even Mike admits this now) - you'd think that would be the case closed. But no.
They need even more proof that Bamber did it.
He will change what is left of his mind again.
Most of them do know JB did it but cannot face the fact they have wasted years of their lives supporting a child killer.
-
I had another look at Julie's statement and still think that it makes more sense that her version of events would be true than that it would be made up. The detail is incredible. I cannot imagine someone would have made it all up and risk perjuring themselves in a high profile court case, just to get back at an ex?
-
I had another look at Julie's statement and still think that it makes more sense that her version of events would be true than that it would be made up. The detail is incredible. I cannot imagine someone would have made it all up and risk perjuring themselves in a high profile court case, just to get back at an ex?
What you say is very true goatboy. Detectives and especially one with the experience that Stan Jones had would see through any lies immediately. What speaks volumes is that Julie cooperated with police while Jeremy prevaricated and did all he could to thwart detectives interviewing him. I for one know who I would believe.
-
I had another look at Julie's statement and still think that it makes more sense that her version of events would be true than that it would be made up. The detail is incredible. I cannot imagine someone would have made it all up and risk perjuring themselves in a high profile court case, just to get back at an ex?
although i find Julies statement more believeable than Jeremys i cant helping thinking it was 'managed' somewhat.
-
I had another look at Julie's statement and still think that it makes more sense that her version of events would be true than that it would be made up. The detail is incredible. I cannot imagine someone would have made it all up and risk perjuring themselves in a high profile court case, just to get back at an ex?
although i find Julies statement more believeable than Jeremys i cant helping thinking it was 'managed' somewhat.
That's probably true, however it probably is no more "managed" than most prosecution witness statements are, I imagine this is pretty routine. A prosecution witness statement has to be good and compelling to ensure a conviction.
-
I had another look at Julie's statement and still think that it makes more sense that her version of events would be true than that it would be made up. The detail is incredible. I cannot imagine someone would have made it all up and risk perjuring themselves in a high profile court case, just to get back at an ex?
although i find Julies statement more believeable than Jeremys i cant helping thinking it was 'managed' somewhat.
That's probably true, however it probably is no more "managed" than most prosecution witness statements are, I imagine this is pretty routine. A prosecution witness statement has to be good and compelling to ensure a conviction.
Witness statements aren't relied on in court unless there are special reasons as it is the witnesses testimony which counts.
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
John, it still amazes me how much proof people need.
Sheila couldn't have shot herself the second time (Even Mike admits this now) - you'd think that would be the case closed. But no.
They need even more proof that Bamber did it.
He will change what is left of his mind again.
Most of them do know JB did it but cannot face the fact they have wasted years of their lives supporting a child killer.
Unless he can prove that Sheila's body was on the bed (which he CAN'T) he will continue to look like a total knobber.
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
John, it still amazes me how much proof people need.
Sheila couldn't have shot herself the second time (Even Mike admits this now) - you'd think that would be the case closed. But no.
They need even more proof that Bamber did it.
He will change what is left of his mind again.
Most of them do know JB did it but cannot face the fact they have wasted years of their lives supporting a child killer.
Unless he can prove that Sheila's body was on the bed (which he CAN'T) he will continue to look like a total knobber.
And SOMEONE ( 8(0(* ) should google "witness"!!
-
The whole episode just doesn't ring true Shona. When jeremy telephoned the police there was no urgency, no panic and even after the operator put him on hold for several minutes he did react like someone who needed police help immediately in a life or death situation. This has been mentioned by several others before in the past and I agree, if it was such an emergency why didn't he phone 999?
John, it still amazes me how much proof people need.
Sheila couldn't have shot herself the second time (Even Mike admits this now) - you'd think that would be the case closed. But no.
They need even more proof that Bamber did it.
He will change what is left of his mind again.
Most of them do know JB did it but cannot face the fact they have wasted years of their lives supporting a child killer.
Unless he can prove that Sheila's body was on the bed (which he CAN'T) he will continue to look like a total knobber.
@)(++(*