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: ISpyWithMyEye on February 25, 2020, 06:56:18 AM
-
Looking at other social media platforms now WHF has ended, interest in the Bamber tragedy in which Jeremy was found guilty of murder, contributors have lost interest and dropped away, as is to be expected
I myself am tired of reading the same tired old claims his supporters repeat ad nauseam: all of which are weak arguments of no substance, and just make him look more guilty by arguing such ludicrous points which only highlight his guilt
Wouldn’t it be better if he simply confessed?
I know he’ll never be freed, but surely that would help his own soul, and he may feel better for confessing
I’m sure his supporters will still write to him, and probably make excuses for why he shot them all dead — so he’ll still receive mail, cash, photos of cakes etc...
Confession is good for the soul: he should do it
-
Looking at other social media platforms now WHF has ended, interest in the Bamber tragedy in which Jeremy was found guilty of murder, contributors have lost interest and dropped away, as is to be expected
I myself am tired of reading the same tired old claims his supporters repeat ad nauseam: all of which are weak arguments of no substance, and just make him look more guilty by arguing such ludicrous points which only highlight his guilt
Wouldn’t it be better if he simply confessed?
I know he’ll never be freed, but surely that would help his own soul, and he may feel better for confessing
I’m sure his supporters will still write to him, and probably make excuses for why he shot them all dead — so he’ll still receive mail, cash, photos of cakes etc...
Confession is good for the soul: he should do it
He should, but he never will.
-
He should, but he never will.
I don't think he will either.
Yes, if he's guilty, he should, but if he's innocent, there is a good reason for him not to do so!
-
Looking at other social media platforms now WHF has ended, interest in the Bamber tragedy in which Jeremy was found guilty of murder, contributors have lost interest and dropped away, as is to be expected
I myself am tired of reading the same tired old claims his supporters repeat ad nauseam: all of which are weak arguments of no substance, and just make him look more guilty by arguing such ludicrous points which only highlight his guilt
Wouldn’t it be better if he simply confessed?
I know he’ll never be freed, but surely that would help his own soul, and he may feel better for confessing
I’m sure his supporters will still write to him, and probably make excuses for why he shot them all dead — so he’ll still receive mail, cash, photos of cakes etc...
Confession is good for the soul: he should do it
Why would anyone confess to extremely serious crimes if they're not responsible for them?
-
Why would anyone confess to extremely serious crimes if they're not responsible for them?
Or if it would mean admitting to killing children.
-
Or if it would mean admitting to killing children.
"He only answers what he wants to answer" - as both Carol Ann and Caroline have discovered...
https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/carol-ann-lee-on-jeremy-bamber (https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/carol-ann-lee-on-jeremy-bamber)
-
"He only answers what he wants to answer" - as both Carol Ann and Caroline have discovered...
https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/carol-ann-lee-on-jeremy-bamber (https://soundcloud.com/phil-garlic/carol-ann-lee-on-jeremy-bamber)
I've found him evasive on occasions. Still think he's the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice.
-
I've found him evasive on occasions. Still think he's the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice.
Why would an innocent person be evasive?
-
Or if it would mean admitting to killing children.
No one in their right mind would commit to a crime they hadn't committed unless they were pressured to do so eg Stefan Kiszko.
-
Why would an innocent person be evasive?
Maybe he's mentally fragile having spent decades behind bars fighting what he considers to be a gross injustice.
The likes of you, CAL and me are Johnny-Come-Latelys.
-
No one in their right mind would commit to a crime they hadn't committed unless they were pressured to do so eg Stefan Kiszko.
You might want to re-phrase that.
-
You might want to re-phrase that.
No thanks it makes perfect sense to me.
-
Maybe he's mentally fragile having spent decades behind bars fighting what he considers to be a gross injustice.
The likes of you, CAL and me are Johnny-Come-Latelys.
Maybe he's just manipulative!
-
Maybe he's just manipulative!
I didn't and don't feel manipulated in my limited dealings with him.
-
I didn't and don't feel manipulated in my limited dealings with him.
I feel he tried to push certain aspects of the case and tried to get to to ignore others. I don't feel manipulated either because I noticed it quite early on - others may not.
-
Looking at other social media platforms now WHF has ended, interest in the Bamber tragedy in which Jeremy was found guilty of murder, contributors have lost interest and dropped away, as is to be expected
I myself am tired of reading the same tired old claims his supporters repeat ad nauseam: all of which are weak arguments of no substance, and just make him look more guilty by arguing such ludicrous points which only highlight his guilt
Wouldn’t it be better if he simply confessed?
I know he’ll never be freed, but surely that would help his own soul, and he may feel better for confessing
I’m sure his supporters will still write to him, and probably make excuses for why he shot them all dead — so he’ll still receive mail, cash, photos of cakes etc...
Confession is good for the soul: he should do it
Great post, compared to the golden age of say 10-15 years ago, the free Bamber campaign is now truly dead in the water with no place to go.
Every now and then I come back to this forum to rage and vent spleen at his twisted little campaign, but each time I do it seems less necessary than the last. It has now reached the point where all sensible people have abandoned him and only the die hards remain.
I too hoped that he would eventually confess, but your sentence I highlighted above partly explains why he can't. He would lose the only friends he has left as well as his perks within prison. if he were to finally own up to being a child killer his life behind bars would be even more miserable than it is now.
All those years in a cell must have taken their toll. Hopefully he won't make old bones and will just shuffle off sooner rather than later.
-
I feel he tried to push certain aspects of the case and tried to get to to ignore others. I don't feel manipulated either because I noticed it quite early on - others may not.
IMO he should not be discussing his case with anyone except his lawyers.
People contact him and he's foolish enough to engage and then people turn on him eg Bob Woffenden, PH and CAL.
-
IMO he should not be discussing his case with anyone except his lawyers.
People contact him and he's foolish enough to engage and then people turn on him eg Bob Woffenden, PH and CAL.
Do you think it matters?
-
IMO he should not be discussing his case with anyone except his lawyers.
People contact him and he's foolish enough to engage and then people turn on him eg Bob Woffenden, PH and CAL.
Turn on him? What an odd turn of phrase. Why should someone stay silent if they believe he's guilty and trying to pull the wool? No one has an obligation to have an allegiance to Jeremy Bamber.
-
Great post, compared to the golden age of say 10-15 years ago, the free Bamber campaign is now truly dead in the water with no place to go.
Every now and then I come back to this forum to rage and vent spleen at his twisted little campaign, but each time I do it seems less necessary than the last. It has now reached the point where all sensible people have abandoned him and only the die hards remain.
I too hoped that he would eventually confess, but your sentence I highlighted above partly explains why he can't. He would lose the only friends he has left as well as his perks within prison. if he were to finally own up to being a child killer his life behind bars would be even more miserable than it is now.
All those years in a cell must have taken their toll. Hopefully he won't make old bones and will just shuffle off sooner rather than later.
If I thought JB was guilty I would simply give it all a wide birth on the basis I would presume he would remain behind bars for the rest of his natural life as per his whole life tarrif.
I certainly couldn't muster up the motivation to "rage and vent spleen" on a forum. Atrocities happen every day.
-
If I thought JB was guilty I would simply give it all a wide birth on the basis I would presume he would remain behind bars for the rest of his natural life as per his whole life tarrif.
I certainly couldn't muster up the motivation to "rage and vent spleen" on a forum. Atrocities happen every day.
No, there was a vile campaign to free him and that needed to be kept in check.
But as I said it's completely dead now, he will die in prison sooner rather than later. Then you will need a new hobby.
-
If I thought JB was guilty I would simply give it all a wide birth on the basis I would presume he would remain behind bars for the rest of his natural life as per his whole life tarrif.
I certainly couldn't muster up the motivation to "rage and vent spleen" on a forum. Atrocities happen every day.
Most of us don't 'rage and vent spleen' about Bamber being guilty. Sometimes other posters cause such feelings but not Bamber.
-
No thanks it makes perfect sense to me.
It makes no sense, read it again:
“No one in their right mind would commit to a crime they hadn't committed unless they were pressured to do so eg Stefan Kiszko”.
You wrote commit instead of admit, admit it!
-
Do you think it matters?
JB's conviction will only be quashed based on sound forensic evidence undermining his conviction and no amount of campaigning etc will change that. Likewise book authors etc changing stance will not change anything either.
Afaik other high profile victims of MOJ's in the past have not engaged directly with the public in the way JB has.
-
Most of us don't 'rage and vent spleen' about Bamber being guilty. Sometimes other posters cause such feelings but not Bamber.
I think it unlikely a poster on a forum would cause me to feel any strong emotion.
If I think a case is a slam dunk for guilt I can't be bothered eg Vincent Tabak. I'm only interested in cases which I think involve a moj eg WHF and Rettendon murders or they remain unsolved eg Jill Dando and Madeleine McCann.
-
JB's conviction will only be quashed based on sound forensic evidence undermining his conviction and no amount of campaigning etc will change that. Likewise book authors etc changing stance will not change anything either.
Afaik other high profile victims of MOJ's in the past have not engaged directly with the public in the way JB has.
That's because they were centred on clearing their name because they were innocent. Jeremy is trying to convince as many people as possible that he is innocent - but he isn't.
-
I think it unlikely a poster on a forum would cause me to feel any strong emotion.
If I think a case is a slam dunk for guilt I can't be bothered eg Vincent Tabak. I'm only interested in cases which I think involve a moj eg WHF and Rettendon murders or they remain unsolved eg Jill Dando and Madeleine McCann.
I think I remember you getting heated once or twice @)(++(*
We're all different Holly and it would make for a VERY BORING forum if everyone agreed.
-
No, there was a vile campaign to free him and that needed to be kept in check.
But as I said it's completely dead now, he will die in prison sooner rather than later. Then you will need a new hobby.
I'm sure the CPS, CCRC and COA are more than capable of determining whether or not any new forensic material undermines a conviction or not.
Those who believe JB guilty are unlikely to know what's going on behind the scenes.
I'll need a new hobby when JB's conviction has been overturned.
-
I think I remember you getting heated once or twice @)(++(*
We're all different Holly and it would make for a VERY BORING forum if everyone agreed.
Heated? The only time I recall getting heated was when a moderator on the blue forum set out to deceive me. I certainly would not get heated about a case.
-
That's because they were centred on clearing their name because they were innocent. Jeremy is trying to convince as many people as possible that he is innocent - but he isn't.
I disagree. All the historical high profile MOJ's have benefited from consistent and stable family support. JB has had all manner of fruit loops involved from the likes of Mike to the dear ladies at CT with their cake baking and graveside reading 8(8-))
-
Turn on him? What an odd turn of phrase. Why should someone stay silent if they believe he's guilty and trying to pull the wool? No one has an obligation to have an allegiance to Jeremy Bamber.
JB is foolish enough to think these people can assist him when their primary motive is to write a book for commercial gain.
-
JB is foolish enough to think these people can assist him when their primary motive is to write a book for commercial gain.
CAL never offered to help him and he was fully aware of the book. Bamber would have nothing to worry about if he were honest and straight up - he isn't.
-
JB is foolish enough to think these people can assist him when their primary motive is to write a book for commercial gain.
Very true.
-
Age-progressed Jerryatric?... https://twitter.com/YouCommon (https://twitter.com/YouCommon)
-
JB's conviction will only be quashed based on sound forensic evidence undermining his conviction and no amount of campaigning etc will change that. Likewise book authors etc changing stance will not change anything either.
Afaik other high profile victims of MOJ's in the past have not engaged directly with the public in the way JB has.
You ought to rephrase that, Holly
You’re categorically saying Jeremy Bamber is a victim of a MOJ
He isn’t
He’s been found guilty, lost an appeal, lost a second leave to appeal, lost his appeal at the Human Rights Court, so there isn’t one whiff of evidence that suggests he is innocent
He was rightfully found guilty by the jury — the appeal court judges said so
No amount of wishful thinking will alter the fact Jeremy Bamber shot dead his mother, his father, his sister — and his two six-year-old nephews.
And all for GREED
-
You ought to rephrase that, Holly
You’re categorically saying Jeremy Bamber is a victim of a MOJ
He isn’t
He’s been found guilty, lost an appeal, lost a second leave to appeal, lost his appeal at the Human Rights Court, so there isn’t one whiff of evidence that suggests he is innocent
He was rightfully found guilty by the jury — the appeal court judges said so
No amount of wishful thinking will alter the fact Jeremy Bamber shot dead his mother, his father, his sister — and his two six-year-old nephews.
And all for GREED
The fact JB has had two previous appeals heard and rejected is par for the course with high profile cases:
This is what was said about other MOJ's who have subsequently had their convictions quashed:
Stefan Kizsko
"We can find no grounds whatsoever to condemn the jury's verdict of murder as in any way safe or unsatisfactory. The appeal is dismissed". Lord Justice Bridge.
Stephen Downing
"The court felt that her evidence was not credible and secure enough to allow an appeal against the conviction".
Sally Clarke
"Despite recognition of the flaws in Meadow's statistical evidence, the convictions were upheld at appeal in October 2000."
Guildford Four
"Both the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven unsuccessfully sought leave to appeal their convictions immediately".
"The Guildford Four tried to obtain from the Home Secretary a reference to the Court of Appeal under Section 17 of Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (later repeled) but were unsuccessful.
Birmingham 6
"In March 1976 their first application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Widgery CJ".
"In January 1988 after a six week hearing (at that time the longest criminal hearing ever held), the convictions were ruled to be safe and satisfactory. The Court of Appeal, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane dismissed the appeals".
-
Age-progressed Jerryatric?... https://twitter.com/YouCommon (https://twitter.com/YouCommon)
Ha ha, yes, I came across that yesterday!
-
The fact JB has had two previous appeals heard and rejected is par for the course with high profile cases:
This is what was said about other MOJ's who have subsequently had their convictions quashed:
Stefan Kizsko
"We can find no grounds whatsoever to condemn the jury's verdict of murder as in any way safe or unsatisfactory. The appeal is dismissed". Lord Justice Bridge.
Stephen Downing
"The court felt that her evidence was not credible and secure enough to allow an appeal against the conviction".
Sally Clarke
"Despite recognition of the flaws in Meadow's statistical evidence, the convictions were upheld at appeal in October 2000."
Guildford Four
"Both the Guildford Four and the Maguire Seven unsuccessfully sought leave to appeal their convictions immediately".
"The Guildford Four tried to obtain from the Home Secretary a reference to the Court of Appeal under Section 17 of Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (later repeled) but were unsuccessful.
Birmingham 6
"In March 1976 their first application for leave to appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, presided over by Lord Widgery CJ".
"In January 1988 after a six week hearing (at that time the longest criminal hearing ever held), the convictions were ruled to be safe and satisfactory. The Court of Appeal, presided over by the Lord Chief Justice Lord Lane dismissed the appeals".
You’re comparing chalk with cheese
All of those cases should never have even got to court in the first place, whereas the evidence against Jeremy Bamber is overwhelming
-
Age-progressed Jerryatric?... https://twitter.com/YouCommon (https://twitter.com/YouCommon)
Ha, ha! How do you find these things? @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
You’re comparing chalk with cheese
All of those cases should never have even got to court in the first place, whereas the evidence against Jeremy Bamber is overwhelming
If they should never have even got to court in the first place, as you claim
- why did the CPS take the cases to court
- why did juries find guilty
- why did the judiciary take so long to rectify
- why did they all have to take their cases to the appeal courts at least twice before their convictions were quashed
-
If they should never have even got to court in the first place, as you claim
- why did the CPS take the cases to court
- why did juries find guilty
- why did the judiciary take so long to rectify
- why did they all have to take their cases to the appeal courts at least twice before their convictions were quashed
In 3 of those cases you mentioned the CPS took them to court partly based on the accused's own confessions, which were later found to have likely been made under duress, amongst other revelations. And that simply will not happen with Jeremy Bamber.
Ispy is right, Jeremy was convicted following a fair trial about which he can have no great complaints. 2 appeals in 87 and 02 were dismissed. He was denied leave to appeal in 2012 and nothing new has, or we can safely presume ever will, come to light now.
-
Ha, ha! How do you find these things? @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Perhaps Myster has too much time on his hands! ( Mind you, I found that one too.)
-
If they should never have even got to court in the first place, as you claim
- why did the CPS take the cases to court
- why did juries find guilty
- why did the judiciary take so long to rectify
- why did they all have to take their cases to the appeal courts at least twice before their convictions were quashed
Indeed!