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: scipio_usmc on March 30, 2014, 04:33:15 PM
-
This is a topic on the blue board but I have not seen any responses containing sound well supported reasoning. I will explain what convinces me that Jeremy is guilty.
1) Julie Mugford says that Jeremy had contemplated killing his family for some time. She said that he told her the very evening before the murders that tonight is the night and followed up with other phone calls to keep her in the loop of the progress he was making.
2) Evidence exists that corroborates Julie's claims. For one thing Jeremy did in fact phone her that evening before the murders, he also phoned her 2 times over the course of the morning of the murders. The phone call not only woke her up but all of her roomates. In fact one of her roomates answered. One rooomate thinks the call came around 3:15AM but when pressed said it could have been as late as 3:30 she was the least sure of the bunch. The other 3 placed the call around 3AM including one adamant about looking at the clock so their time is more credible considering these 3 basically agree.
A) What valid reason could he have for phoning her at 3AM thereby waking her up? Jeremy called her before he called the police. If he was truly concerned about his family why would he phone her instead of doing the 3 minute drive to check things out or to call police? Calling her instead of going and before calling police demonstrates a lack of concern on his part. At the time he made this call he insists he didn't know what was going on at WHF. He insists his father called him saying Shiela was in a rage and got hold of a gun come quick to help disarm her then the phone went dead. He supposedly woke Julie up to tell her guess what my dad woke me up saying Shiela is running around the house with a gun. What would someone in Julie's position ask next? She would ask what happened. He would have to respond I don't know I didn't go to investigate so have no idea what happened. Why would he wake her up to tell her he had no idea what happened? The normal thing to do is to wait until he knows what happened if anything before calling her and if he still didn't know once it was a decent hour maybe then at that point to call to indicate what was going on and how he was waiting to find out. His tale that he called to tell her about the call but had no idea what if anything happened makes no sense.
B) Before police entered and found the bodies jeremy phoned Julie a second time, at 6AM. He told her not to go to work because police would need to speak with her about the tragedy. Police had not yet discovered the bodies so how could he know they were dead and thus that Julie would be needed for questioning? Moreover, since they still had not found out anything why would he call her again? The natural thing to do would be to call when he found out what happened not to again wake everyone to say he knew nothing yet. This is more corroboration that Julie's story is true. His account makes no sense. He also was caught lying about this. He denied telling Julie not to go to work and to wait for him or police to pick her up. How would she know to stay home and wait for police to pick her up unless he did in fact tell her such? She would have gone to work otherwise. The fact she didn't go ot work and waited for police to get her (which they did) is evidence her account is true and he was lying.
Calling Julie period makes no sense. The only reason he would call her is to tell her that he killed his family because he was so excited and needed to share his joy with someone. That is exactly why she says he called her. The second time was not only to share his excitement but also to get Julie to help him in his charade blaming Sheila. Her claims make sense and are supported by evidence. His claims make no sense and clearly he lied about various aspects.
C) If Julie were going to make up lies to implicate Jeremy then she would have made up the lie he told her he shot them. The story she told is not what a scorned woman framing her boyfriend would say but rather comports with her boyfriend admitting part of the truth to her but blaming it on someone he hired because he didn’t want her to know how cold blooded he truly is.
3) Jeremy called Julie before calling police. Calling her period is highly suspicious but it is even worse that he called her before the police. That demonstrates no concern at all for his family. Many things he did demonstrate a complete lack of concern for his family.
A) Calling Julie first
B) Waiting quite a while after getting off the phone with Julie to call police
C) Instead of calling 999 he wasted time to looking up the numbers of police stations. He gave inconsistent accounts of why he didn't dial 999. He said that he was not sure anything was really wrong so didn't know if it was an emergency. Yet he contradicted this claim when he stated he was scared Nevill was trying to sucker him there so Sheila would kill him too. Why would Nevill do that? How could he even know they were being killed? He is giving away that he knew they were dead before he called the police. If he was that worried then he should have called 999.
Moreover, even if he was suspicious that he was being set up he could have safely spied from outside the house. He could have driven there in 3 minutes, investigated whether something was actually wrong and if so could have gone back home to call police. Had he done so he still could have dialed 999 sooner than he actually did. In a matter of 15 minutes he could have driven there and back, spent 6 minutes to investigate and still would have 3 minutes left to call police upon arriving home. That still would have been faster than him calling at 3:26. We have no idea what he was doing as he was wasting time between calling Julie and police. Moreover, why would he be so scared of Sheila when he never saw Sheila touch a gun and she probably didn't even know how to use one?
D) Not going to investigate at all either before or after the phone calls despite living 3 minutes away and instead making police go there before he would go. Being too scared to go spy from the outside before police arrived makes no sense. The police were unarmed and were could not defend him if someone came out to attack. He had no problem hanging around outside for hours with them anyway without fear of being ambushed. Quite clearly he could have safely spied without them. It is obvious he wanted police to be aware he wasn't there until after them. Why was he so anxious for police to see him arrive? The only reason that makes any sense is he didn't want them to know he had anything to do with the murders. He didn't want police to say well he was on the scene when we arrived so that they could say maybe he had entered before police arrived and had some part in what occurred. There is no rational reason whatsoever for him not parking near WHF where he ultimately parked and not waiting there for police but instead waiting on the side of the road for the cops to pass him and then proceeding to WHF. This is a major red flag.
E) He waited with police for close to 4 hours outside the house. He didn't suggest police go inside to try to save his family. He didn't tell them he would go in if they didn't. He never showed any concern for his family at all during this wait.
F) In fact he helped engineer the wait. There was a spare key hidden on the property which police could have used to sneak inside. Jeremy never mentioned this key because he didn't want police to enter right away. The longer the passage of time the more difficult to establish the times of death. Moreover, revealing the key would reveal he could have snuck in and out. Instead he didn't tell them about the key so they would have to break in. The noise from breaking in would alert an armed person to their presence thus risking their health because they would not have the element of surprise. He also lied suggesting he saw someone walking around at the window where Sheila's body was found. That also gave them reason to pause but also reason to think it was Sheila he saw and that she died last so obviously was the killer and not Jeremy. Either her body was intentionally shot near the window for him to make such claim or he simply made it up on the spot because he knew that is where her body was.
G)Much more significantly though, Jeremy lied to police about Sheila firing every gun in the house and being proficient with them all. There is no doubt this claim was a lie, he later admitted he never saw her touch a weapon as an adult. This lie was to make police fear going inside and also so they would believe she had the technical ability to carry out the murders. Why would he have lied like this if he had no been the killer? He also later lied by claiming Sheila had gone shooting with Nevill and his cousin. The cousin denied ever going shooting with her. Eventually Jeremy ended up admitting he never knew her to touch a gun as an adult. These lies are major red flags.
4) The killer unplugged and hid the kitchen phone and plugged the bedroom phone in the kitchen so that the victims would not be able to use the phone to ID the killer before dying. If Sheila intended to commit murder suicide then she would have no need to plan such in advance. Particularly if she did so in a rage and had not planned anything as is claimed. Such a move is indicative of planning in advance by a killer who intended to escape liability not commit suicide. It thus is what Jeremy would have done if he committed the murders.
5) Nevill was wounded before he reached the kitchen and such wounds according to the pathologist would have prevented Nevill from speaking. Thus he would have been unable to make the call Jeremy claims he made. If Nevill had reached the phone and dialed he would have gotten blood on the phone and Jeremy would not have been able to understand him because his voicebox had been severed and his jaw shattered.
6) If by some miracle he could have spoken clearly why would he call Jeremy instead of 999? His wife was shot and dying and he was shot. They needed medical attention. Why would he call Jeremy? Aside from the fact that the evidence proves he was shot before reaching the kitchen and being anywhere near the phone, if he hadn't yet been shot then why would he call Jeremy to disarm Sheila? Nevill was much larger than Sheila, he could have done anything Jeremy could have. Moreover, she didn;t get along with Jeremy that well while she did get along with her father. So the person most likely able to calm her down would be Nevill. Calling Jeremy makes no sense whether he had been wounded yet or not. But the evidence establishes he was wounded before reaching the kitchen and never reached the phone at all. Since the call is made up that means Jeremy had to be the killer because otherwise he would not have been aware of a probelm he would have been sleeping peacefully instead of alerting police.
7)More evidence the call was a lie is that the phone was left off the hook. He claimed the phone went dead which means someone at WHF had to hang the phone up abruptly. But the telephone company said that a call was placed to Jeremy's and that after it was answered he hung up and that cleared the line on his end. The line was never hung up at WHF so never cleared on that end. Thus it had not been hung up like he claimed. His click is impossible and another lie. He had to leave the phone off the hook in order to pick up the phone at his place. He dialed, left the phone off the hook so it kept ringing at his place and eventually answered. Because no one was alive to hang it up it remained off the hook. He hung it up on his end and after 1-2 minutes his line cleared and he was able to dial out. He changed his account about this too. Once it was pointed out that the phone had not been hung up he changed to claiming he heard struggling so hung up and immediately called police. He couldn't immediately call police though he would have to have waited for the line to clear. Moreover he didn't call for quite some time as discussed above. Worse yet if he heard the struggle why didn't he say that all along? He had no reason for these lies unless he was the killer.
-
8) The suppressor had Sheila's blood type inside. This means the suppressor was used to shoot her. She would not have been able to reach the trigger to shoot herself with the suppressor attached nor after she was dead could she remove the suppressor and place it in the closet. That proves she can't have killed herself. The pathologist testified that her fatal wound was of a nature it would almost certainly produce back spatter. There was none in the rifle but was in the suppressor so obviously it had been used to deliver that fatal shot.
Contrary to the claims of Tesko and his lemmings, there were not merely blood chips inside that could have been planted or accidentally transferred. The blood actually soaked onto the baffles and dried. The prosecution removed all visible chips and yet the defense found Sheila’s blood type on the first 8 baffles. Microscopic traces remained and they were substantial enough to be tested successfully by the defense. This proves the blood was deposited while wet and was sprayed there thus consistent with back spatter. It wasn't dripped it was a stream of blood that had exhibited a spray pattern. There is no way for blood to accidentally spray inside the only way for it to get inside in the manner observed by the defense would be if someone looked up Sheila's blood type, secured wet blood and found a device such as an atomizer that would spray the blood inside. Not spray it in every direction like perfume though something with more of a stream though with enough spray to hit 8 baffles instead of stopping at 1 or 2. Perhaps there are sprayers that can mimic such but what is the chance that someone actually went through the effort and figured out how to do it? Someone planting blood would probably do what Tesko suggested- taking dry blood and tossing it inside or maybe taking a dropper and making some drip inside. Is there any evidence someone actually planted it by spraying it inside? No, none. Is there a reasonable likelihood that all the other evidence such as Nevill being unable to speak and all Jeremy's lies were flukes and that someone actually planted the blood? Not in my eyes. Being a reasonable, logical person I don't buy that someone involved in the case knew exactly how to plant the blood with a spray tool so no one would be able to prove it had been planted. Nor does Tesko apparently believe such so he distorts and pretends that all that was found inside was floating paint chips.
9) In addition the paint on the suppressor had to be planted for him to be innocent. Some had to take the suppressor, scrape it against the mantle and hope that police would be able to figure out that is where the paint came from and hope they would be able to prove the paint matched conclusively.
10) Jeremy's claims about leaving the rifle out make no sense either. According to witnesses he didn’t use the rifle much if ever, he didn’t like to kill animals or hunt. He seemed to agree with this initially. He said he had not used it the week before the murders. He changed his story though once the last living person known to have used it stated the gun was put away with the suppressor still on it and that is also how he found it in the closet and that is the usual way it is stored. (Recall Jeremy also lied about it not fitting in the closet with the suppressor on) To try to refute the claim Jeremy changed his story and said he used it multiple times the week prior to the murders and that sometimes it had the suppressor attached when he took it from the closet and other times it didn’t. He claimed it was used with and without the suppressor. His claims make no sense though. It makes no sense to remove the sights and suppressor and use the gun to shoot animals without such accessories. Thus his first story and that of his cousin seem to be the truth while his revisionist accounts are lies that make no sense. He made up a tale of seeing rabbits while it was dark out and attempting to shoot them without the suppressor though they react fast to the sound of a shot and you would want to use the suppressor. It was supposedly after dinner as they sat in the kitchen that he supposedly saw them not as he walked from the fields to eat like Tesko suggests. Tesko makes up things instead of working with the evidence at hand. Never did Jeremy suggest he saw the rabbits while walking from the field he clearly stated he saw then from the kitchen. Why did he make up this tale about getting the gun out and leaving it and the ammunition out? Well he wanted everyone to believe that Sheila went crazy and the weapon just happened to be in front of her as she went crazy. His frame was not that she preplanned things but that she went crazy. So in his mind she would be unlikely to go seek out the gun so he made up the tale of it being left under her nose. In support of his frame after the murders he took a box of ammo and left it in the kitchen. He claimed he placed this box there along with the weapon and that the box was still where he left it. He said this is the ammo she used because it had been full or only missing a couple of rounds but now was only half full. He thus suggested she ran back to the kitchen to keep reloading. Why? Because Sheila had no pockets to carry extra ammo. If she had moved the box she would not have placed it back in the same spot later so obviously she supposedly didn’t move it. He didn’t bother to count the rounds. There were 30 in the box so only 20 missing. Even if the box had been full there should only be 25 rounds left. The killer can’t have just used this box but had to get at least some ammo from the ammo carrier in the closet. Why would the killer use 20 rounds from the box in the kitchen and take 5 rounds from the ammo carrier in the closet? That makes no sense. If the killer saw the ammo carrier it would be worn and the killer would then not need to keep running to the kitchen to reload. Taking 5 rounds only from it instead of wearing the bandolier makes no sense at all. The killer obviously used the ammo carrier and suppressor then put both side by side in a box in the closet after the murders. The tale about the rabbits was to pretend the gun and ammo had been left out when it had not been and also to pretend the gun didn’t have the suppressor attached during the murders. The only reason to need a cover story is because Jeremy was guilty. Only a guilty person needs to frame someone to avoid liability.
On top of all Jeremy’s lies and the other evidence pointing to his guilt, there is a complete lack of evidence that Sheila fired a weapon, knew how to load and fire he murder weapon, or would have done so.
It always makes me laugh that Jeremy’s supporters claim there is no evidence against him and yet claim there is evidence against Sheila. What evidence is there against Sheila? She had no GSR on her hands or clothes. No one had seen her ever handle let alone fire a weapon. The only person to claim she fired a weapon was Jeremy and he claimed it was when she was a child, even he said she hadn’t done so as an adult. (Thus he lied when he told police waiting outside WHF hat she fired all the weapons in the house and was proficient with them) The killer would have wounds of some sort from the rifle stock breaking as the killer was wielding it and would have some kind of abrasions from delivering blows that broke Nevill’s nose. The killer would likely have Nevill’s blood from beating Nevill severely. The only blood on her body was her own and she had no wounds of any kind. She even had bare feet and yet no blood or cuts from the kitchen floor that had blood and broken glass.
What evidence is there against her? None at all. IN contrast there is evidence against Jeremy and I just cited it.
Her mental illness was a mild case, she had no signs of becoming much worse than ever before but rather was on medication that her doctors said was helping. Just hours earlier she was very docile according to her aunt.
For her to be guilty her medicine had to stop working suddenly, she had to have planned in advance that she would kill them and therefore hid the phone, hoped to find a way to get away with the crime and not go to jail so removed the bedroom phone, she had to be pretending to be docile but was really waiting to explode. She pretended to go to sleep but stayed awake as they slept. Around 3AM she figured they would be asleep so went and got the rifle from where Jeremy claims to have left it. She then got the suppressor, attached it to the gun, took 5-8 bullets from the ammo carrier and placed them in the kitchen in the box of ammo and then went up to the master bedroom to kill her parents. June was disabled but Nevill was not, he managed to flee to the kitchen. Despite his jaw being shattered and voicebox a miracle enabled him to speak and another miracle prevented his blood from dripping onto the phone. Instead of calling for medical help so their wounds could be treated he calls Jeremy, doesn’t tell them they need medical treatment and instead tells him to come over to help disarm her before she can shoot anyone. The phone call is cut off even though it was not hung up and the cord was not cut. Sheila beats this big man to a pulp so severely she breaks the rifle stock without getting so much as a hair out of place. They struggle together but she doesn’t get a scratch because she is being protected by a magical force. The same force prevents her from getting any blood, GSR or other evidence on her body or clothing. She even wraps her body around the rifle as she fires twice without any GSR landing on her gown or hands. Immediately prior to this she decides to kill herself but finds out she can’t with the suppressor attached so she removes it. She decides to bring it downstairs and place it in the closet where she found it instead of leaving it next to her yet still leaves the box of shells in the kitchen. She then shoots herself and again magic strikes as there is not a drop of back spatter in the rifle even though it is a virtual certainty it would result. Moreover after delivering the fatal shot she manages to fire a second shot by magic. Even though the recoil would send the gun up the gun instead goes down as if the laws of physics cease to apply on the night of the murders (which would conveniently explain some of the other magical happenings too) so this second shot ends up lower than the fatal shot.
Jeremy senses a trap so doesn’t go and instead calls Julie to wake her up to tell her about Nevill’s claim as if it is a trip and he needs to share a good laugh with her about it. He eventually calls police. He refuses to go or offer any assistance unless police take him there with them. After they arrive he shows up and they BS around for almost 4 hours. He is telepathic and senses the family is dead so calls Julie again and tells her not to go to work he will have cops pick her up to come support his story. Cops go in and find her and the family dead as Jeremy had sensed. Julie lies to frame him. Unknown persons take the suppressor, scrape it against the mantle so it gets paint on it then looks up Sheila’s blood type in the medical file, obtains blood of that type from somewhere and sprays blood inside in order to all police to argue the suppressor was used when Sheila was shot thus suggesting she was murdered not a suicide victim. Why would they need to plant the paint though, the blood evidence would be much more compelling.
I don’t believe in magic so I am certain that Jeremy did it.
How do Jeremy’s supporters respond? With distortions. They deny there was a scuffle in the kitchen there though clearly was. They claim the police knocked over the table and chairs in the kitchen including somehow turning the chair upside down that Nevill’s body was on. They say there were actually 2 bodies in the kitchen and Sheila was moved. They claim Sheila was shot by police, they claim police had 3 suppressors that they doctored. They claim the suppressor only had floating blood chips that were planted. The list goes on. There is nothing but distortions and bogus excuses that never touch the heart of the evidence against Jeremy.
Nothing to explain away why Jeremy showed such little concern for his family and refused to do anything to try to help. Nothing that can honestly explain how Nevill could have made the call given his injuries or to account for why if by some miracle he could speak why he would not state they had been shot and needed medical attention. Nothing to account for Jeremy’s contradictions and lies. If there were a reasonable way to explain away the evidence I would not know he is guilty. But the fact there is no reasonable way to explain away the evidence and it takes lies and nonsense to try makes me convinced even more of his guilt instead of less.
-
I fear this thread will be heavily biased in favour of guilty scipio as most of the original members here believe it to be so. Poor Holly could find herself swimming in a pool of one.
Have pity 8(8-))
-
I fear this thread will be heavily biased in favour of guilty scipio as most of the original members here believe it to be so. Poor Holly could find herself swimming in a pool of one.
Have pity 8(8-))
That's a nice avatar pic John of you with your aunt.
It's quality that counts not quantity 8)-)))
-
Who on earth voted innocent ! >@@(*&) ... must be abs. 8(8-))
Holly knows he's guilty and is just winding everybody up pretending otherwise ! 8()(((@#
-
Who on earth voted innocent ! >@@(*&) ... must be abs. 8(8-))
Holly knows he's guilty and is just winding everybody up pretending otherwise ! 8()(((@#
You mean playing Devils Advocate? 8(0(*
-
That's a nice avatar pic John of you with your aunt.
It's quality that counts not quantity 8)-)))
I must say Holly, you are a credit to Bambers cause. It's a pity none of the blues have the courage of their convictions to come over and support you. Probably scared that Tesko will close the door on them if they tread outside. 8(0(*
-
I fear this thread will be heavily biased in favour of guilty scipio as most of the original members here believe it to be so. Poor Holly could find herself swimming in a pool of one.
Have pity 8(8-))
I didn't create a poll someone else did that.
I don't care about polls I care about reasoning. That is why I explained my reaosning is such vast detail.
I guarantee no one who claims he is innocent can come up with any detailed proof that anyone other than Jeremy did it and can't rebut any of the evidence I posted.
-
I must say Holly, you are a credit to Bambers cause. It's a pity none of the blues have the courage of their convictions to come over and support you. Probably scared that Tesko will close the door on them if they tread outside. 8(0(*
Thank you John 8((()*/
Oh no don't encourage them over here. Most of them would be a hindrance rather than support.
-
Thank you John 8((()*/
Oh no don't encourage them over here. Most of them would be a hindrance rather than support.
Open debate is never a hindrance. In fact it can be very advantageous. Taking apart the claims of your brethren from that board would only demonstrate even more clearly how guilty he is and how baseless the innocence claims truly are.
Long involved posts like mine above is amajor threat because all those claiming he is guilty can't come up with anything close to such level of support for his innocence and can't even refute any of the points I raise.
-
Open debate is never a hindrance. In fact it can be very advantageous. Taking apart the claims of your brethren from that board would only demonstrate even more clearly how guilty he is and how baseless the innocence claims truly are.
Long involved posts like mine above is amajor threat because all those claiming he is guilty can't come up with anything close to such level of support for his innocence and can't even refute any of the points I raise.
Why don't you go over the way then and debate with them? Oh no on seconds thought don't as I love your undivided attention 8**8:/:
I put together 14 succinct points and I kept saying to myself copy, copy but I didn't and then lost it 8)><( 8)><( 8)><( . I'll drum it up again in the next couple of days.
-
Why don't you go over the way then and debate with them? Oh no on seconds thought don't as I love your undivided attention 8**8:/:
I put together 14 succinct points and I kept saying to myself copy, copy but I didn't and then lost it 8)><( 8)><( 8)><( . I'll drum it up again in the next couple of days.
I already registered there before I did so here. Tesko refused to activate my membership because I am not a lemming. I thus came here and they activated my membership here within 6 hours of registering. I don't think it take sthem 3 month to view an application.
-
I already registered there before I did so here. Tesko refused to activate my membership because I am not a lemming. I thus came here and they activated my membership here within 6 hours of registering. I don't think it take sthem 3 month to view an application.
How would he know anything about you in advance of joining to refuse membership? Your style of posting seems unfamiliar to me ie I don't believe you have posted on Blue or Red previously so he would not be able to identify you from an ip address?
-
How would he know anything about you in advance of joining to refuse membership? Your style of posting seems unfamiliar to me ie I don't believe you have posted on Blue or Red previously so he would not be able to identify you from an ip address?
Maybe he read my posts on the DeFeo website (Amityville Horror). This case was compared to the Horror case so I discussed this case there.
Maybe he read my comments on newspaper articles on the Bamber case. I used the same email to register with that I used to comment on the newspaper comment sections.
Maybe he read my posts about other cases like Amityville and decided since I was not buying the conspiracy mumbo jumbo in those cases he didn't want me.
Maybe he simply is not allowing anyone he doesn't know to register and rejecting all new applications.
I have no way to know why my membership was never approved because the only email message I was ever sent was an automated message saying that until my membership was approved I could not log in. Months later and still that was the only message I ever received and it says my user name doesn't exist when I try to log in.
In contrast after around 5-6 hours I received a message from here saying my membership was approved and I was able to log in after that.
-
Maybe he read my posts on the DeFeo website (Amityville Horror). This case was compared to the Horror case so I discussed this case there.
Maybe he read my comments on newspaper articles on the Bamber case. I used the same email to register with that I used to comment on the newspaper comment sections.
Maybe he read my posts about other cases like Amityville and decided since I was not buying the conspiracy mumbo jumbo in those cases he didn't want me.
Maybe he simply is not allowing anyone he doesn't know to register and rejecting all new applications.
I have no way to know why my membership was never approved because the only email message I was ever sent was an automated message saying that until my membership was approved I could not log in. Months later and still that was the only message I ever received and it says my user name doesn't exist when I try to log in.
In contrast after around 5-6 hours I received a message from here saying my membership was approved and I was able to log in after that.
Ok thanks for explaining. They are usually ok with anti-posters though. A bit pointless in having a debating forum if everyone agrees.
I know nothing about the Amityville case other than recognising the name. Just looked it up on dare I say it...Wikipedia... @)(++(* My source of just about everything in my head as you know 8(0(*
Don't really see any comparisons with the WHF case?
Don't believe in paranormal experiences. All in the mind. Why did the Lutz family think they were buying the property at a bargain price? I would suggest because it was deemed undesirable due to its ghoulish past. It obviously played on their minds from day one hence the invitation (albeit suggested by a friend) to the priest to carry out a blessing. This is one of the reasons properties such as Dunblane Gym, Cromwell St (Wests) College Close (Huntley) are demolished and left as open spaces. With regard to WHF I do struggle to understand how AE took up residence there 8-)(--)
-
With regard to WHF I do struggle to understand how AE took up residence there 8-)(--)
I imagine the Eatons moved in for pragmatic reasons - the house didn't belong to the Bambers anyway so it wasn't as if they inherited it. The house was probably best placed for them to manage the farm or whatever it was they managed after Nevill's death. However I do agree with you - I would never have moved in knowing what had happened there, but it may have helped that neither Anne nor the rest of her family saw the bodies at any time. And the house was cleaned up pretty quickly with the blood stained carpets etc disposed of.
-
Ok thanks for explaining. They are usually ok with anti-posters though. A bit pointless in having a debating forum if everyone agrees.
I know nothing about the Amityville case other than recognising the name. Just looked it up on dare I say it...Wikipedia... @)(++(* My source of just about everything in my head as you know 8(0(*
Don't really see any comparisons with the WHF case?
I drew a lot of distinctions between the cases. The main similarity is that a son killed off his whole family with a rifle to get the family's wealth. Other than that there were a lot of differences. The case itself has a similarity in supporters proclaiming his innocence and claiming he was set up. His supporters and Jeremy's supporters act in a very similar matter.
Don't believe in paranormal experiences. All in the mind. Why did the Lutz family think they were buying the property at a bargain price? I would suggest because it was deemed undesirable due to its ghoulish past. It obviously played on their minds from day one hence the invitation (albeit suggested by a friend) to the priest to carry out a blessing. This is one of the reasons properties such as Dunblane Gym, Cromwell St (Wests) College Close (Huntley) are demolished and left as open spaces. With regard to WHF I do struggle to understand how AE took up residence there 8-)(--)
The paranormal crap really has nothing to do with the murders. No alleged paranormal activity spurred DeFeo to kill his family except in a fictional book and movie that claimed he was possessed.
Moreover, the supposed spirits haunting the house were not the murder victims but rather an Indian among other nonsense claims. It is now alleged that the lutzes dabbled in demon worship and that these demons then haunted the house and followed them to California even. So the DeFeo murders are as incidental to the haunting claims as the haunting is incidental to the murders.
They are in effect 2 separate things that should be treated independently.
-
I imagine the Eatons moved in for pragmatic reasons - the house didn't belong to the Bambers anyway so it wasn't as if they inherited it. The house was probably best placed for them to manage the farm or whatever it was they managed after Nevill's death. However I do agree with you - I would never have moved in knowing what had happened there, but it may have helped that neither Anne nor the rest of her family saw the bodies at any time. And the house was cleaned up pretty quickly with the blood stained carpets etc disposed of.
I have relatives who moved in to residences where family members had died. The houses remind them of their lost relatives because they had visited the locations or even lived there in the past. They can't stand the thought of strangers living there so stay though they were not particularly nice places or areas.
People are motivated by different things and have different quirks. My grandmother's old bedroom was turned into a quest room after her passing. My uncle refuses to stay there opting for the couch instead when he visits my mom. He said it would be too weird to stya in her old bed even though she died in a hospital. My aunt and uncle moved back into my paternal grandmother's home after she died (all the same furniture) and stay in the master bedroom in the bed she died in. It really depends on the person whether they have some mental hangup or superstition. I don't believe in ghosts so nothing like that really bothers me I could stay anywhere I simply don't like the furniture that is the only hangup I would have regarding keeping the furniture and so forth.
-
I drew a lot of distinctions between the cases. The main similarity is that a son killed off his whole family with a rifle to get the family's wealth. Other than that there were a lot of differences. The case itself has a similarity in supporters proclaiming his innocence and claiming he was set up. His supporters and Jeremy's supporters act in a very similar matter.
The paranormal crap really has nothing to do with the murders. No alleged paranormal activity spurred DeFeo to kill his family except in a fictional book and movie that claimed he was possessed.
Moreover, the supposed spirits haunting the house were not the murder victims but rather an Indian among other nonsense claims. It is now alleged that the lutzes dabbled in demon worship and that these demons then haunted the house and followed them to California even. So the DeFeo murders are as incidental to the haunting claims as the haunting is incidental to the murders.
They are in effect 2 separate things that should be treated independently.
Well the most striking difference for me is the fact that De Fao's defence lawyer mounted an affirmative defence of insanity. The prosecution psychiatrist maintained he had an anti social personality disorder.
JB has been assessed by no less than 27 psychiatrists over different time periods using different methods and not one has found any trace of mental illness and/or any personality disorder(s).
http://jeremybamber.org/psychological-reports/
I am feeling quite lonely in the poll which so far is showing just one poster (moi) believes JB to be innocent 8(8-))
-
Well the most striking difference for me is the fact that De Fao's defence lawyer mounted an affirmative defence of insanity. The prosecution psychiatrist maintained he had an anti social personality disorder.
JB has been assessed by no less than 27 psychiatrists over different time periods using different methods and not one has found any trace of mental illness and/or any personality disorder(s).
http://jeremybamber.org/psychological-reports/
I am feeling quite lonely in the poll which so far is showing just one poster (moi) believes JB to be innocent 8(8-))
Do you really believe it to be so Holly or do you simply wish it? If I'm honest I used to hope it was untrue too but the evidence...
-
Are we certain that Bamber is assessed each year?
What's involved with this assessment?
Where's the proof?
-
Are we certain that Bamber is assessed each year?
What's involved with this assessment?
Where's the proof?
It is a medical fact that psychopaths change and mellow with age. Testing Bamber now will have no relevance to 1985.
-
Well the most striking difference for me is the fact that De Fao's defence lawyer mounted an affirmative defence of insanity. The prosecution psychiatrist maintained he had an anti social personality disorder.
JB has been assessed by no less than 27 psychiatrists over different time periods using different methods and not one has found any trace of mental illness and/or any personality disorder(s).
http://jeremybamber.org/psychological-reports/
DeFeo was feigning temporary insanity, there was no more evidence of him being insane than Jeremy. That is why the defense was rejected. Prior to his trial he said in jail that he would pretend to be insane to get off. The jury even heard from the witness he told this to. In a post trial interview he told Hans Holzer that he was just pretending to be insane in order to avoid going to jail and that he made up the various things about black hands handing him the rifle.
After all his appeals failed he changed his story and eventually claimed his sister killed everyone and that he only killed her and that he killed her by accident in the heat of passion. To try to support his claim he invented a fake brother in law and a whole host of lies that need not really be discussed here. I see only a surface comparison between the cases. Both killed their immediate families in the middle of the night to inherit the family wealth. In addition Jeremy had to kill his nephews to inherit the estate, DeFeo's siblings had no children. DeFeo was living with them all, Jeremy in conrast had his own place. Jeremy actually framed his sister. DeFeo killed them all then afterwards tried to figure out who to blame for it and some excuse as to why he wasn't killed too since he also lived there. He claimed a mob hitman did it and that he hid during the murders so he wasn't killed too. When that defense fell apart because it made no sense and the hitman was proved to be out of state he eventually confessed. He tried to get his confession suppressed claiming it was beaten out of him but the court rejected his claims.
His supporters insist is was a false confession that was beaten out of him, that his lawyer insisted on the insanity defense though he didn't want to and that his sister Dawn killed everyone he just killed her. Jeremy claims he killed no one.
So there are only a few surface similarities in the murders, virtually no similarities in the trials and mainly a similarity in how Jeremy and DeFeo's supporters operate. But I am sure that many supporters of guilty criminals act in such manner so it is not as if it is unique to these cases.
I am feeling quite lonely in the poll which so far is showing just one poster (moi) believes JB to be innocent 8(8-))
A poll is meaningless. What matters is the evidence that can be brought to the table. I posted on a facebook page where everyon einsisted DeFeo was innocent and railroaded. I was mocked by all yet I demolished the evidence and claims made by his defenders and produced evidence that could not be refuted. After they realized that all they had on their side was rhetoric and that their personal attacks made them look like morons, I was banned from the page and all my posts deleted along with their childish responses.
1000 people can vote a particularly way but if there is no valid ground for their vote it is quite meaningless.
I don't know what motivated others to vote. This thread was not intended to be a poll it was supposed to be for posting in detail the evidence that convinces people of his innocence or guilt. I posted my reasoning in detail. I have no seen anyone dent any of the points I raised let alone them ost crucial ones. So I have a solid basis for my position. That is what matters to me not how many people have the same opinion.
-
Are we certain that Bamber is assessed each year?
What's involved with this assessment?
Where's the proof?
All too often people claim you have to have a mental disorder in order to kill. All it takes is greed or even anger and murder can result. People can regret it later, others can rationalize what they have done. Jeremy obviously spent a great deal of time rationalizing it saying he was doing Colin a favor by killing the sons who were holding him back. Not being a father himself, Jeremy saw them as just weights around the neck.
Could Jeremy have had some underlying issues no one detected? Absolutely. I still think that too often we take away individual responsibility by trying to blame things on illnesses. Even if you have a personality distorder you know right from wrong and you make a conscious choice to kill. It is not because of your illness but something else that motivates the killer be it greed, jealousy etc.
It is rare when a mental illness is truly responsible as in people having hallucinations, delusions and psychotic episodes in general. The percentage of murders from such incidents as opposed to people doing it out of greed or the like is quite small.
Many personality disorders just make it easier on the killer afterwards because there will be less guilt felt.
-
It is a medical fact that psychopaths change and mellow with age. Testing Bamber now will have no relevance to 1985.
As he has been assessed on some 27 occasions it would seem that an annual review is par for the course with cat A prisoners? Surely his mental health was assessed as he started his sentence in 1985.
-
Do you really believe it to be so Holly or do you simply wish it? If I'm honest I used to hope it was untrue too but the evidence...
I am 99.99% sure in my mind that JB is innocent John. I don't believe there's any evidence at all other than the silencer, which on the surface looks a sure bet but scratch the surface and I find it's fatally flawed.
-
I am 99.99% sure in my mind that JB is innocent John. I don't believe there's any evidence at all other than the silencer, which on the surface looks a sure bet but scratch the surface and I find it's fatally flawed.
Saying you don't believe the evidence is not vlaid reaosning though. You have the right to irrationally believe he is innocent but that means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
What evidence do you have that paint evidence and blood evidence were planted in/on the suppressor? You don't have any. You were challenged repeatedly to post evidence proving it was planted, how and by whom. You have no idea who might have planted it or how. You just say you believe it happened. That is irrational not well founded.
The suppressor evidence only proves Sheila did not kill herself. It doesn't prove who did kill them. If Jeremy didn't make the phone call to police then he would be suspected of being the one who committed the murders but we would not know for sure whether it was him or someone else.
He gave himself away by alerting police about the murders, only the murderer would know about the murders.
You irrationally ignore that Nevill's lip, jaw and voicebox wounds would have rendered him unable to speak so the call Jeremy claims he received from Nevill cannot have happened at best Nevill could have dialed but not have gotten any intelligible message across.
You irrationally ignore that if by some miracle Nevill could speak he would have said he and his wife had been shot and to send medical help.
You irrationally ignore that he called Julie before police entered telling her not to go to work because police would need ot speak to her about the tragedy. How could he know what happened before police even went in?
You irrationally ignore a whole lot of other evidence as well.
Your argument at best amounts to this: I choose to believe that Nevill made the call inspite of all the evidence proving he didn't, choose to ignore all of Jeremy's lies such as telling police Sheila fired all guns in the house and was proficient with them. I choose to believe that Julie lied even though she went to extreme detail that would not be likely from someone who was lying and even though documentary evidence tends to support her claims. I choose to believe relatives planted evidence on the suppressor simply because they had the opportunity to do so by virtue of them having the suppressor in their possession. Nevermind the fact they would not have a reaosn to know SHeila's blood type, wound not have a means to plant the blood inside in a manner to get blood on each of the first 8 baffles, nevermind they didn't know police would find the scratches on the mantle and be able to prove conclusively that the paint matched. It just happened because that is what you want to believe because you want to believe he is innocent.
That is why you are all alone here. It is because you have no valid basis for your position while I have evidence and logic to support mine.
-
Saying you don't believe the evidence is not vlaid reaosning though. You have the right to irrationally believe he is innocent but that means nothing in the grand scheme of things.
What evidence do you have that paint evidence and blood evidence were planted in/on the suppressor? You don't have any. You were challenged repeatedly to post evidence proving it was planted, how and by whom. You have no idea who might have planted it or how. You just say you believe it happened. That is irrational not well founded.
The suppressor evidence only proves Sheila did not kill herself. It doesn't prove who did kill them. If Jeremy didn't make the phone call to police then he would be suspected of being the one who committed the murders but we would not know for sure whether it was him or someone else.
He gave himself away by alerting police about the murders, only the murderer would know about the murders.
You irrationally ignore that Nevill's lip, jaw and voicebox wounds would have rendered him unable to speak so the call Jeremy claims he received from Nevill cannot have happened at best Nevill could have dialed but not have gotten any intelligible message across.
You irrationally ignore that if by some miracle Nevill could speak he would have said he and his wife had been shot and to send medical help.
You irrationally ignore that he called Julie before police entered telling her not to go to work because police would need ot speak to her about the tragedy. How could he know what happened before police even went in?
You irrationally ignore a whole lot of other evidence as well.
Your argument at best amounts to this: I choose to believe that Nevill made the call inspite of all the evidence proving he didn't, choose to ignore all of Jeremy's lies such as telling police Sheila fired all guns in the house and was proficient with them. I choose to believe that Julie lied even though she went to extreme detail that would not be likely from someone who was lying and even though documentary evidence tends to support her claims. I choose to believe relatives planted evidence on the suppressor simply because they had the opportunity to do so by virtue of them having the suppressor in their possession. Nevermind the fact they would not have a reaosn to know SHeila's blood type, wound not have a means to plant the blood inside in a manner to get blood on each of the first 8 baffles, nevermind they didn't know police would find the scratches on the mantle and be able to prove conclusively that the paint matched. It just happened because that is what you want to believe because you want to believe he is innocent.
That is why you are all alone here. It is because you have no valid basis for your position while I have evidence and logic to support mine.
How many more time do I have to say NO I don't believe the 'evidence' as I don't believe any RELIABLE 'evidence' exists showing beyond reasonable doubt that JB is guilty.
It seem obvious to me that there was something seriously wrong at WHF when JB called JM circa 6am. At this time EP/JB had been outside for some 2 hours. At one point Taff Jones attempted to make contact with a loud hailer. Given the background ie the said phone call from NB to JB re SC with gun and going crazy it should be obvious to all that something was amiss. The best case scenario was the occupants injured and unable to make contact or held hostage. The worst case scenario was sadly the outcome. EP suggested to JB that he might like to call someone, for emotional support I guess as they no doubt figured the likely scenario. He called his then girlfriend.
It was for the jury to decide whether or not the silencer was a reliable exhibit insofar as being used as the basis of convicting a man of 5 murders. As contamination was not presented to them as a realistic possibility they were unable to reject the silencer on this basis. The judge misled them into thinking SC's blood was in the silencer as a result of back spatter. Hence they asked about a "perfect match" something you and I definitely aint @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
You irrationally ignore the fact that you were not at WHF and have no real idea what did or didn't take place and the sequence of events. No more than I know what took place. Of course NB would not have called JB having suffered the 4 or 5 shots in the bedroom/on the stairs (it's almost certain he would not be able to engage in purposeful conversation) but you cannot disprove that NB called JB before any shots were fired or that he may have even called from the phone in the office. You're happy with your narrative. Fine. The narrative I subscribe to is very different and if anything your wearisome verbose just reinforces my position in my own mind.
I am not bothered in the slightest that I am "all alone here". Firstly The UK Justice Forum is not representative of the global democratic society ie every citizen who should be interested in justice. Secondly it shows that I am capable of independent thought and don't fall for the official line.
-
How many more time do I have to say NO I don't believe the 'evidence' as I don't believe any RELIABLE 'evidence' exists showing beyond reasonable doubt that JB is guilty.
It seem obvious to me that there was something seriously wrong at WHF when JB called JM circa 6am. At this time EP/JB had been outside for some 2 hours. At one point Taff Jones attempted to make contact with a loud hailer. Given the background ie the said phone call from NB to JB re SC with gun and going crazy it should be obvious to all that something was amiss.
There is more than enough evidence that establishes his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. You simply choose to irrationally ignore it. That doesn't make the evidence go away it just makes your position unsupportable.
You start out by ignoring that the killer removed the bedroom phone before anyone went to bed. The killer actually planned the murders in advance. You pointed to testimony that phones were constantly breaking and that when the usual kitchen phone broke that the master bedroom phone was moved to the kitchen. The kitchen phone didn't break though it worked perfectly. The killer unplugged the kitchen phone, hid it and moved the bedroom phone to the kitchen. What valid reaosn is there for hiding the kitchen phone and replacing it with the bedroom phone? None. That is why when challenged you could not come up with a rational reason. Afte ryour position was proved wrong and untenable you simply stopped addressing this point and say you refuse to believ the killer moved the phone. All that amounts to is you hiding your head in the sand because you don't like that this suggests the killer planned in advance because that implicates Jeremy ist doesn't support the claim that Sheila suddenly went crazy at 3AM in the morning.
Also, nice of you to completely ignore that NB can't have made the phone call that JB claims he received. What part of the doctor's assessment that NB could not speak coherently after having his lip shot off, jaw shattered and voicebox severed confuses you? Since no blood was on the phone NB obviously never even reached it. Had he been able to talk by some miracle he would have requested medical help because he and his wife had been shot before he even reached the kitchen let alone could have reached the phone.
Jeremy didn't even carefully think about what to say to police about this supposed call. He claimed the phone simply went dead because someone hung up the phone at WHF, presumably the killer hung it up. He claimed he then immediately called police. In fact, the line was not hung up at WHF it was left off the hook. This is consistent with him dialing his own number, leaving it off the hook to keep ringing and answering when he got home. It is not consistent with a killer taking the phone from the NB hands and hanging it up. After the discrepancy was brought to his attention he changed his tune and suggested he heard scuffling and might have even heard gunshots so then hung up and called police. But it would have taken 1-2 minutes for the line to clear. So then he claimed it took him a while to find the phone number. Yet he didn't know it would be faster to just dial 999 then to spend a great deal of time supposedly looking up police station numbers... Yep his claims make a lot of sense, NOT!
Worse yet he lied he called Julie first and took quite some time after that to finally call police.
Why did he call Julie period at 3AM let alone do so before calling police? He woke up her whole flat. He told her he had not been to sleep and that his plan (he told her about around 10PM he was going to kill his family) was going well. His claim he called Julie because he was worried makes no sense. She couldn't do a thing for him. If he was worried he would have called 999 and/or ran over to investigate. This phone call is consistent with Julie's version not his. Why would he lie and say the line clicked and he heard silence if in fact he could hear them scuffling and he is the one who ended the call himself by hanging up so he could call police? That certianly doesn't accord with him then calling Julie and waiting so long to call police. So he changed it again back to claiming the line went dead though it had not been hung up.
Taff Jones didn't arrive at the scene until after the bodies had been found you claim he used a bull horn to try to speak to them before Jeremy called Julie at 6Am is false. Statements of those police who were on the scene state they were patched into the telephone and spoke through the line hoping that someone was in the kitchen listening but they never got any response. The bull horn claim is not supported by any evidence but rather one of Tesko's many bogus claims.
Police had indeed waited outside for 2 hours before Jeremy called Julie. The only odd thing noticed was that the phone was off the hook. Other than this they could all have been asleep for all the cops knew. There wa sno movement inside at all. The only reason police went there is because Jeremy's claim that he received a call from Neville, a call that he could not have made. But for that claim no one would know the phone was off the hook and everyone would think the household was merely sleeping.
They arrived because of Jeremy and they were scared to go inside because of Jeremy. Jeremy intentionally scared them by describing all the firearms in the house and lying about Sheila being proficient with all of them though he admitted later that she hadn't handled let alone fired any of them to his knowledge. Prior to that he lied about her going shooting with Anthony and Nevill but after Anthony denied it he rescinded the claim. Jeremy never asked them togo inside nor made any effort himself. He knew where a spare key was hidden around the barn or near the barn (the precise locaion I don't recall) but never bothered to tell police so they could use it to sneak in. Instead he made them break the door in.
At 6Am he calls Julie to tell her not to go to work so she can answer police questions about his family. This not only discloses he knows they are dead, it shows he needs her help with his charade. Why would police need to speak to her? He wanted her to corroborate things he told her including his phone call to her. He called her to try to make it seem like there was a genuine problem. He didn't think that a normal person would not have called their girlfriend at that hour just to say they received a distressing phone call and something may or may not be wrong.
Nor did he think through things carefully when he staged the scene and left a box containing 30 rounds instead of 25 or less. That means the killer had to get additional ammo from the closet. Additional ammo from a stash found right next to the suppressor, in the same box in fact.
The best case scenario was the occupants injured and unable to make contact or held hostage. The worst case scenario was sadly the outcome. EP suggested to JB that he might like to call someone, for emotional support I guess as they no doubt figured the likely scenario. He called his then girlfriend.
EP didn't suggest JB call someone, according to testimony and the appeal court decision he asked police to allow him to call Julie. Except he didn't call her for emotional support. He told her he had only 10p so could not talk he just implied they were dead and not to go to work because eventually police would pick her up and question her. He didn't want her to go to work so she could be questioned by police and support his story that way he would not be suspected. It paid off because Taff Jones, believed the frame and ended up not allowing his officers to collect evidence that should have been.
It was for the jury to decide whether or not the silencer was a reliable exhibit insofar as being used as the basis of convicting a man of 5 murders. As contamination was not presented to them as a realistic possibility they were unable to reject the silencer on this basis. The judge misled them into thinking SC's blood was in the silencer as a result of back spatter. Hence they asked about a "perfect match" something you and I definitely aint @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
The judge didn't mislead them in the least. We (the US and UK) have an adversarial legal system. It was the duty of defense to refute the testomony of the defense but they couldn't. Teh court summarized the evidence presented merely, no one was mislead.
You have not presented any evidence that contamination was a realistic possibility. In fact you have demonstrated you have no desire to discuss the possibility in realistic fashion. You were challenged by me at least 10 times to explain how the paint coudl have been accidentally deposited on the suppressor. Likewise I challenged you to explain how wet blood could have accidentally been transferred to the 8 baffles where the defense expert found type A blood. You could not provide any manner in which there was an accidental tranfer of either let alone both because there is no realistic or even remote possibility of such. The only way for this evidence to be deposited there is intentionally and even that would not exacly be easy.
The family needed to:
1) figure out what blood Sheila (a non-blood relative) had
2) find a source of such blood that didn't have any genetic markers that would give away that it wasn't her blood
3) find a way to transfer wet blood onto the first 8 baffles (I already explained in detail how this could not be accomplished by simply dripping blood inside)
4) had to scratch the mantle with it
5) had to hope police would figure out it was the mantle that had been scratched by it
6) had to hope police would be able to prove conclusively the paint on the suppressor was the same paint on the mantle
This is a tall order. You basically insist that it is a real possibility this happened. Yet what evidence do you have to establish it was a real possiiblity this all happened? None! Your sole evidence is that they found the suppressor, had it in their possession before police and thus had the opportunity to doctor it if they so chose. Mere possession for a short amount of time doesn't establish a possibility it was doctored sufficient to create reasonable doubt over the evidence.
That is why none of the appeals filed on such ground got any traction.
At the end of the day you simply assert that because the suppressor was in the hands of relatives before police this means they had the opportunity to plant evidence and that the evidence thus should not be used.
I repeatedly challenged you to explain your theory of who planted the evidence, where the blood came from and how it was planted. You were unable to respond. You don't even have a theory of who did it and how let alone evidence that anyone planted evidence in/on the suppressor
You have not established a real possibility of evidence being planted. You just irrationally want to believe it was planted because you want Jeremy to be innocent.
You irrationally ignore the fact that you were not at WHF and have no real idea what did or didn't take place and the sequence of events. No more than I know what took place. Of course NB would not have called JB having suffered the 4 or 5 shots in the bedroom/on the stairs (it's almost certain he would not be able to engage in purposeful conversation) but you cannot disprove that NB called JB before any shots were fired or that he may have even called from the phone in the office. You're happy with your narrative. Fine. The narrative I subscribe to is very different and if anything your wearisome verbose just reinforces my position in my own mind.
That's a good one. I irrationally believe I was present during the murders. What a laugh. I know I wasn't there on the night of the murders. However unlike you I follow the evidence.
The sequence of events I have described is the sequence that is supported by the physical evidence.
You INGORE the evidence because it establishes Jermey's guilt. So instead you make up a sequence that doesn't have any evidentiary foundation at all and in fact makes no sense..
Your sequence features Nevill running to the kitchen twice. Since you told me it a number of times I have it memorized. Despite being docile as late at 10PM and dressing for bed and going to her room for bed, Sheila becomes agitated while everyoen else is in bed. Around 3AM Sheila is running around with a gun screaming but not yet firing it. Nevill is much larger than her but instead of trying to disarm her he decides to call Jeremy to ask him to come disarm her. (It would presumably take time for Jeremy to dress so it would take at least 5 minutes if not longer for him to arrive. Why would he no try to disarm her himself instead of waiting that long for someone to do it?) So he goes to the kitchen to make a call (you completely ignore the issue of the phone being removed from the bedroom before they went to bed, which indicates planning in advance.) As this is going on June simply stays in her bedroom. She doesn't check on the boys or go downstairs to support her husband. Sheila follows Nevill into the kitchen and knocks the phone out of his hand and orders him to march upstairs to the master bedroom. (Somehow he had enough time to dial and talk to Jeremy before she could knock it out of his hand.) Instead of trying to disarm her he marches back into the master bedroom. (why woudl she march him back to his bedroom to shoot him there instead of just shooting him if she was in a frenzy?) She then begins shooting June and Nevill. Nevill is shot in the lip, and jaw/voicebox. He is not disabled but still doesn't try to disarm her. Instead he races past her and is shot in the right shoulder and elbow as he is running. He would have been close enough to try to wrestle the gun away in order to get past her but he doesn't try instead he just pushes her aside and runs downstairs. Sheila follows him. Despite the fact it would take a long time for the injuries he received to cause him to pass out and die you say he passed out and the chair he fell on turned over and he rested upon it. No struggle took place he simply passed out and messed up the kitchen all on his own as he fell. Sheila then took the rifle and beat him so hard the rifle stock broke but because he was limp she suffered no injuries as she was bludgeoning him. He didn't raise his arm to defend himself like prosecution witnesses claim. She intentionally beat his arm while he was unconscious and then beat his head. After she got her rage out beating his limp body she shot him in the head multiple times killing him. She then shot the boys and shot her mother some additional times to make sure she was dead having to reload in between.
You never account for when or why she went into the gun closet to get the additional rounds of ammunition that she would have to have gotten in order for 30 rounds to remain in the box in the kitchen.
What evidence supports your acoc..t? None. You made it up because that is the only way that Nevill could have made a call to Jeremy. Yet it makes no sense for him to call Jeremy to come disarm her instead of doing it himself since time was of the essence and he was as physically capable as Jeremy. Nor does it make sense to keep running up and down the stairs. It certainly makes no sense to run by her instead of wrestling the gun away as she was shooting at him. To get by her he would have to be so close that she could not aim the gun at him. Why would she march him upstairs anyway instead of just shooting him in the kithen if she were in such a frenzy? Your account makes no sense. It is ridiculous. I would be embarrassed to attach my name to such rubbish you must have no shame.
The evidence and logic clearly establish that the killer entered the master bedroom and walked around part of the bed and then began firing. Presumably to kill Nevill first, he was shot multiple times but not killed. By not blocking the door and instead being inside this is what enabled Nevill to escape and June to also run towards the door only her wounds immoblized her so she never made it out. Nevill ran to the kitchen and in the kitchen he struggled with his killer over the gun. He was already shot and going to be shot more unless he wrestled the gun away to he tried to take it from his killer. His killer broke his nose and gave him 2 black eyes. His killer beat him with the rifle as he tried to block receiving defensive wounds in the process. He was eventually beaten unconsclous and the rifle broke he was hit so hard. The gun broke the ceiling light which is indicative the suppressor was attached because the gun would not have struck it otherwise. Similarly it scraped against the mantle during this struggle which you deny took place despite the evidence proving it did and your account of Sheila beating a lifeless body making no sense at all. Once he was unconscious the killer was able to fatally shoot him in the head as he was slumped over the chair that had been overturned during the struggle.
Ignoring the evidence to put forth an account that makes no sense and is ridiculous just makes you look silly. It doesn't help convince anyone else of his innocence and certainly doesn't prove his innocence or mean he is innocent. It just means you refuse to admit his guilt though the evidence proves he is guilty.
I am not bothered in the slightest that I am "all alone here". Firstly The UK Justice Forum is not representative of the global democratic society ie every citizen who should be interested in justice. Secondly it shows that I am capable of independent thought and don't fall for the official line.
This forum holds the mainstram view of this case. Justice was served. All you are demonstrating is your willingness to ignore evidence and facts and instead make up nonsense to try to justify your claim he is innocent. Your version of events is irrational and not supported by any evidence.
Unknown people framed him in some unspecified manner according to you. You have no evidence at all to support such claim which is why it is unknown people in an unspecified fashion. Julie Mugford according to you is lying though she gave a very detailed account that would have taken a long time to make up and is not contradicted by any objective evidence but rather comports with the evidence. What proof do you have she is lying? According to you she must be because you want Jeremy to be innocent. That is why the blood evidence and mantle paint must have been planted too, because you want him to be innocent.
The only thought you are engaging in is ways to pretend he is inocent. You have not used any logical thought process to evaluate this case. I think I have proved that quite clearly.
-
There is more than enough evidence that establishes his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. You simply choose to irrationally ignore it. That doesn't make the evidence go away it just makes your position unsupportable.
You start out by ignoring that the killer removed the bedroom phone before anyone went to bed. The killer actually planned the murders in advance. You pointed to testimony that phones were constantly breaking and that when the usual kitchen phone broke that the master bedroom phone was moved to the kitchen. The kitchen phone didn't break though it worked perfectly. The killer unplugged the kitchen phone, hid it and moved the bedroom phone to the kitchen. What valid reaosn is there for hiding the kitchen phone and replacing it with the bedroom phone? None. That is why when challenged you could not come up with a rational reason. Afte ryour position was proved wrong and untenable you simply stopped addressing this point and say you refuse to believ the killer moved the phone. All that amounts to is you hiding your head in the sand because you don't like that this suggests the killer planned in advance because that implicates Jeremy ist doesn't support the claim that Sheila suddenly went crazy at 3AM in the morning.
Also, nice of you to completely ignore that NB can't have made the phone call that JB claims he received. What part of the doctor's assessment that NB could not speak coherently after having his lip shot off, jaw shattered and voicebox severed confuses you? Since no blood was on the phone NB obviously never even reached it. Had he been able to talk by some miracle he would have requested medical help because he and his wife had been shot before he even reached the kitchen let alone could have reached the phone.
Jeremy didn't even carefully think about what to say to police about this supposed call. He claimed the phone simply went dead because someone hung up the phone at WHF, presumably the killer hung it up. He claimed he then immediately called police. In fact, the line was not hung up at WHF it was left off the hook. This is consistent with him dialing his own number, leaving it off the hook to keep ringing and answering when he got home. It is not consistent with a killer taking the phone from the NB hands and hanging it up. After the discrepancy was brought to his attention he changed his tune and suggested he heard scuffling and might have even heard gunshots so then hung up and called police. But it would have taken 1-2 minutes for the line to clear. So then he claimed it took him a while to find the phone number. Yet he didn't know it would be faster to just dial 999 then to spend a great deal of time supposedly looking up police station numbers... Yep his claims make a lot of sense, NOT!
Worse yet he lied he called Julie first and took quite some time after that to finally call police.
Why did he call Julie period at 3AM let alone do so before calling police? He woke up her whole flat. He told her he had not been to sleep and that his plan (he told her about around 10PM he was going to kill his family) was going well. His claim he called Julie because he was worried makes no sense. She couldn't do a thing for him. If he was worried he would have called 999 and/or ran over to investigate. This phone call is consistent with Julie's version not his. Why would he lie and say the line clicked and he heard silence if in fact he could hear them scuffling and he is the one who ended the call himself by hanging up so he could call police? That certianly doesn't accord with him then calling Julie and waiting so long to call police. So he changed it again back to claiming the line went dead though it had not been hung up.
Taff Jones didn't arrive at the scene until after the bodies had been found you claim he used a bull horn to try to speak to them before Jeremy called Julie at 6Am is false. Statements of those police who were on the scene state they were patched into the telephone and spoke through the line hoping that someone was in the kitchen listening but they never got any response. The bull horn claim is not supported by any evidence but rather one of Tesko's many bogus claims.
Police had indeed waited outside for 2 hours before Jeremy called Julie. The only odd thing noticed was that the phone was off the hook. Other than this they could all have been asleep for all the cops knew. There wa sno movement inside at all. The only reason police went there is because Jeremy's claim that he received a call from Neville, a call that he could not have made. But for that claim no one would know the phone was off the hook and everyone would think the household was merely sleeping.
They arrived because of Jeremy and they were scared to go inside because of Jeremy. Jeremy intentionally scared them by describing all the firearms in the house and lying about Sheila being proficient with all of them though he admitted later that she hadn't handled let alone fired any of them to his knowledge. Prior to that he lied about her going shooting with Anthony and Nevill but after Anthony denied it he rescinded the claim. Jeremy never asked them togo inside nor made any effort himself. He knew where a spare key was hidden around the barn or near the barn (the precise locaion I don't recall) but never bothered to tell police so they could use it to sneak in. Instead he made them break the door in.
At 6Am he calls Julie to tell her not to go to work so she can answer police questions about his family. This not only discloses he knows they are dead, it shows he needs her help with his charade. Why would police need to speak to her? He wanted her to corroborate things he told her including his phone call to her. He called her to try to make it seem like there was a genuine problem. He didn't think that a normal person would not have called their girlfriend at that hour just to say they received a distressing phone call and something may or may not be wrong.
Nor did he think through things carefully when he staged the scene and left a box containing 30 rounds instead of 25 or less. That means the killer had to get additional ammo from the closet. Additional ammo from a stash found right next to the suppressor, in the same box in fact.
EP didn't suggest JB call someone, according to testimony and the appeal court decision he asked police to allow him to call Julie. Except he didn't call her for emotional support. He told her he had only 10p so could not talk he just implied they were dead and not to go to work because eventually police would pick her up and question her. He didn't want her to go to work so she could be questioned by police and support his story that way he would not be suspected. It paid off because Taff Jones, believed the frame and ended up not allowing his officers to collect evidence that should have been.
The judge didn't mislead them in the least. We (the US and UK) have an adversarial legal system. It was the duty of defense to refute the testomony of the defense but they couldn't. Teh court summarized the evidence presented merely, no one was mislead.
You have not presented any evidence that contamination was a realistic possibility. In fact you have demonstrated you have no desire to discuss the possibility in realistic fashion. You were challenged by me at least 10 times to explain how the paint coudl have been accidentally deposited on the suppressor. Likewise I challenged you to explain how wet blood could have accidentally been transferred to the 8 baffles where the defense expert found type A blood. You could not provide any manner in which there was an accidental tranfer of either let alone both because there is no realistic or even remote possibility of such. The only way for this evidence to be deposited there is intentionally and even that would not exacly be easy.
The family needed to:
1) figure out what blood Sheila (a non-blood relative) had
2) find a source of such blood that didn't have any genetic markers that would give away that it wasn't her blood
3) find a way to transfer wet blood onto the first 8 baffles (I already explained in detail how this could not be accomplished by simply dripping blood inside)
4) had to scratch the mantle with it
5) had to hope police would figure out it was the mantle that had been scratched by it
6) had to hope police would be able to prove conclusively the paint on the suppressor was the same paint on the mantle
This is a tall order. You basically insist that it is a real possibility this happened. Yet what evidence do you have to establish it was a real possiiblity this all happened? None! Your sole evidence is that they found the suppressor, had it in their possession before police and thus had the opportunity to doctor it if they so chose. Mere possession for a short amount of time doesn't establish a possibility it was doctored sufficient to create reasonable doubt over the evidence.
That is why none of the appeals filed on such ground got any traction.
At the end of the day you simply assert that because the suppressor was in the hands of relatives before police this means they had the opportunity to plant evidence and that the evidence thus should not be used.
I repeatedly challenged you to explain your theory of who planted the evidence, where the blood came from and how it was planted. You were unable to respond. You don't even have a theory of who did it and how let alone evidence that anyone planted evidence in/on the suppressor
You have not established a real possibility of evidence being planted. You just irrationally want to believe it was planted because you want Jeremy to be innocent.
That's a good one. I irrationally believe I was present during the murders. What a laugh. I know I wasn't there on the night of the murders. However unlike you I follow the evidence.
The sequence of events I have described is the sequence that is supported by the physical evidence.
You INGORE the evidence because it establishes Jermey's guilt. So instead you make up a sequence that doesn't have any evidentiary foundation at all and in fact makes no sense..
Your sequence features Nevill running to the kitchen twice. Since you told me it a number of times I have it memorized. Despite being docile as late at 10PM and dressing for bed and going to her room for bed, Sheila becomes agitated while everyoen else is in bed. Around 3AM Sheila is running around with a gun screaming but not yet firing it. Nevill is much larger than her but instead of trying to disarm her he decides to call Jeremy to ask him to come disarm her. (It would presumably take time for Jeremy to dress so it would take at least 5 minutes if not longer for him to arrive. Why would he no try to disarm her himself instead of waiting that long for someone to do it?) So he goes to the kitchen to make a call (you completely ignore the issue of the phone being removed from the bedroom before they went to bed, which indicates planning in advance.) As this is going on June simply stays in her bedroom. She doesn't check on the boys or go downstairs to support her husband. Sheila follows Nevill into the kitchen and knocks the phone out of his hand and orders him to march upstairs to the master bedroom. (Somehow he had enough time to dial and talk to Jeremy before she could knock it out of his hand.) Instead of trying to disarm her he marches back into the master bedroom. (why woudl she march him back to his bedroom to shoot him there instead of just shooting him if she was in a frenzy?) She then begins shooting June and Nevill. Nevill is shot in the lip, and jaw/voicebox. He is not disabled but still doesn't try to disarm her. Instead he races past her and is shot in the right shoulder and elbow as he is running. He would have been close enough to try to wrestle the gun away in order to get past her but he doesn't try instead he just pushes her aside and runs downstairs. Sheila follows him. Despite the fact it would take a long time for the injuries he received to cause him to pass out and die you say he passed out and the chair he fell on turned over and he rested upon it. No struggle took place he simply passed out and messed up the kitchen all on his own as he fell. Sheila then took the rifle and beat him so hard the rifle stock broke but because he was limp she suffered no injuries as she was bludgeoning him. He didn't raise his arm to defend himself like prosecution witnesses claim. She intentionally beat his arm while he was unconscious and then beat his head. After she got her rage out beating his limp body she shot him in the head multiple times killing him. She then shot the boys and shot her mother some additional times to make sure she was dead having to reload in between.
You never account for when or why she went into the gun closet to get the additional rounds of ammunition that she would have to have gotten in order for 30 rounds to remain in the box in the kitchen.
What evidence supports your acoc..t? None. You made it up because that is the only way that Nevill could have made a call to Jeremy. Yet it makes no sense for him to call Jeremy to come disarm her instead of doing it himself since time was of the essence and he was as physically capable as Jeremy. Nor does it make sense to keep running up and down the stairs. It certainly makes no sense to run by her instead of wrestling the gun away as she was shooting at him. To get by her he would have to be so close that she could not aim the gun at him. Why would she march him upstairs anyway instead of just shooting him in the kithen if she were in such a frenzy? Your account makes no sense. It is ridiculous. I would be embarrassed to attach my name to such rubbish you must have no shame.
The evidence and logic clearly establish that the killer entered the master bedroom and walked around part of the bed and then began firing. Presumably to kill Nevill first, he was shot multiple times but not killed. By not blocking the door and instead being inside this is what enabled Nevill to escape and June to also run towards the door only her wounds immoblized her so she never made it out. Nevill ran to the kitchen and in the kitchen he struggled with his killer over the gun. He was already shot and going to be shot more unless he wrestled the gun away to he tried to take it from his killer. His killer broke his nose and gave him 2 black eyes. His killer beat him with the rifle as he tried to block receiving defensive wounds in the process. He was eventually beaten unconsclous and the rifle broke he was hit so hard. The gun broke the ceiling light which is indicative the suppressor was attached because the gun would not have struck it otherwise. Similarly it scraped against the mantle during this struggle which you deny took place despite the evidence proving it did and your account of Sheila beating a lifeless body making no sense at all. Once he was unconscious the killer was able to fatally shoot him in the head as he was slumped over the chair that had been overturned during the struggle.
Ignoring the evidence to put forth an account that makes no sense and is ridiculous just makes you look silly. It doesn't help convince anyone else of his innocence and certainly doesn't prove his innocence or mean he is innocent. It just means you refuse to admit his guilt though the evidence proves he is guilty.
This forum holds the mainstram view of this case. Justice was served. All you are demonstrating is your willingness to ignore evidence and facts and instead make up nonsense to try to justify your claim he is innocent. Your version of events is irrational and not supported by any evidence.
Unknown people framed him in some unspecified manner according to you. You have no evidence at all to support such claim which is why it is unknown people in an unspecified fashion. Julie Mugford according to you is lying though she gave a very detailed account that would have taken a long time to make up and is not contradicted by any objective evidence but rather comports with the evidence. What proof do you have she is lying? According to you she must be because you want Jeremy to be innocent. That is why the blood evidence and mantle paint must have been planted too, because you want him to be innocent.
The only thought you are engaging in is ways to pretend he is inocent. You have not used any logical thought process to evaluate this case. I think I have proved that quite clearly.
Not as tall as your posts! Lol and you accuse me of a broken record!
Scipio I am not going round in circles with you. I will finish on the FACT that your views, beliefs etc do not equate to proof, evidence no more than mine are. It's all to be played for my friend. All to be played for. Watch this space ... 8(0(*
-
Not as tall as your posts! Lol and you accuse me of a broken record!
Scipio I am not going round in circles with you. I will finish on the FACT that your views, beliefs etc do not equate to proof, evidence no more than mine are. It's all to be played for my friend. All to be played for. Watch this space ... 8(0(*
You are the only one going round in circles. This thread asks the important question of WHY you believe he is guilty or innocent. In other words based on what evidence do you believe he is innocent or guilty. I presented a case supported by evidence of why he is guilty. You presented no evidence to rebut anything I posted. Nor did you present evidence that would in any way exonerate him. You have no rational basis for believing he is innocent. You simply assert he is innocent because that is what you want to assert. That is the reality at the end of the day.
In contrast I assert he is guilty because of all the unrebuttable evidence that proves he is guilty.
I simply followed the evidence and my version of events is thus supported by evidence my views. You made up a tale not supported by any evidence whatsoever and that is in fact contradicted by evidence and makes no sense.
Denying a struggle took place when evidence proves beyond all reasonable doubt it happened just means you are in denial. You are in denial about everything. That just renders your claims pathetic.
Evidence proves that in advance the killer unplugged the kitchen phone, hid it and replaced it with the bedroom phone so that when the killer went into the bedroom to kill Nevill and June that they could not phone to reveal who the killer was and what was transpiring.
Evidence proves that Sheila had been docile and on her medication. The only medication she didn't take was medication which had nothing to do with helping her affliction but to counter the effects of the medication. Thus the medication she didn't take is medication which would have assisted her dexterity and hand eye-coordination. Not taking it was a detriment to her ability to carry out any shootings. It is thus claimed that after eveyrone went to bed and was sleeping for quite a while is when she went into a rage suddenly and decided to go kill everyone.
Evidence proves Sheila didn't fire any guns as an adult if ever in her life and probably had no idea how to load or fire the murder weapon.
Evidence proves the gun was routinely stored with the scope and suppressor attached and routinely used with them attached. There would be no reason to use the gun without the accessories and in fact it would be detrimental to use them without the accessories.
Evidence proves Jeremy didn't like to shoot animals and was neve rknown to use the gun in question or any other to shoot rabbits.
Evidence proves Jeremy lied about the rifle not fitting in the closet without the accessories attached.
Evidence proves Jeremy initially stated he had not used the gun between the time AP used it and when he supposedly removed it from the closet. But after AP stated he found it in the closet with the scope and suppressor attached, it was always used with them attached and he put it away the same manner, Jeremy changed his story and claimed he used it multiple times the week prior sometimes with the accessories attached otherties without to create the false impression the gun was used with and without the accessories and thus stored with and without the accessories.
Evidence proves the killer used bullets from the gun closet and thus the box of bullets sitting in the kitchen were staged by Jeremy- who admitted to be the one who put them there. They supposedly didn't move from that location.
Evidence proves all the victims had been to bed and were in their pajamas/nightgowns
Evidence proves the shooting started upstairs in the master bedroom sometimes between 2-3AM. The killer had been standing well inside the room around the foot of the bed and evne to the left of the bed to shoot Nevill first. Both victims ran away from the shooter towards the door. June was shot enough times she collapsed before making it too the door. Nevill was able to get out of the room despite being shot 4 times.
Evidence proves he would have been unable to speak because of the wounds he suffered
Evidence proves the phone was never hung up after the call to Goldhanger was made. Jeremy lied about the phone being diconnected in the middle of the conversaton by being hung up at WHF.
Evidence proves Nevill ran to the kitchen and struggle ensued where the killer and Nevill struggled over control of the weapon. Various items were broken and knocked over. The gun had the suppressor attached thus it was able to break the ceiling light (without it attached the rifle would not have hit the light) and the suppressor also scratched the mantle. The killer obtained full control after breaking Nevill's nose and used the butt of the gun to beat him. Nevill tried to defend himself from the blows thus leaving various defensive wounds on his arm. Eventually the gun bashed his head in leaving marks to prove it and breaking the stock in the process. Nevill was rendered unconscious slumping over a chair. He was then shot in the head and killed.
Evidence proves that the killer reloaded multiple times to shoot everyone repeatedly. June was shot again to make sure she was dead, Sheila 2 times and the boys shot 8 times total.
Evidence proves the suppressor was attached when it was fired. Saying you don't believ eit doesn't refute this evidence or the evidence ptoving it was attached during the struggle in the kitchen. You have no evidence at all to rebut such evidence. You simply say you don't believe it because you feel someone could have planted it. You have no idea who or how. Despite the evidence proving back spatter would have resulted from her neck wound (which came from an expert that testified at trial and not even his lawyers on appeal have been able to find anyone to rebut such testimony) and thus back spatter would have been in the rifle itself had the suppressor not been attached you simply claim back spatter is rare and would not be expected except in head shots though you have no evidence at all to support such statement because they are nonsense.
Evidence proves that after the murders the killer returned the ammo carrier to the closet, removed the suppressor and placed it in the same box as the ammo carrier.
Evidence proves that Jeremy recieved a phone call he could not have received from Nevill. Your rebuttla is laughable. You insist that Shiela was making noise, flipping out and thus woke up her parents but not her kids somehow. Instead of Nevill disarming her he he went down to the kitchen to call Jeremy to ask him to come disarm her. This makes no sense because it would take time for Jeremy to dress and arrive. Nevill was just as capable of disarming her if not moreso. He had no way to know if the gun was even loaded or a round had been chambered so even more reason to be bold. Yet he supposedly called his son to come disarm her. She supposedly gets close enough to knock the phone out of his hands but he still doesn't try to disarm her. She is in a frenzy but doesn't shoot him on sight she orders him back to the bedroom because she wants to shoot both parents together. Why? He still doesn't try to disarm her he marches back up instead. All this time June just stayed in her bedroom doing nothing. She marches them in and makes them get back into bed and stands near the foot towards the windown and starts shooting. She doesn't block the door but rather sits inside so they are awake so could run out the door. June almost reaches the door but collapses. Nevill makes it downstairs.
Your version makes no sense and is not supported by the evidence. The evidence is the killer started shooting while they were asleep that is why the killer didn't fell the need to block the door and felt safe being far inside the room. If the parents were awake there would be no reason to be on the opposite side of the room instead of blocking the doorway. Moreover, why wait to shoot him upstairs? It makes no sense.
Your tale makes no sense and is contradicted by evidence which you ar eunable to refute. You don't refute the evidence you simply live in denial and refuse to accept it.
If you had any basis for your opinion, you would be able to rebut the evidence I posted.
You can't so you make no effort to go point by point to rebut the evidence. You simply ignore the evidence saying you don't find it credible but not putting forth any rational reason to disbelieve it. Instead you make up things that are blatantly false like the bogus claim about back spatter being unlikely from a neck wound.
You even try to deny that the only way for the defense expert to find blood on the 8 baffles after the prosecution experts cleaned all visible blood is if the blood were wet when deposited. It also had to be a stram or spray of blood because how else could it reach 8 plates that are all in a row? It certainly can't travel through them. So it has to spray with droplets going at different angles.
Saying you ar edone just leaves things as follows:
I produced evidence Jeremy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you failed to rebut any of it so my argument is fully intact but you personally refuse to accept the fact he is guilty and claim that the verdict was unfair because you and others like you who live in fantasy land think it is unfair.
You need to prove the verdict is unfair to convince anyone who matters and even to convince a large amount of the populaion. You won't even try because you have no hope of proving it.
1)
-
He is simply just telling the truth. Whether it’s enough to convince or not I don’t know, but I wonder why it is that the most simple explanation is the hardest to believe?
-
He is simply just telling the truth. Whether it’s enough to convince or not I don’t know, but I wonder why it is that the most simple explanation is the hardest to believe?
I don't know how anyone can believe him over Julie given all his lies and changing details or more importantly in the face of the evidence. I only believe people when their story maks sense, is consistent and the evidence matches up to what they claim. Nothing matches what he claims though. The evidence conflicts with his claims.