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: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 12:19:31 PM

Title: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 12:19:31 PM
SB starts off her 10th Sep WS by describing the property she shared with JM as a "house".  Throughout this WS she refers to the shared property as a "house".

"The premises are a semi-detached three bedroom house".

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1649

She states she moved in during Sep '84 with three others:  JM, Jim Richards and Charles Thackway.  Why then in her WS dated 23rd Sep does she keep referring to the same property/house as a flat? 

"About 10pm on the 6th Aug 1985 the phone rang in the flat..."

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=530.0;attach=1669

"I spoke to Julie in relation to the time of the telephone call to our flat..."

"I was aware that Julie wanted to know the time of this phone call as she had phoned the flat..."

Lol SB even concludes by "I then ran upstairs and cried..."   @)(++(* 8)><(

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=530.0;attach=1671

Also why are the words phone and phoned preceded by a single apostrophe?  Was this to identify what might need changing and editing later?

As far as I am concerned it's a racing cert EP coerced prosecution witnesses into testifying against JB using the threat of criminal charges for drug related offences.   
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 12:59:03 PM
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.463807,-0.0061412,3a,75y,169.37h,80.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-DqBbzE6MtoPCq-S2xRtwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

42 Caterham Road, Lewisham, London postcode SE13 5AR above with bright red door and black wheelie bin marked "42" on pavement outside.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2016, 01:09:30 PM
A few of the houses in Caterham Road have been converted into "flats". Look at the next property to 42 where there are two doors to one semi, one presumably opening onto a staircase giving access to the first floor rooms.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2016, 01:18:27 PM
... as for the apostrophe before phone... it's just shorthand for telephone. Nothing sinister at all!!!
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 01:29:41 PM
A few of the houses in Caterham Road have been converted into "flats". Look at the next property to 42 where there are two doors to one semi, one presumably opening onto a staircase giving access to the first floor rooms.

Yes they have but the point is SB and JM interchange "house" and "flat" throughout their WS's.  SB makes it clear the shared property was a house.  If you look at the postcode finder you will see some numbers have an a A and B, I assume denoting the properties that  have been separated into two?  Unfortunately 42 isn't one of them. 

12A
15A
22A
22B
40A
44A
44B

http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode

Other more reliable records will confirm the status of the property, physical changes made, title deeds etc.  I can't see why anyone would refer to living in a 3 bed semi-detached house as a flat?

The property JM moved into during early Sept was a flat.  Liz Rimmington also lived in a flat.  EP obviously got their wires crossed!
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Caroline on June 11, 2016, 01:36:05 PM
Yes they have but the point is SB and JM interchange "house" and "flat" throughout their WS's.  SB makes it clear the shared property was a house.  If you look at the postcode finder you will see some numbers have an a A and B, I assume denoting the properties that  have been separated into two?  Unfortunately 42 isn't one of them. 

12A
15A
22A
22B
40A
44A
44B

http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode

Other more reliable records will confirm the status of the property, physical changes made, title deeds etc.  I can't see why anyone would refer to living in a 3 bed semi-detached house as a flat?

The property JM moved into during early Sept was a flat.  Liz Rimmington also lived in a flat.  EP obviously got their wires crossed!

I fail to see what difference this makes?
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2016, 01:42:00 PM
Yes they have but the point is SB and JM interchange "house" and "flat" throughout their WS's.  SB makes it clear the shared property was a house.  If you look at the postcode finder you will see some numbers have an a A and B, I assume denoting the properties that  have been separated into two?  Unfortunately 42 isn't one of them. 

12A
15A
22A
22B
40A
44A
44B

http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode (http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode)

Other more reliable records will confirm the status of the property, physical changes made, title deeds etc.  I can't see why anyone would refer to living in a 3 bed semi-detached house as a flat?

The property JM moved into during early Sept was a flat.  Liz Rimmington also lived in a flat.  EP obviously got their wires crossed!

Nothing to stop each bedroom having its own door lock and being called a flat, with say the downstairs front room being used as a communal lounge. You're making a mountain out of a molehill! 

Nos 44A and B have gone further by separating the accommodation to a greater extent... that's all.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 01:58:36 PM
In JM's WS of 8th/9th Sep she states after she told SB they never discussed again:

"From that day to the present I haven't spoken to Susan about what Jeremy told me regarding the killings".

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1128

This contradicts with SB's WS's of 10th Sep:

"After she first told me about the shootings both Julie and I spoke about it on a number of occasions"

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1665

Come on girls get your stories right.  You're not talking about some girly gossip here.  You're talking 5 murders.  Either it was discussed on one occasion or a number of occasions.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 03:35:06 PM
It was JM's 21st birthday on 26th Aug '85.  Her mother arranged a family dinner at a restaurant near Colchester.  JB and BC attended.

JM's WS's provide brief details of most days in chronological order.  However in her 8th/9th Sept WS she states "On the Bank Holiday Monday, 26th August nothing of interest happened":

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1126

Then in her WS of 23rd Sept she states "I have been asked about my movements on 26th August 1985, I can say that I did not go to the Whitehouse on that day. I believe that during the early part of the morning Jeremy went to the Whitehouse alone, returning around lunchtime.  He made no comment about who he saw or what he done there.  As far as I am aware he did not go back to the Whitehouse that day as we left between 2pm and 2.30pm and went to London.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=286.0;attach=1150

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=286.0;attach=1152

JM's WS states JB and BC took JM to Chelmsford train station on 27th August to return to London.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1169

Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 03:51:54 PM
Why were EP keen to cover off JB's movements on 26th Aug?
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: scipio_usmc on June 11, 2016, 04:01:02 PM
Yes they have but the point is SB and JM interchange "house" and "flat" throughout their WS's.  SB makes it clear the shared property was a house.  If you look at the postcode finder you will see some numbers have an a A and B, I assume denoting the properties that  have been separated into two?  Unfortunately 42 isn't one of them. 

12A
15A
22A
22B
40A
44A
44B

http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode

Other more reliable records will confirm the status of the property, physical changes made, title deeds etc.  I can't see why anyone would refer to living in a 3 bed semi-detached house as a flat?

The property JM moved into during early Sept was a flat.  Liz Rimmington also lived in a flat.  EP obviously got their wires crossed!

Brits I have interacted with have called where they live here in the states flats.  In a colloquial sense some call where they live period a flat. You are trying to take claims in a very literal sense.  All day long though people use terms in an imprecise manner and even wrong in a technical sense.  When there are questions like this you must get the person to clarify what they mean.  his is but one reason why courts want live witness who can be questioned. If you want to get technical macaroni means elbow pasta. Yet to a large swatch of American-Italians macaroni is used to mean pasta generally.  As Caroline said it is not really relevant whether what the place technically was so it not worth worrying about.


   
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: scipio_usmc on June 11, 2016, 04:05:49 PM
Why were EP keen to cover off JB's movements on 26th Aug?

She recounted what she knew of what he did from the murders forward. They were not interested in that date in particular over others.  They wanted to know who he interacted with and what he did so they could question any people he might have been involved with. They were not sure whether he did it alone or not or whether he told anyone else anything.  They especially liked hearing about how much oney he was spending and where he got the money from.

Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 04:18:05 PM
Brits I have interacted with have called where they live here in the states flats.  In a colloquial sense some call where they live period a flat. You are trying to take claims in a very literal sense.  All day long though people use terms in an imprecise manner and even wrong in a technical sense.  When there are questions like this you must get the person to clarify what they mean.  his is but one reason why courts want live witness who can be questioned. If you want to get technical macaroni means elbow pasta. Yet to a large swatch of American-Italians macaroni is used to mean pasta generally.  As Caroline said it is not really relevant whether what the place technically was so it not worth worrying about.

SB's WS of 10th Sept clearly states the property was a semi-detached house.  Why would she then refer to it as a flat? 
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 04:26:42 PM
She recounted what she knew of what he did from the murders forward. They were not interested in that date in particular over others.  They wanted to know who he interacted with and what he did so they could question any people he might have been involved with. They were not sure whether he did it alone or not or whether he told anyone else anything.  They especially liked hearing about how much oney he was spending and where he got the money from.

Why did JM forget to say it was her 21st birthday on 26th Aug and the birthday dinner her mother arranged in Colchester?  In the UK dinner is usually referred to as an evening meal.  Lunch at midday.  JM said she and JB left for London at 2.00 - 2.30pm.  She said JB took her to the train station on 27th Aug to return to London?

No mention of who paid for the 21st birthday dinner or JB's pressie to JM save the cheque for £400 at a later date for a hol. 
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2016, 04:49:02 PM
SB's WS of 10th Sept clearly states the property was a semi-detached house.  Why would she then refer to it as a flat?

You don't half go on!!!  We used to call them bedsits at uni.  No.42 was simply a house where the bedrooms were made into individual units to be rented out separately.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: scipio_usmc on June 11, 2016, 04:49:11 PM
Why did JM forget to say it was her 21st birthday on 26th Aug and the birthday dinner her mother arranged in Colchester?  In the UK dinner is usually referred to as an evening meal.  Lunch at midday.  JM said she and JB left for London at 2.00 - 2.30pm.  She said JB took her to the train station on 27th Aug to return to London?

No mention of who paid for the 21st birthday dinner or JB's pressie to JM save the cheque for £400 at a later date for a hol.

Nothing of significance happened with respect to Jeremy one would have to presume she mean.

The norm for early parties is to serve a dinner meal despite the time of day. You will eat the kind of food normally eaten at dinner and thus some still call it dinner.

If you eat sandwiches or something normally associated with lunch with the intention people eat a dinner later then you call it a lunch party.  What particular people will call such things will vary.

Someone who eats nothing until 1PM and then eats a bowl of cereal will frequently call that breakfast because we associate cereal with breakfast.

Obviously you are saying the person who called my house a flat was wrong to do so but he did and what should I make of it- that he is a dolt? You are being too literal.  You would not like life as a lawyer you would hate dealing with the lack of precision that people use day in and out. 
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 11, 2016, 04:55:36 PM
Why did JM forget to say it was her 21st birthday on 26th Aug and the birthday dinner her mother arranged in Colchester?  In the UK dinner is usually referred to as an evening meal.  Lunch at midday.  JM said she and JB left for London at 2.00 - 2.30pm.  She said JB took her to the train station on 27th Aug to return to London?

No mention of who paid for the 21st birthday dinner or JB's pressie to JM save the cheque for £400 at a later date for a hol.

Julie and her mother were from the North-West (Cheshire?) I believe, where at that period, dinner was often referred to as the midday meal... until Southerners interfered.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 11, 2016, 05:06:54 PM
You don't half go on!!!  We used to call them bedsits at uni.  No.42 was simply a house where the bedrooms were made into individual units to be rented out separately.

Any ideas about the following:

In JM's WS of 8th/9th Sep she states after she told SB they never discussed again:

"From that day to the present I haven't spoken to Susan about what Jeremy told me regarding the killings".

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1128

This contradicts with SB's WS's of 10th Sep:

"After she first told me about the shootings both Julie and I spoke about it on a number of occasions"

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1665

Come on girls get your stories right.  You're not talking about some girly gossip here.  You're talking 5 murders.  Either it was discussed on one occasion or a number of occasions.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: david1819 on June 11, 2016, 05:31:24 PM
Any ideas about the following:

In JM's WS of 8th/9th Sep she states after she told SB they never discussed again:

"From that day to the present I haven't spoken to Susan about what Jeremy told me regarding the killings".

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1128

This contradicts with SB's WS's of 10th Sep:

"After she first told me about the shootings both Julie and I spoke about it on a number of occasions"

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1665

Come on girls get your stories right.  You're not talking about some girly gossip here.  You're talking 5 murders.  Either it was discussed on one occasion or a number of occasions.

I find it odd Julie has never mentioned the case since 1986 when almost every other major witness has. Relatives and Police always make an appearance in documentaries yet Julie does not.

I would have thought she has had plenty of offers thou 
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 12, 2016, 10:28:33 AM
You don't half go on!!!  We used to call them bedsits at uni.  No.42 was simply a house where the bedrooms were made into individual units to be rented out separately.

In SB's WS of 10th Sept she confirms 42 Caterham Road was a 3 bed semi with one of the downstairs rooms used as a bedroom.  Flats are purpose built or converted but both have everything required for independent living eg cooking and washing.  It would not be possible or practical to turn each bedroom at Caterham Road into individual units/flats.  It was a shared house.  SB also makes clear prior to taking up residence at 42 Catherham Road she and JM were in halls of residence and she referred to these dwellings as "rooms".

Throughout SB's WS's of 10th Sept she refers to 42 Catherham Road as a "house" and makes no reference to "flat":

Page 1 - 2
Page 2 - 0
Page 3 - 0
Page 4 - 5 - http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1655
Page 5 - 0
Page 6 - 1
Page 7 - 1
Page 8 - 1
Page 9 - 0
Page 10 - 0

Throughout SB's WS of 23rd Sept the reverse happens where she refers to 42 Catherham Road as a "flat" and makes no reference to "house":

Page 1 - 1
Page 2 - 2 - http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=530.0;attach=1671

Exactly the same situation with JM's WS.  I don't have time to go through them right now but I will do later because I'm very geeky and like looking for patterns even though I may be the only person on the planet that can find meaning in the pattern  *&*%£
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 12, 2016, 10:40:34 PM
JM was selling bank coin bags of cannabis for £5 a pop. 

SB said she didn't see JB bring the bags into the house she shared with JM but after he had been and gone the bags would appear.  She said there were ten bags at the most at any one time:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=b5grts1elec1r0v02voqfpdqa5&action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1655

JM said she sold £100 worth and gave JB £70 as she had spent £30 on herself
(£100/£5 = 20 bags)

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=cfuuuf8jl1kh73q5tor8d78496&action=dlattach;topic=283.0;attach=1058



Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 12, 2016, 10:51:44 PM
JM was selling bank coin bags of cannabis for £5 a pop. 

SB said she didn't see JB bring the bags into the house she shared with JM but after he had been and gone the bags would appear.  She said there were ten bags at the most at any one time:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=b5grts1elec1r0v02voqfpdqa5&action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1655

JM said she sold £100 worth and gave JB £70 as she had spent £30 on herself
(£100/£5 = 20 bags)

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=cfuuuf8jl1kh73q5tor8d78496&action=dlattach;topic=283.0;attach=1058

SB said JM obtained the bags of cannabis when she visited JB.  Or JB would bring it with him when he visited JM:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=b5grts1elec1r0v02voqfpdqa5&action=dlattach;topic=529.0;attach=1655

JM said after the initial sale of £100 worth she didn't continue as SB didn't like her bringing it into the house:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=cfuuuf8jl1kh73q5tor8d78496&action=dlattach;topic=283.0;attach=1056

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=cfuuuf8jl1kh73q5tor8d78496&action=dlattach;topic=283.0;attach=1058






Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 12, 2016, 11:15:01 PM
JM said she had been smoking marijuana (she usually refers to it as cannabis) before JB's 10pm tel call on 6th Aug:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?PHPSESSID=0d8hpgt6l84mcfsnsu1qb3lma2&action=dlattach;topic=284.0;attach=1106

I guess she could have been smoking it in her own bedroom but I wouldn't mind betting all occupants were hanging out in the communal lounge which was a haze of cannabis smoke

 ?>)()<

                ?>)()<




                                                           ?>)()<


Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2016, 10:50:45 AM
I find it odd Julie has never mentioned the case since 1986 when almost every other major witness has. Relatives and Police always make an appearance in documentaries yet Julie does not.

I would have thought she has had plenty of offers thou

Apart from the NoW article post trial I have read JM contributed an article in the female mag 'She' although I haven't seen any evidence for this.

As far as I can see all these low budget tv docu/dramas feature the same faces:

- Relatives, usually DB
- BW
- Low ranking officers eg DS Jones, PS Bews, DI Miller, DI Cook
- Tabloid journalists eg Kieron Saunders, Michael Fielder
- Local Essex Journalists eg reasonably good looking guy in CTSB and an aesthetically challenged guy in Behind Mansion Walls or 'Killing Mum and Dad'.  The titles of these low budget/docu dramas say it all!

We never hear from high ranking officers or experts such as Dr Vanezis, Malcolm Fletcher, John Hayward (now deceased) or Dr Ferguson.

Consequently these low budget docu/dramas can offer little, if anything, by way of evidential value.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: david1819 on June 13, 2016, 06:40:18 PM
Apart from the NoW article post trial I have read JM contributed an article in the female mag 'She' although I haven't seen any evidence for this.

As far as I can see all these low budget tv docu/dramas feature the same faces:

- Relatives, usually DB
- BW
- Low ranking officers eg DS Jones, PS Bews, DI Miller, DI Cook
- Tabloid journalists eg Kieron Saunders, Michael Fielder
- Local Essex Journalists eg reasonably good looking guy in CTSB and an aesthetically challenged guy in Behind Mansion Walls or 'Killing Mum and Dad'.  The titles of these low budget/docu dramas say it all!

We never hear from high ranking officers or experts such as Dr Vanezis, Malcolm Fletcher, John Hayward (now deceased) or Dr Ferguson.

Consequently these low budget docu/dramas can offer little, if anything, by way of evidential value.

I really want to see the ITV documentary made in 2003/2004 when AE takes them round WHF

It's not on the Internet Anywhere (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/Smileys/custom/c021.gif)
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 13, 2016, 06:53:20 PM
I really want to see the ITV documentary made in 2003/2004 when AE takes them round WHF

It's not on the Internet Anywhere (http://miscarriageofjustice.co/Smileys/custom/c021.gif)

Email ITV and ask them to stream it... what's the title?
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: david1819 on June 13, 2016, 10:33:27 PM
Email ITV and ask them to stream it... what's the title?

Real Crime Season 4 Episode 1 Jeremy Bamber

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Crime#Season_04_-_2004 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Crime#Season_04_-_2004)


Who in ITV do I ask? the only episodes online seem to be from people that have happened to tape/record them.

Someone must have it somewhere
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Holly Goodhead on June 13, 2016, 10:53:56 PM
Real Crime Season 4 Episode 1 Jeremy Bamber

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Crime#Season_04_-_2004 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Crime#Season_04_-_2004)


Who in ITV do I ask? the only episodes online seem to be from people that have happened to tape/record them.

Someone must have it somewhere

Oh David *sighs* must be your high cheekbones that have made me push the boat out for you  8**8:/:

http://www.itv.com/presscentre/content/itn-source-archive-footage
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Caroline on June 14, 2016, 12:07:18 AM
Oh David *sighs* must be your high cheekbones that have made me push the boat out for you  8**8:/:

http://www.itv.com/presscentre/content/itn-source-archive-footage

The picture is actually Bad Pitt.
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: david1819 on June 14, 2016, 12:58:25 AM
The picture is actually Bad Pitt.

Its not even a picture lol

(http://s32.postimg.org/ahefbf3zp/avatarart.jpg)
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Caroline on June 14, 2016, 01:13:22 AM
Its not even a picture lol

(http://s32.postimg.org/ahefbf3zp/avatarart.jpg)

Of course its a picture and it's Brad Pit. I didn't say it was a PHOTOGRAPH!!
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Myster on June 14, 2016, 06:44:46 AM
The picture is actually Bad Pitt.

Was that Freudian intentional?  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Caroline on June 14, 2016, 11:39:00 AM
Was that Freudian intentional?  @)(++(*

Actually no, my lap top is getting old and the keys often stick  @)(++(* @)(++(*
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: Nicholas on May 08, 2020, 01:20:40 PM
- Relatives, usually DB
- BW
- Low ranking officers eg DS Jones, PS Bews, DI Miller, DI Cook
- Tabloid journalists eg Kieron Saunders, Michael Fielder
- Local Essex Journalists eg reasonably good looking guy in CTSB and an aesthetically challenged guy in Behind Mansion Walls or 'Killing Mum and Dad'.  The titles of these low budget/docu dramas say it all!

Who contacted Kieron Saunders Holly ?

What motivated them to allegedly tell him about SC & heroin/methadone?
Title: Re: Inconsistencies in the witness statements of JM and SB
Post by: ISpyWithMyEye on May 08, 2020, 06:03:36 PM
Apart from the NoW article post trial I have read JM contributed an article in the female mag 'She' although I haven't seen any evidence for this.

As far as I can see all these low budget tv docu/dramas feature the same faces:

- Relatives, usually DB
- BW
- Low ranking officers eg DS Jones, PS Bews, DI Miller, DI Cook
- Tabloid journalists eg Kieron Saunders, Michael Fielder
- Local Essex Journalists eg reasonably good looking guy in CTSB and an aesthetically challenged guy in Behind Mansion Walls or 'Killing Mum and Dad'.  The titles of these low budget/docu dramas say it all!

We never hear from high ranking officers or experts such as Dr Vanezis, Malcolm Fletcher, John Hayward (now deceased) or Dr Ferguson.

Consequently these low budget docu/dramas can offer little, if anything, by way of evidential value.

Well, what do you expect?

No TV company are going to push the boat out for Jeremy Bamber who was old news thirty years ago...

The only documentary they did spend money on was the WHF drama based on CAL’s excellent, factual, well-researched  book.

On YouTube there’s a few terribly amateurish pro-JM documentaries; one where the man doing the voiceover sounds like he’s stepped out of the 1930s — obviously done for effect, but all it did was make it sound weird.

I don’t share your view that the TRUE documentaries featured “low ranking” detectives: two Detective INSPECTORS and Detective Sergeant Jones — who actually DEALT with the case — were hardly low ranking.

What did you think of Jeremy’s solicitor in one of the YouTube docs? You know, the one who had the high-pitched voice and claimed he’d represented Saddam Hussain; that it was “impossible “ for Jeremy to have carried out the murders; then shortly after was arrested himself, charged, then convicted at court for impersonating a solicitor and sentenced to prison for about 12 years? Low ranking or high ranking? @)(++(*