From Stephanie Hall today:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8726.msg418152.html#msg418152
How many of the experts have a history of violence? Simon Hall was convicted of violent offences during his youth and spent time in a youth offenders prison long before he murdered Mrs Albert. This is conveniently overlooked. Most men don't have convictions for violence. If they do it's a red flag for most. Those who choose to play with fire often get burned.
At Hall's original trial at Norwich crown court, jurors were told that Albert had been the victim of a "sudden, savage and brutal attack" after a burglary attempt went wrong. They heard that Hall, who had previous convictions for violence, had been out drinking with friends in Ipswich and had an alibi for most of the night and following morning, except between 5.30am and 6.15am, which could have corresponded with the time of Albert's death.
We know JB admitted to petty crime as did the chief prosecution witness. This is a world away from violence resulting in a custodial sentence.
The above link is no longer working but here's the screenshot.
Forgot to add the link to the Guardian article about Hall's previous. Second from last para:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/08/man-confesses-murder-decade-clear-name
Stephanie you were not conned. You allowed yourself to become emotionally involved with a man behind bars who had convictions for violence before he brutally murdered Mrs Albert. Why not take some responsibility and ask yourself why you sought out a 'relationship' with such an invidual?
A bith harsh isn't it? The previous convicitons of violence have nothing to do with the murder case, no one is denying previous convictions.
Stephanie believed SH innocent of MURDER. He claimed he was, he lied - sounds like she was conned to me.
I agree Mat, Steph didn't 'sought' out a relationship with a stranger, she knew SH before his conviction. Holly, If you can believe that a stranger (Bamber) is innocent, not sure why you find it hard to believe that Steph believed a person she knew? Many teenagers have violence in their history and a small fraction of those go on to be murderers.
I used to have many very long telephone conversations with Stephanie about Simon's case at the time of his last appeal. I am still convinced that Stephanie genuinely loved the guy and believed everything that he told her about the morning Mrs Albert was murdered. In the beginning I also believed Simon's account of what occurred that morning as the prosecution timings looked weak and there were others in the frame. Over time though I came to suspect that Simon was not being as honest as he could have been and especially so when he admitted to having broke into Zenith double glazing in Ipswich hours before Mrs Albert was murdered. This admission was promoted as an alibi but it backfired big time and eventually led to him confessing to what actually happened that morning.
I truly believe that Stephanie was misled by Simon and others who convinced her of his innocence despite his proven propensity to violence. I also believe that certain individuals, whom I cannot name for obvious reasons, lied to police and knew very well that Simon was guilty. They got off Scot free imo but carry a very heavy burden with them to this day. Had they come clean he might still be alive and a free man today having served his full sentence for murder.
I used to have many very long telephone conversations with Stephanie about Simon's case at the time of his last appeal. I am still convinced that Stephanie genuinely loved the guy and believed everything that he told her about the morning Mrs Albert was murdered. In the beginning I also believed Simon's account of what occurred that morning as the prosecution timings looked weak and there were others in the frame. Over time though I came to suspect that Simon was not being as honest as he could have been and especially so when he admitted to having broke into Zenith double glazing in Ipswich hours before Mrs Albert was murdered. This admission was promoted as an alibi but it backfired big time and eventually led to him confessing to what actually happened that morning.
I truly believe that Stephanie was misled by Simon and others who convinced her of his innocence despite his proven propensity to violence. I also believe that certain individuals, whom I cannot name for obvious reasons, lied to police and knew very well that Simon was guilty. They got off Scot free imo but carry a very heavy burden with them to this day. Had they come clean he might still be alive and a free man today having served his full sentence for murder.
A really good overview, John.
Hi Mat. Yes I agree it is a good overview.
I don't for one minute think SH thought late SH guilty pre confession but personally I wouldn't allow myself to become emotionally involved with someone behind bars if I hadn't been emotionally involved with the person pre prison. To my mind it's different where there's an existing relationship and he/she decides to stand by his/her man/woman. Where no such relationship exists I think the chances are it's pretty dysfunctional. How can you get to know someone to the extent you enter into marriage when the person had had his/her liberty removed? I would want to check out the wedding tackle before tying the knot.
Imagine if like this couple you find you're sexually incompatible eg too soft/gentle or too firm/rough you might find upon consummating the marriage you're then filing for divorce:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?q=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4969900/Doctor-s-indecent-assault-conviction-CONSENSUAL-sex.html&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwjO_tvImfDWAhUnCMAKHZZnD20QFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw27Te53ipyzke4MNSvB3mhv
A bith harsh isn't it? The previous convicitons of violence have nothing to do with the murder case, no one is denying previous convictions.
Stephanie believed SH innocent of MURDER. He claimed he was, he lied - sounds like she was conned to me.
Stephanie knew Simon long before he was charged with murder. It was only after his incarceration that she rekindled their previous relationship.
I agree Mat, Steph didn't 'sought' out a relationship with a stranger, she knew SH before his conviction. Holly, If you can believe that a stranger (Bamber) is innocent, not sure why you find it hard to believe that Steph believed a person she knew? Many teenagers have violence in their history and a small fraction of those go on to be murderers.
It exactly because I believe Steph genuinely loved SH and believed he was innocent, that I'm prepared to give the same benefit of doubt to Julie. NO woman, unless she has the character traits of Myra Hindley, would want to believe that the man she loved was capable of committing murder.
How can you genuinely love someone you barely know?
I don't believe you can compare JM's relationship with JB and that of SH's with Hall. It's not a question of whether or not the men are guilty or innocent or what JM/SH believe(d) but the emotional involvement.
JM dated JB for some 18 months and they did all the normal couple stuff. Hall was behind bars so this was not possible. I don't believe letters, phone calls and prison visits are a substitute.
No I don't think it's harsh at all. In the eyes of the law Hall's previous had nothing to do with the murder case hence I'm pretty certain it was withheld from jurors? Supporting an MoJ is one thing. Allowing yourself to become emotionally involved is another.
When someone manipulates something or someone to their advantage Roch it's more often than not obvious
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8745.msg419076.html?PHPSESSID=9drpl266l17ffn15mock404344#msg419076
I thought you were intelligent.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8745.msg419077.html?PHPSESSID=9drpl266l17ffn15mock404344#msg419077
I repeat I don't for one minute think SH ever thought Hall guilty.
There seems to be some misunderstanding here. I 100% don't believe SH ever thought Hall guilty before he confessed. What I struggle to understand is why anyone would want to become emotionally involved with a prisoner to the extent they marry behind bars?
The difference being I support JB as I believe he's a victim of a MoJ. I'm not emotionally involved with him in any shape or form.
What % of teenage boys spend time in youth offender institutions for violence?
From what I've read I don't believe SH knew Hall pre-prison. They were acquainted through work. There's knowing someone and there's knowing someone?
It is harsh. It's harsh to claim she wasn't conned - and then in the same breath say that you think she truly believed he was innocent.
Of course she was conned, she believed him innocent - he wasn't. He lied.
Too many people who were supportive of Stephanie at the time have now turned on her and said "Always knew he was guilty. Silly Stephanie for believing him." That's just utter bullshit, she wasn't the only supporter of him but she is the ONLY ONE I've seen hold her hands up and say she was was conned, lied to, everyone else seems to have said "Told you so."
I think you're victim shaming with your comments.
But seeing as Stephanie doesn't post here, it's not right to continue talking about it, so I'm oot.
Whoa! That's a very leading question!!! To answer that it must be assumed that we all start off from the same level playing field. I don't believe we do.
She didn't just become emotionally involved when he was in prison, she knew he before. Not really comfortable discussing this - it's none of our business and I think she's gone through enough.
It is harsh. It's harsh to claim she wasn't conned - and then in the same breath say that you think she truly believed he was innocent.
Of course she was conned, she believed him innocent - he wasn't. He lied.
Too many people who were supportive of Stephanie at the time have now turned on her and said "Always knew he was guilty. Silly Stephanie for believing him." That's just utter bullshit, she wasn't the only supporter of him but she is the ONLY ONE I've seen hold her hands up and say she was was conned, lied to, everyone else seems to have said "Told you so."
I think you're victim shaming with your comments.
But seeing as Stephanie doesn't post here, it's not right to continue talking about it, so I'm oot.
It is my business when I have to hear about it whenever I look in on Blue. As a guest I assume I'm able to provide feedback?
From Stephanie Hall today:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8726.msg418152.html#msg418152
How many of the experts have a history of violence? Simon Hall was convicted of violent offences during his youth and spent time in a youth offenders prison long before he murdered Mrs Albert. This is conveniently overlooked. Most men don't have convictions for violence. If they do it's a red flag for most. Those who choose to play with fire often get burned.
At Hall's original trial at Norwich crown court, jurors were told that Albert had been the victim of a "sudden, savage and brutal attack" after a burglary attempt went wrong. They heard that Hall, who had previous convictions for violence, had been out drinking with friends in Ipswich and had an alibi for most of the night and following morning, except between 5.30am and 6.15am, which could have corresponded with the time of Albert's death.
We know JB admitted to petty crime as did the chief prosecution witness. This is a world away from violence resulting in a custodial sentence.
From Stephanie Hall today:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8726.msg418152.html#msg418152
How many of the experts have a history of violence? Simon Hall was convicted of violent offences during his youth and spent time in a youth offenders prison long before he murdered Mrs Albert. This is conveniently overlooked. Most men don't have convictions for violence. If they do it's a red flag for most. Those who choose to play with fire often get burned.
At Hall's original trial at Norwich crown court, jurors were told that Albert had been the victim of a "sudden, savage and brutal attack" after a burglary attempt went wrong. They heard that Hall, who had previous convictions for violence, had been out drinking with friends in Ipswich and had an alibi for most of the night and following morning, except between 5.30am and 6.15am, which could have corresponded with the time of Albert's death.
We know JB admitted to petty crime as did the chief prosecution witness. This is a world away from violence resulting in a custodial sentence.
Stephanie knew Simon long before he was charged with murder. It was only after his incarceration that she rekindled their previous relationship.
Stephanie knew Simon long before he was charged with murder. It was only after his incarceration that she rekindled their previous relationship.
Would you like to clear up any misunderstandings surrounding the Simon Hall case Stephanie? For example do you think others knew of his guilt yet protected him?
I used to have many very long telephone conversations with Stephanie about Simon's case at the time of his last appeal. I am still convinced that Stephanie genuinely loved the guy and believed everything that he told her about the morning Mrs Albert was murdered. In the beginning I also believed Simon's account of what occurred that morning as the prosecution timings looked weak and there were others in the frame. Over time though I came to suspect that Simon was not being as honest as he could have been and especially so when he admitted to having broke into Zenith double glazing in Ipswich hours before Mrs Albert was murdered. This admission was promoted as an alibi but it backfired big time and eventually led to him confessing to what actually happened that morning.
I truly believe that Stephanie was misled by Simon and others who convinced her of his innocence despite his proven propensity to violence. I also believe that certain individuals, whom I cannot name for obvious reasons, lied to police and knew very well that Simon was guilty. They got off Scot free imo but carry a very heavy burden with them to this day. Had they come clean he might still be alive and a free man today having served his full sentence for murder.
I used to have many very long telephone conversations with Stephanie about Simon's case at the time of his last appeal. I am still convinced that Stephanie genuinely loved the guy and believed everything that he told her about the morning Mrs Albert was murdered. In the beginning I also believed Simon's account of what occurred that morning as the prosecution timings looked weak and there were others in the frame. Over time though I came to suspect that Simon was not being as honest as he could have been and especially so when he admitted to having broke into Zenith double glazing in Ipswich hours before Mrs Albert was murdered. This admission was promoted as an alibi but it backfired big time and eventually led to him confessing to what actually happened that morning.
I truly believe that Stephanie was misled by Simon and others who convinced her of his innocence despite his proven propensity to violence. I also believe that certain individuals, whom I cannot name for obvious reasons, lied to police and knew very well that Simon was guilty. They got off Scot free imo but carry a very heavy burden with them to this day. Had they come clean he might still be alive and a free man today having served his full sentence for murder.
Simon murdered in December 2001. We met the following year.
It wasn't until after his inquest, via material handed to me by Suffolk police, that I read something that confirmed he started working for the company early February 2002.
He was arrested in June/July the same year. Sorry can't remember exactly when now.
When he was arrested, he was in a relationship with a women called Phoebe.
Our 'relationship' didn't take off until around 2007 but there was a "mutual spark" between us from the moment we met, at least that's what I thought it was until he confessed.
If the disabled toilet episode took place then it had to be when you first met him in 2002?
If the disabled toilet episode took place then it had to be when you first met him in 2002?
Hello Holly,
I cannot see anything on blue as I've been banned
I'd learned you were asking personal and indeed intimate questions regarding my relationship with Simon Hall.
Before I go any further, that is none of your business and has no relevance in your quest to find out if Jeremy Bamber is guilty or not.
However, I am more than happy to help guide you to some of the answers you seek regarding the JB case and point you to the similarities
Before I forget, Hello to everyone else on the thread - I think we've all met before therefore no need for introductions
No I don't believe there are any similarities other than Hall and JB were adopted. You could probably take any two crimes and find such a similarity.
JB's case is unique in British criminal history in that it is the only peacetime mass shooting unwitnessed by numerous others.
Hall's case was routine either burglary that went wrong and/or some sexual motive.
So what in your opinion are the foundations of a successful relationship with a significant other?
Halls case was said to be unique being the first in UK crim history to have been convicted on flock fibre evidence alone
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/news/2010/195.html
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/law/news/2011/204.html
Adoption aside for a moment
There are a wealth of similarities in the Hall and Bamber cases, if only you could take off the blinkers
Forget the crimes for which they were convicted of and look at their motivations, their behaviours pre/post trials.
* Both cases were built on circumstantial evidence
* Both men publicly maintained innocence https://therealmrshspoofblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/13/simon-halls-fight-for-freedom-by-scott-lomax/
* Both men used the same/similar arguments/psychological tactics to fool their victims re their plausible deniability
* Both men pre conviction showed they had a criminal mind and a propensity to lie
* Both men appeared to be promiscuous
* Both men appeared to have a grandiose sense of self
* Both men appeared to have a deep seated hatred towards their parents, and women in particular, how could this have affected their emotional growth (when does the male brain stop developing - what core beliefs did they both hold)
I don't have the time to add to the list at the moment
What is YOUR opinion on this Holly?
Stephanie if you disagree with a post it is sufficient to say you disagree setting out your reasons why. Please refrain from making comments such as "if only you could take the blinkers off" as it can sow discord. Thanks.%56&
Good point about Hall's case being the first based on flock fibre. JB's was the first afaik based on 'drawback' aka 'blowback'. That's a similarity I hadn't really thought about.
Lots of cases are based on circumstantial evidence.
The only victims I see in JB's case are those that lost their lives and their respective friends and family and of course JB as I see him as the victim of a MoJ.
I don't know anything about Hall in terms of promiscuity, grandiose sense of self etc. When did you realise this? As far as JB goes I don't think there's any evidence of either? Perhaps you could give some examples? In any event I don't believe there's any correlation with promiscuity and grandiose sense of self and murder?
At the time Hall and JB were charged for murder Hall had a criminal record and had spent time in a youth offenders institution. JB had neither a criminal record nor served time.
I don't know about Hall's relationship with his adoptive parents. As far as JB goes some say he had a positive relationship with NB but not so good with June. The same applies to SC.
Hall maintained innocence for some 10 years and then confessed. JB is still maintaining innocence after some 30 years.
%56&
No I don't believe there are any similarities other than Hall and JB were adopted. You could probably take any two crimes and find such a similarity.
JB's case is unique in British criminal history in that it is the only peacetime mass shooting unwitnessed by numerous others.
Hall's case was routine either burglary that went wrong and/or some sexual motive.
https://youtu.be/EKhVSkZXrhY
There are a lot of similarities between Bamber & Steve Benson -
Both Inheritance killers.
Same year.
Benson also tried to kill his sister.
Benson also tried and succeeded in killing another relative.
Benson tried to look upset at the televised funeral.
Benson's mother had found out Benson had been committing financial crimes against her.
Benson's mother was also considering disinheriting him.
The jury reached a verdict quickly.
Benson tried to blame other people for the crime. But unlike Bamber, was very vague about who.
Benson also wanted to live beyond his means. And did not like having to depend on his mother.
Benson did not like the controlling influence his mother tried to exert.
A bomb caused the deaths of Bensons family, Benson being the number one suspect. But Benson may have had the same view as Bamber after robbing the caravan site - 'they will never be able to prove it'.
Ugh. Benson and Bamber, what a couple of maggots. How can ANYONE be fooled by Bamber's cringeworthy performance at the funeral?
&%&£(+
https://youtu.be/EKhVSkZXrhY
There are a lot of similarities between Bamber & Steve Benson -
Both Inheritance killers.
Same year.
Benson also tried to kill his sister.
Benson also tried and succeeded in killing another relative.
Benson tried to look upset at the televised funeral.
Benson's mother had found out Benson had been committing financial crimes against her.
Benson's mother was also considering disinheriting him.
The jury reached a verdict quickly.
Benson tried to blame other people for the crime. But unlike Bamber, was very vague about who.
Benson also wanted to live beyond his means. And did not like having to depend on his mother.
Benson did not like the controlling influence his mother tried to exert.
A bomb caused the deaths of Bensons family, Benson being the number one suspect. But Benson may have had the same view as Bamber after robbing the caravan site - 'they will never be able to prove it'.
Hall maintained innocence for some 10 years and then confessed. JB is still maintaining innocence after some 30 years.
He sounds dim? In a country where firearms are common place I doubt many are murdered by pipe bombs? And what would be the motive?
I don't really see any similarities. The only other case that I'm aware of where I see some similarities is the case of David Bain.
- Dysfunctional family
- 4 murders/1 suicide
- Murder weapon .22 rifle
Hall had a habit of telling me about some of the letters he received from others and I ended up unknowingly, and to my detriment, doing his bidding for him.
He would more often than not forward me the letters so that I could defend him.
This is EXACTLY what Bamber does
Why did Simon Hall confess. Was new evidence piling up on him ?
When he confessed, how did he prove that he was the killer. Did he mention things no one else knew ?
Why did Simon Hall confess. Was new evidence piling up on him ?
When he confessed, how did he prove that he was the killer. Did he mention things no one else knew ?
I believe Bamber reached the point of no return when he continued protesting his innocence after the 1986 verdict.
Criminals will admit to a crime before a trial starts. So they can give their outlandish version of events to try to get a better sentance. Ian Huntley did this. After a trial the convicted person may admit to their crime, such as Tracy Andrews. A lot of criminals will just do their time & accept the sentance.
Bamber could have admitted his guilt before the trial. But don't blame him for not doing so as he was going for an aquittal.
Once he started appealing & making complaints to the 'Police Complaints Authority', there was no going back. He was young & an early release on a technicality may have meant he could resume the life he had for a month after the massacre.
Since his 'Campaign for Freedom' has gone online he has gained a few more supporters, so will continue protesting his innocence despite no chance of a release.
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.[/b]
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
If, as some claim, Hall's adoptive mother represented his final victim I wonder who his first two victims represented?
Were there other victims where crimes went unreported?
Have you read Hall's letters?
It was Simon Hall who claimed his victim represented his adoptive mother
Quite possibly Holly - maybe one day Halls adoptive parents or brother will finally speak out?
What I can tell you, is that in Halls pre trial assessment report, there were references to his previous girlfriends. One girlfriend claimed he held a hot iron up to her face. Like Bamber and JM - it was her word against his.
Another of his girlfriends claimed she had found bruises on her deaf child, after Hall had looked after him
A girlfriend he had from school used to write to him when he was in the YOI. She passed her saved letters from him to the police. Contained within the letters, were references to homosexual activity.
Simon Hall always denied these claims, and with regards one incident he wrote about to his girlfriend, he explained away and dismissed as adolescent "experimentation"
If, as some claim, Hall's adoptive mother represented his final victim I wonder who his first two victims represented?
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
- Ex girlfriend claims he was violent towards her
I wonder how he would square up to my personal trainer a 6' something ex royal marine?
Hall sounds like an archetypal bully:
- Young man in MacDonalds
- Man caught unaware leaving doctors surgery where Hall had an accomplice
- Elderly lady unaware in her own home
- Ex girlfriend claims he was violent towards her
I wonder how he would square up to my personal trainer a 6' something ex royal marine?
Hall sounds like an archetypal bully:
- Young man in MacDonalds
- Man caught unaware leaving doctors surgery where Hall had an accomplice
- Elderly lady unaware in her own home
- Ex girlfriend claims he was violent towards her
I bet he would crap his pants like he claimed he did in his letters.
I bet he would crap his pants like he claimed he did in his letters.
Hall sounds like an archetypal bully:
- Young man in MacDonalds
- Man caught unaware leaving doctors surgery where Hall had an accomplice
- Elderly lady unaware in her own home
- Ex girlfriend claims he was violent towards her
I wonder how he would square up to my personal trainer a 6' something ex royal marine?
I wonder if there are other crimes, violent and/or non-violent, he was responsible for that went undetected?
After all the Zenith burglary went undetected until he confessed.
I guess one could ponder why?
Maybe it's time to call time on mass debating over Simon Hall and accept much will remain unknown possibly even to the perp himself!
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
I've no idea what you are pondering Holly, I've been attempting to display the similarities between the Hall and the Bamber case
YOU chose to focus on Simon Hall
YOU started the debate - I came here to respond
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8523.msg426317#msg426317
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8523.msg426648#msg426648
I wonder if there are other crimes, violent and/or non-violent, he was responsible for that went undetected?
After all the Zenith burglary went undetected until he confessed.
What effects did Bambers adoption have on him
What effects did being sent to boarding school at a young age have on him
What effects did his mother have on him
The same applies to his father
Did he have attachment issues/disorder
Did he have a dissociative disorder
Was he pathological
Did he disassociate as a child
Was his emotional growth stunted by trauma
I guess one could ponder why?💩
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
Maybe it's time to call time on mass debating over Simon Hall and accept much will remain unknown possibly even to the perp himself!
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE
And another:
"A close friend of his, Brett Collins, said Bamber was sexually assaulted when he was 11, around the time he started at Gresham's, and according to Collins, Bamber went on to have sexual relationships with men and women, finding that his good looks and charm made him popular with both.
"Julie Mugford claimed that Jeremy had openly admitted to her “at least one homosexual relationship
"If Jeremy was having a sexual relationship with another man or indeed a woman other than Julie, all this would illustrate was Jeremy’s infidelity and might or might not give some reflection as to his character
Simon Hall, it turned out, was the same (went on to have sexual relationships with men and women), though he denied these allegations until around the time he confessed
A couple of men came forward, making witness statements pre trial, claiming to have had homosexual liaisons with Hall prior to his arrest. Hall denied these. And according to him in 2013, he claimed to have had a sexual liaison with another prisoner whilst serving time on remand and during his time at HMP Swaleside
Hall also alleged he was sexually abused at around the age of 10
Hall also claimed his "good looks and charm" made him popular with men and women
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
We know JB admitted to petty crime as did the chief prosecution witness. This is a world away from violence resulting in a custodial sentence.
From Stephanie Hall today:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8726.msg418152.html#msg418152
How many of the experts have a history of violence? Simon Hall was convicted of violent offences during his youth and spent time in a youth offenders prison long before he murdered Mrs Albert. This is conveniently overlooked. Most men don't have convictions for violence. If they do it's a red flag for most. Those who choose to play with fire often get burned.
At Hall's original trial at Norwich crown court, jurors were told that Albert had been the victim of a "sudden, savage and brutal attack" after a burglary attempt went wrong. They heard that Hall, who had previous convictions for violence, had been out drinking with friends in Ipswich and had an alibi for most of the night and following morning, except between 5.30am and 6.15am, which could have corresponded with the time of Albert's death.
We know JB admitted to petty crime as did the chief prosecution witness. This is a world away from violence resulting in a custodial sentence.
I bet he would crap his pants like he claimed he did in his letters.
I bet he would crap his pants like he claimed he did in his letters.
Over time though I came to suspect that Simon was not being as honest as he could have been and especially so when he admitted to having broke into Zenith double glazing in Ipswich hours before Mrs Albert was murdered. This admission was promoted as an alibi but it backfired big time and eventually led to him confessing to what actually happened that morning.
I truly believe that Stephanie was misled by Simon and others who convinced her of his innocence despite his proven propensity to violence.
Or maybe he wrote those words for my benefit Holly - so that I'd feel sorry for him?
Toy with my emotions, the same way Bamber does with his unsuspecting victims - "a few comforting words" perhaps
Hall didn't appear to be afraid of anyone
His prison records showed no signs of violence, unlike Bambers
Why are you avoiding ALL my questions Holly - are they too difficult for you to answer perhaps. Your apparent silence speaks volumes as does your moderation of my posts today 8(0(*
Stephanie I explained to you recently why I will not be responding to your posts. .
I guess one could ponder why?
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
Maybe it's time to call time on mass debating over Simon Hall and accept much will remain unknown possibly even to the perp himself!
I used to have many very long telephone conversations with Stephanie about Simon's case at the time of his last appeal. I am still convinced that Stephanie genuinely loved the guy and believed everything that he told her about the morning Mrs Albert was murdered. In the beginning I also believed Simon's account of what occurred that morning .
No I don't think it's harsh at all. In the eyes of the law Hall's previous had nothing to do with the murder case hence I'm pretty certain it was withheld from jurors? Supporting an MoJ is one thing. Allowing yourself to become emotionally involved is another.
"Oh and Anji Greaves his girlfriend after Julie Mugford stood by him during his trial. After his conviction she still believed in his innocence but felt that by standing by him further would have been a life sentence for them both.
Suzette Ford his former live-in lover also stood by him and attended some or all of the trial. She also still believed in his innocence after the conviction.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=3668.0
"Oh and Anji Greaves his girlfriend after Julie Mugford stood by him during his trial. After his conviction she still believed in his innocence but felt that by standing by him further would have been a life sentence for them both.
Suzette Ford his former live-in lover also stood by him and attended some or all of the trial. She also still believed in his innocence after the conviction.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=3668.0
Like so many others they couldn't believe that the young man they had got to know was capable of such depraved horror.
Another similarity in the Hall case is that he also wanted his website shutdown
As NGB has today confirmed - it's all about Bambers need for control
To control what is written about him
To ensure that only what is manufactured by him is allowed to be seen by the public
And have you recognised the blue forum control what is allowed to be posted on the forum and that it is manufactured to support innocence as opposed to being seen to be fair
Ask Jackie Holly she'll tell you. She described it once as "sanitised" in other words posts were removed to reflect their bias
NGB reasoned today, after someone suggested the behind the scenes behaviour sounded "catty" http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8692.msg421132.html#msg421132
"It can be. There was one member here who never posted but came onto the forum in order to print off posts and send them to JB. He was selecting posts and threads which he knew would wind JB up and he was not presenting a fair overall view of forum debate. Eventually he was challenged and then banned.
This behaviour is often referred to as blame shifting. It is done in order to suggest Bamber is the victim of abuse as opposed to Bamber being the abuser
After they had murdered, both Hall and Bamber started relationships with new girlfriends. Both men also cheated on their new girlfriends, before they were eventually arrested and charged for their crimes.
I guess one could ponder why?
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
Maybe it's time to call time on mass debating over Simon Hall and accept much will remain unknown possibly even to the perp himself!
💩
Like so many others they couldn't believe that the young man they had got to know was capable of such depraved horror.
I guess one could ponder why?
Genetic propensity towards aggression and violence
Nurture including issues about adoption
Alcohol/recreational drug fuelled lowering inhibitions
Undiagnosed mental illness
Undiagnosed personality disorder
Other reasons?
Maybe it's time to call time on mass debating over Simon Hall and accept much will remain unknown possibly even to the perp himself!
It will be interesting to see what if anything this throws up:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/29/las-vegas-shooter-stephen-paddock-brain-study
.
Like so many others they couldn't believe that the young man they had got to know was capable of such depraved horror.
Even if I put my JB guilty hat on I don't see any parallels between the cases ie motive and/or personalities involved, background etc.
One can pick up any newspaper any day and read some ghastly story about someone inflicting harm on another. The question is why?
How about this character:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/16/cambridge-graduate-admits-137-online-abuse-charges/
https://www.exposingtruth.com/psychopaths-serial-killers/
"These people are not all geniuses, and they are not inherently particularly effective at anything other than being ruthless. Their high levels of stress tolerance, or inability to feel their stress and process it, let them fool lie detectors, as well as most of us. To them, lying is such a small occurrence that it wouldn’t necessarily cause a real spike in their heart rate or pulse
Even if I put my JB guilty hat on I don't see any parallels between the cases ie motive and/or personalities involved, background etc.
One can pick up any newspaper any day and read some ghastly story about someone inflicting harm on another. The question is why?
https://www.exposingtruth.com/psychopaths-serial-killers/
"These people are not all geniuses, and they are not inherently particularly effective at anything other than being ruthless. Their high levels of stress tolerance, or inability to feel their stress and process it, let them fool lie detectors, as well as most of us. To them, lying is such a small occurrence that it wouldn’t necessarily cause a real spike in their heart rate or pulse
https://www.exposingtruth.com/psychopaths-serial-killers/
"These people are not all geniuses, and they are not inherently particularly effective at anything other than being ruthless. Their high levels of stress tolerance, or inability to feel their stress and process it, let them fool lie detectors, as well as most of us. To them, lying is such a small occurrence that it wouldn’t necessarily cause a real spike in their heart rate or pulse
And another trait in common - both gamblers http://jeremybamber.blogspot.co.uk *&^^&
"Whether it involves gambling away one's life savings or committing one murder after another, a psychopath inevitably leaves the rest of us wondering: What was going on in his head? Now researchers report that part of the answer may be hypersensitivity to rewards, which may create a pathological drive for money, sex, and status.
All psychopaths share two characteristic traits: an inability to empathize with others' emotions, such as the fear in a person's face, and impulsive, anti-social behavior, such as reckless risk taking or excessive aggression. Neuroscientists have pinpointed neural mechanisms that may cause psychopaths' lack of empathy. But very little research has looked at what leads to impulsivity-which in some ways might be more important, because it can help predict a psychopath's tendency towards violent crime.
Neuroscientist Joshua Buckholtz of Vanderbilt University in Nashville and his colleagues decided to focus on a system of interconnected brain regions called the mesolimbic system, which motivate us to hunt for rewards by releasing the neurotransmitter dopamine. Drugs like heroine-to which psychopaths are also more susceptible—can push circuits in this system into overdrive, leaving addicts compulsively seeking another hit. The researchers hypothesized that psychopaths might also overreact to other rewards.
http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/03/psychopaths-keep-their-eyes-prize
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8112.msg383924.html#msg383924
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/manager-of-social-club-in-ipswich-accused-of-sexually-assaulting-two-teenagers-1-5423105
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8088.msg455027#msg455027
In 2013 when the CCRC were considering Hall's application, they asked for his permission to take blood samples. They also requested full access to his medical records dating back to childhood.
Has Bamber given the CCRC full access to his medical records? What about his adoption records?
I would have thought once charged investigators and prosecutors were entitled to view JB's medi records and any other records with or without his permission?
What makes you think this?
Just an assumption on my part that investigators will have far reaching powers to go wherever they want but I might be completely wrong.
We know the police are able to search property albeit with a warrant. I think the small print on financial products states customers' details are confidential unless the organisation is ordered to make available info to law enforcement, HMRC and customs and excise. So I'm assuming the police would be entitled to look at JB's medi records.
I think it would be helpful to you it you found the answer out for yourself Holly.
So I'm assuming the police would be entitled to look at JB's medi records.
But maybe Bamber only ever saw a private doctor? One would need to look into the finer details of the case.
"Police have accused a multiple murderer of "circumnavigating the formal process" of appeal by using the media and websites to fight his conviction.
Insp Cornish said Bamber was "well aware of the legal processes that he should follow to seek a review of his convictions".
"His attempt at circumnavigating the formal process using the media and websites is ill-conceived," the letter continued.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-35932802
7. THE CONTROLLER/MANIPULATOR pits people against each other. Keeps his allies and targets separated. Is verbally skillful at twisting words and actions. Is charismatic and usually gets his way. Often undermines our support network and discourages us from seeing our family and friends. Money is often his objective. Other people's money is even better. He is ruthless, demanding and cruel. This control-freak bully wants you pregnant, isolated and financially dependent on him. Appears pitiful, confused and in need of help. We rush in to help him with our finances, assets, and talents. We may be used as his proxy interacting with others on his behalf as he sets us up to take the fall or enjoys the performance he is directing.
Defense Strategy: Know the 'nature of the beast'. Facing his failure and consequences will be his best lesson. Be suspicious of his motives, and avoid involvement. Don't bail him out.http://www.topix.com/forum/city/irvine-ky/TG8C0C3M0PIEH9OS3/living-with-a-psychopath-when-the-mask-slips
Putting what you see as my "anti-Bamber bias" aside and looking at this case from a pro Bamber point of view, what do you have to say to him and his supporters (and the supposed fence sitters) in relation to the way in which Bamber has played out his public campaign these past 3 decades?
It makes me very angry because I don't believe there should be dogmas, loyalties or agendas. The issue here is whether Bamber's conviction is legally-safe, nothing more or less than that.
The thing about that BMA link is that it's just guidance, it's not authoritative, and it's not contemporary. But if we take it at face value, then I think the real crux of it is that a registered medical professional must be satisfied that he can defend his actions at a "statutory tribunal" (I assume a GMC hearing), and I think that is going to be seen as a pragmatic moral question as much as anything else. Your average humble local GP will just hand the records over for any police investigation at the murder/manslaughter level, regardless of what medical regulations strictly say about it. No tribunal is going to discipline him and no civil court would award damages in such circumstances.
The point of this being that I think Holly's original assumption is correct: if the police wanted the records, they would have asked for them and they would have got them on request, without the need for a court order, irrespective of the relevant legal position.
The following outlines the position:
https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/fees/medical-records
What useful info do you think they might have provided for the police/prosecution and defence?
I have no current interest in Simon Hall, whoever he is. My interest is in Jeremy Bamber's case. That's what this Forum is for. I welcome discussion of analogous cases, but I don't see how your summary helps me understand the Bamber case.
Guilty people do maintain their innocence. We know this. We know that that might be the case with Jeremy Bamber. For one thing, if he confessed he would be immediately in danger among Category A prisoners as an admitted double child killer. So he has an incentive to lie, the lies being part of a self-preservation strategem. I acknowledge and accept this possibility. But none of us need to be told this. We know.
Since we have a thread on this case, what I'd like to know is more about the reliability of the late Mr Hall's confession.
Did he confess to the police, his lawyers or some other disinterested party?
If so, was a proper record taken of the confession, including a signed statement?
Does the confession set out in necessary detail why, how and when Mr Hall committed the offence?
Simon Hall's guilt is not in question!
If you are genuinely interested in the Simon Hall case and the details surrounding his confession, may I suggest you speak directly with his older brother Shaun, his adoptive parents Lynn and Phil, his biological family, previous campaigners like Stephanie Bon, the police, the CCRC, his representative at the time of confession - Dr Michael Naughton, alternatively his previous legal teams, the prison authorities, the parole board, HMC or the Secretary of State.
I'm a genuine victim of a miscarriage of justice!
If you had any kind of moral compass, objectivity, reasoning and your ego wasn't as inflated as it appears, you would have recognised this fact.
You are not neutral as you claim. You have a personal agenda . You are ignorant, a bully and appear criminally minded ergo manipulation and deception is second nature to you. You are a coward who hides behind a fake identity. You brag about your time in prison as though it's a badge of honour. It is not! It is because of people like you that miscarriages of justice occur in the first place!!!
This does not answer my questions.
Was his confession reliable or not? I've given the criteria. It's a very important question.
I would ask the moderators to keep the post above up, because it shows the basic flaw in Stephanie and also the wider forum.
You're just proving my point - rational discussion is impossible and people like you cause miscarriages of justice.
And I have not bullied anybody on here at all.
You speak of your own experience. It would seem you believe rational discussion is impossible for you. You are allowed that belief. If someone claims you are a bully, it must have been their experience that they felt bullied by you. They, like you, are allowed their belief.
This doesn't answer my questions about the Simon Hall case.
We still haven't established whether he actually gave a confession.
If no answer is forthcoming, then my default assumption will be that there was no confession and everything said about him on here is, ergo, voided.
Of course, if there was a reliable confession, then that's great - let's hear about it. Post up a link to the signed and dated statement in which he confesses.
This doesn't answer my questions about the Simon Hall case.
We still haven't established whether he actually gave a confession.
If no answer is forthcoming, then my default assumption will be that there was no confession and everything said about him on here is, ergo, voided.
Of course, if there was a reliable confession, then that's great - let's hear about it. Post up a link to the signed and dated statement in which he confesses.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/capel-st-mary-killer-simon-hall-admits-guilt-but-he-didn-t-confess-to-authorities-first-1-2326816
Since we have a thread on this case, what I'd like to know is more about the reliability of the late Mr Hall's confession.
What about the reliability of witness evidence given during his original trial?
"His demeanour is unremarkable when he returns home on 16th to the people who know him best."
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/murder-trial-jury-continue-deliberations-1-58906
"MURDER accused Simon Hall's evidence was a "concoction designed to deceive" a court heard.
Prosecution QC Graham Parkins accused Hall of weaving a web of lies to explain how clothes fibres on his floor matched those found at the Capel St Mary home of murdered pensioner Joan Albert.
Hall, who denies murder, said Mr Parkins was "very much mistaken" and stuck to his story that the fibres could have come from clothes left in his wardrobe by his mother. http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/prosecution-confronts-murder-accused-1-132667
"His mother Lynne could not be contacted but told the East Anglian Daily Times: "I'm absolutely shocked because I know he is innocent and I still believe he is.
"But it's the system. If he had pleaded guilty in the beginning, he would be home now.
"I know he has been really low and in hospital recently. He's given up." https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/simon-hall-admits-he-murdered-79-year-old-joan-albert-despite-decade-campaigning-for-miscarriage-of-8751610.html
"The appellant's mother gave evidence in his defence suggesting that she may have been the source of fibres within 8 Snowcroft. Large numbers of the black flock fibres were found in the appellant's wardrobe. Mrs Hall claimed to have stored a black jacket in the appellant's wardrobe http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Hall/index.html
"Lynne Hall testified at the trial that when her son come home form his night out, there was nothing out of the ordinary, and certainly no blood or any other evidence of violence on him.http://www.bushywood.com/BBC_Rough_Justice.htm
It's interesting to note Scott Lomax appears to have taken down his "Simon Halls Fight for Freedon" piece?
"By the time the police charged Simon Hall they had become outwardly convinced that Joan Albert was murdered during a burglary that had gone wrong. There was a forced entry, with a rear window being smashed, but nothing had seemingly been taken despite the killer curiously having stayed at the scene for some time. Medical examination of the body revealed that Joan’s murderer had bizarrely inflicted wounds upon her after a significant period of time had elapsed following her death. An estimate suggested the unnecessary wounds had been inflicted up to half an hour after the crime, showing the killer had spent some time around the body. This, in addition to the location and nature of wounds on the body, has suggested the possibility the murder was in some way sexually motivated, with the murderer gaining sexual gratification from spending time with the corpse. The crime certainly appears to have a far more sinister element than a simple burglary where the perpetrator was disturbed, panicked and killed as a direct result of that panic.
She was a friend of his mother’s rather than a friend of the family. He did know where she lived, but there is no known reason that Hall would wish to harm his mother’s friend. He also would not want to hurt his mother, whom he had (and still has) a good relationship with, by killing her friend. Hall knew that his mother occasionally visited Joan’s house at night because the victim has been having problems with youths. This, his campaign claims, is an important point. It is important, they believe, because Hall would not have broken into his mother’s friend’s home knowing that it was possible his own mother could be in the building
Hall’s mother, Lynne, is adamant she saw Hall arrive at around 06:00. She had woken up and had been unable to sleep. At around 06:00 she had given up trying to sleep and had gone to make a drink. Whilst she was still making the drink, Hall entered. Of course, one could argue she was mistaken or she had reason to protect her son, but would she lie to protect someone who had killed a close friend? Lynne noticed nothing unusual in her son’s manner or appearance. He chatted with his mother and later that day he was ‘his usual smiley entertaining self’ according to friends. This is hardly the demeanour of a man who had killed as a result of a burglary that had gone wrong and who had just killed his mother’s friend. http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html
The full article can be found here https://therealmrshspoofblog.wordpress.com/author/gr8jumper/
If no answer is forthcoming, then my default assumption will be that there was no confession and everything said about him on here is, ergo, voided.
You've still yet to tell us why you were in prison. How many convictions do you have and what are they for?
And if you are applying this logic and reasoning to the Bamber case, which I think you are - everything you state is equally null and void.
Based on what LM has said about being charged with terrorist offences, spending time in prison, having his/her then long hair pulled and his/her interest in whether SH's confession was reliable, I'm assuming he/she might be a survivor of a MoJ. Probably from the days of Irish republican terror groups on mainland UK. If so this might account for the fact he/she can get quite irate at times.
Yesterday LM posted on blue and I quote:
"Just look at the posts today from F.uckwit Steve, the mentally-challenged retard and Everybody's Friend who thinks the silencer links Bamber to the scene of the crime.
Please!
Just delete my account.
These forums don't help anybody. This is NOT a case for taking sides.
Tribalism stunts the brain. In Steve's case, it's retarded him.
Under the topic header, which they started I might add: "Q : PLEASE IN THE NAME OF CHRIST DELETE MY ACCOUNT "
but after throwing their toys out the pram, they came back? Go figure? No apology, no explanation. Just carried on regardless. And they didn't factor Lookout into the equation either. Here lies their flaw.
There's no doubt they have anger issues of some description? Why I don't know? It's only an Internet forum.
And you have to ask yourself why are they insisting our posts remain and not be deleted,not that I ask my posts to be deleted, but then DEMAND there's are deleted? They contradict their own reasoning? Bit of a contradiction in terms isn't it? Mixed messages? Another red flag imho. Rules for one and rules for another. How's that fair?
I should add, because of your following post on blue:
"The anti-Bamber people are obnoxious and full of themselves and don't like questions being asked - cases in point are, regrettably, found on this Forum. http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9320.msg436614.html#msg436614
Ditto! I thought the very same thing of you. There are numerous questions of mine you have chosen to ignore, and to quote yourself - "cases in point are, regrettably, found on this forum.
The following outlines the position:
https://www.bma.org.uk/advice/employment/fees/medical-records
What useful info do you think they might have provided for the police/prosecution and defence?
Or, you could look at it this way;
What useful information do you think Simon Hall's mother Lynne could have provided in relation to her son, to the police, during their investigation into the murder of her friend?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9318.msg455935#msg455935
You choose to dismiss JM's evidence against Bamber but have you ever stopped to consider she was telling the truth and that Bamber is as guilty as sin? You would of course have to accept you've been conned, which isn't easy, I know. But look at the alternative. What if Bamber confesses like Hall eventually did?
LM stated here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9345.msg436610.html#msg436610
"I am happy for these personal attacks to remain posted on the board, but if it continues, I will make an issue of your privilege to post here. It's clear you have no interest in discussing this case from a point-of-view of neutrality and objectivity and, in my view, you are not very intelligent and your presence here is not constructive.
And here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9345.msg436610.html#msg436610
"Most of you here have been discussing this case for years, whereas I've only been looking at it on and off for a few weeks, yet I have better understanding of it than you do. What does that tell you?
What do YOU think it tells us LM?
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/capel-st-mary-killer-simon-hall-admits-guilt-but-he-didn-t-confess-to-authorities-first-1-2326816
Based on what LM has said about being charged with terrorist offences, spending time in prison, having his/her then long hair pulled and his/her interest in whether SH's confession was reliable, I'm assuming he/she might be a survivor of a MoJ. Probably from the days of Irish republican terror groups on mainland UK. If so this might account for the fact he/she can get quite irate at times.
Organised crime and terrorism. It's not clever and it's nothing to be proud of. It does mean I have some unique experiences: including being cross-examined by leading QCs, being sentenced by the top judges to all-expenses paid holidays in some of Her Majesty's Most Salubrious Establishments, serving time among some of the most dangerous offenders and around the dispersal prisons - including in Close Supervision Centres as a Category AA offender - knife/razor fights with prisoners, the list goes on. (Note: I never met or knew of Jeremy Bamber).
Being convicted of something you didn't do is an occupational hazard for serious criminals at that level and normally happens not because the police are malicious or corrupt, but simply because diligent police officers can fit the evidence around known criminals - and if I'm honest, the criminals have no cause for complaint. That's the way it is in the real world. You have to take the rough with the smooth.
Occasionally I would encounter an earnest middle-class person (either a fellow prisoner or some well-intentioned professional) who would say: "You really MUST appeal!" I would laugh at the naiveté. You choose to be a criminal, then you can take responsibility for the consequences, fair or not.
I have no ill-feeling towards the criminal justice system or the police or judges, and I will defend them when appropriate. I remain entirely neutral on the question of Bamber's culpability. I have no axe to grind whatsoever.
If I get irate, then I apologise, but that's not because of my background. I am actually quite an erudite person, if I may say so. Rather, it's because I'm human and the way these discussions go and how posters sometimes behave. I strongly dislike people who bring dogmas and tribal psychology into what should be strictly legal science.
That's all about me. If I come on here, it will be because I want to discuss relevant aspects of the case, not my memoirs.
What about the reliability of witness evidence given during his original trial?
"His demeanour is unremarkable when he returns home on 16th to the people who know him best."
http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/murder-trial-jury-continue-deliberations-1-58906
"MURDER accused Simon Hall's evidence was a "concoction designed to deceive" a court heard.
Prosecution QC Graham Parkins accused Hall of weaving a web of lies to explain how clothes fibres on his floor matched those found at the Capel St Mary home of murdered pensioner Joan Albert.
Hall, who denies murder, said Mr Parkins was "very much mistaken" and stuck to his story that the fibres could have come from clothes left in his wardrobe by his mother. http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/prosecution-confronts-murder-accused-1-132667
"His mother Lynne could not be contacted but told the East Anglian Daily Times: "I'm absolutely shocked because I know he is innocent and I still believe he is.
"But it's the system. If he had pleaded guilty in the beginning, he would be home now.
"I know he has been really low and in hospital recently. He's given up." https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/simon-hall-admits-he-murdered-79-year-old-joan-albert-despite-decade-campaigning-for-miscarriage-of-8751610.html
"The appellant's mother gave evidence in his defence suggesting that she may have been the source of fibres within 8 Snowcroft. Large numbers of the black flock fibres were found in the appellant's wardrobe. Mrs Hall claimed to have stored a black jacket in the appellant's wardrobe http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/Hall/index.html
"Lynne Hall testified at the trial that when her son come home form his night out, there was nothing out of the ordinary, and certainly no blood or any other evidence of violence on him.http://www.bushywood.com/BBC_Rough_Justice.htm
It's interesting to note Scott Lomax appears to have taken down his "Simon Halls Fight for Freedon" piece?
"By the time the police charged Simon Hall they had become outwardly convinced that Joan Albert was murdered during a burglary that had gone wrong. There was a forced entry, with a rear window being smashed, but nothing had seemingly been taken despite the killer curiously having stayed at the scene for some time. Medical examination of the body revealed that Joan’s murderer had bizarrely inflicted wounds upon her after a significant period of time had elapsed following her death. An estimate suggested the unnecessary wounds had been inflicted up to half an hour after the crime, showing the killer had spent some time around the body. This, in addition to the location and nature of wounds on the body, has suggested the possibility the murder was in some way sexually motivated, with the murderer gaining sexual gratification from spending time with the corpse. The crime certainly appears to have a far more sinister element than a simple burglary where the perpetrator was disturbed, panicked and killed as a direct result of that panic.
She was a friend of his mother’s rather than a friend of the family. He did know where she lived, but there is no known reason that Hall would wish to harm his mother’s friend. He also would not want to hurt his mother, whom he had (and still has) a good relationship with, by killing her friend. Hall knew that his mother occasionally visited Joan’s house at night because the victim has been having problems with youths. This, his campaign claims, is an important point. It is important, they believe, because Hall would not have broken into his mother’s friend’s home knowing that it was possible his own mother could be in the building
Hall’s mother, Lynne, is adamant she saw Hall arrive at around 06:00. She had woken up and had been unable to sleep. At around 06:00 she had given up trying to sleep and had gone to make a drink. Whilst she was still making the drink, Hall entered. Of course, one could argue she was mistaken or she had reason to protect her son, but would she lie to protect someone who had killed a close friend? Lynne noticed nothing unusual in her son’s manner or appearance. He chatted with his mother and later that day he was ‘his usual smiley entertaining self’ according to friends. This is hardly the demeanour of a man who had killed as a result of a burglary that had gone wrong and who had just killed his mother’s friend. http://www.mojuk.org.uk/Portia/archive%2012/hall.html
The full article can be found here https://therealmrshspoofblog.wordpress.com/author/gr8jumper/
And here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9345.msg436610.html#msg436610
"Most of you here have been discussing this case for years, whereas I've only been looking at it on and off for a few weeks, yet I have better understanding of it than you do. What does that tell you?
What do YOU think it tells us LM?
Organised crime and terrorism. It's not clever and it's nothing to be proud of. It does mean I have some unique experiences: including being cross-examined by leading QCs, being sentenced by the top judges to all-expenses paid holidays in some of Her Majesty's Most Salubrious Establishments, serving time among some of the most dangerous offenders and around the dispersal prisons - including in Close Supervision Centres as a Category AA offender - knife/razor fights with prisoners, the list goes on. (Note: I never met or knew of Jeremy Bamber).
Being convicted of something you didn't do is an occupational hazard for serious criminals at that level and normally happens not because the police are malicious or corrupt, but simply because diligent police officers can fit the evidence around known criminals - and if I'm honest, the criminals have no cause for complaint. That's the way it is in the real world. You have to take the rough with the smooth.
Occasionally I would encounter an earnest middle-class person (either a fellow prisoner or some well-intentioned professional) who would say: "You really MUST appeal!" I would laugh at the naiveté. You choose to be a criminal, then you can take responsibility for the consequences, fair or not.
I have no ill-feeling towards the criminal justice system or the police or judges, and I will defend them when appropriate. I remain entirely neutral on the question of Bamber's culpability. I have no axe to grind whatsoever.
If I get irate, then I apologise, but that's not because of my background. I am actually quite an erudite person, if I may say so. Rather, it's because I'm human and the way these discussions go and how posters sometimes behave. I strongly dislike people who bring dogmas and tribal psychology into what should be strictly legal science.
That's all about me. If I come on here, it will be because I want to discuss relevant aspects of the case, not my memoirs.
Thanks - but that does not confirm that he made a reliable confession. It's helpful so far as it goes, but it's a local newspaper, which is not an authoritative source.
I am happy to drop the point because the case is not of much interest to me, but I am always cautious about confessions from people who have maintained long-term denial of the offence. I have very good reason to be cautious. To me, a reliable confession would be a signed and dated statement, given in the presence of a responsible party such as the police, a regulated lawyer or a prison governor, etc., and only after being cautioned about one's rights and the incriminating nature of the statement to be signed; in the statement, the offender should admit how, why, where and when he carried out the relevant acts, and add any other relevant information. Anything short of that may not be reliable - though it does depend on the circumstances, and I don't know (and have no wish to inquire further of) the circumstances here. All I can say is that I am very sorry to hear about the lady who was killed, I hope she did not suffer, I offer my condolences to her family - and I hope Simon Hall at last found peace.
IMO Jeremy Bamber will be hard pressed to find decent representation full stop!
Who is Bambers current solicitor? Does he have one?
Is it this chap?
"I am delighted to endorse this comprehensive book on wrongful convictions. In its clear and concise terms it will help readers start to grasp hold of a system which is overly complex and stacked against those who have been wrongfully convicted. The book will help all those who have suffered an injustice to have direction as they continue to fight to clear their names.’ – Mark Newby, Solicitor Advocate, Jordans LLP, Doncaster
http://michaeljnaughton.com/?page_id=877
"WRONGLY ACCUSED: Show me a miscarriage of justice and, nine times out of 10, I will show you the blueprint that caused it, writes Eric Allison.
Eric Allison is the Guardian’s prison correspondent.
This essay will feature in a new collection of essays (No defence: miscarriages of justice and lawyers) as part of the Justice Gap series and following on from Wrongly Accused: who is responsible for investigating miscarriages of justice? (to be published in association with Solicitors Journal and Wilmington). You can download that collection HERE.
Contributors for No Defence include Eric Allison; Dr Ros Burnett; Prof Ed Cape; Dr Dennis Eady; Francis Fitzgibbon QC; Mark George QC; Andrew Green; Campbell Malone; Michael Mansfield QC; Mark Newby; Daniel Newman; Paul May; Dr Angus Nurse; Correna Platt; Julie Price; Dr Hannah Quirk; David Rose; Adam Sampson; Satish Sekar; and Tom Wainwright. Thanks to all.
‘Instead of closing the gap a huge chasm has just opened up right at the top of the system. It is a shocking and disgraceful manoeuvre by those who carry the core responsibility for maintaining and protecting the provision of justice… . This series of admirable essays has sought to identify and suggest remedies for those most disadvantaged by our judicial system.’
Michael Mansfield QC
__________________________________________
Eric Allison: Show me a miscarriage of justice and, nine times out of 10, I will show you the blueprint that caused it. There is a pattern, a template, in virtually all of these cases, made up of the following strands.
First: you have a defendant who has little or no knowledge of the criminal justice system – and, in many cases, a touching belief in the integrity of that system.
Two: investigating police officers who act as judge and jury, making up their minds they have the right person and going to great lengths to hamper the defence. Non-disclosure of evidence being the main obstacle they place in the path of truth.
Three: prejudicial pre-trial reports by the media. Jurors are told to ignore this, but I suggest this is asking too much of them, especially in high profile cases.
Four: poor legal representation. In every case I have studied, I have found glaring errors on the part of the defence lawyers. These include, failure to call witnesses, failure to seek full disclosure of evidence and a general lack of endeavour on the part of those chosen to lead defendants through the minefield of criminal trials. And, with cutbacks in legal aid biting deeper, this situation can only get worse.
Last, but not least, those wrongly convicted face a hostile, intractable, appeal system, with an appeal court seemingly concerned only with maintaining the status quo, that being, the validity of the original conviction. Their Lordships never being more unyielding than when confronted with the assertion that an appellant’s trial lawyers let him or her down. The wigged ones all feed from the same trough and few will question the abilities of another of their ilk.
Other factors go towards the likelihood of more and more innocent people being convicted.
Reasonable doubt
The introduction of majority verdicts, in 1967, was a dangerous step. Given it is for the prosecution to prove guilt; I would have thought two people, out of 12, not being satisfied with the Crown’s case, constituted reasonable doubt? Not so and many high profile alleged miscarriages were the subject of majority verdicts -notably Jeremy Bamber, found guilty on a 10 to two basis.
The law changed in 2003 to allow into evidence of a defendant’s convictions for previous offences. Prior to then, unless a defendant attacked the character of a prosecution witness, juries were kept in the dark about previous convictions the people in the dock had to their name. Easier for the prosecution to prove it’s case. But is it fair? ‘Give a dog a bad name…’
Safety net
On paper, the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) provides a safety net for those floundering in the mire of a wrongful conviction. But the CCRC has disappointed those who hoped the establishment of such a body would deal swiftly and surely with miscarriages of justice.
In practice, the CCRC is under-resourced and seemingly unable to carry out the in-depth investigations required to uncover the truth when the justice system has got it wrong. Critics see them as gatekeepers to the court of appeal, trying to second guess how that tribunal will view the cases they refer, rather than the independent, fact finding, body hoped for.
Of all the alleged miscarriages of justice I have researched, the cases of Jeremy Bamber and Susan May stand out for two reasons: firstly, I have absolutely no doubt about their innocence and, secondly, they tick every box of the blueprint of how the system fails.
Both were people of hitherto good character, with no experience of the criminal justice system. If either had had one tenth of the knowledge of the law – and trial procedure – they have now, both would have walked free – of that I am certain. (Despite both falling victim to prejudicial pre-trial reporting and biased police investigations.) Both have had their cases rejected by the court of appeal twice. Both have had their submissions rejected by the CCRC – though Susan’s case is now being reviewed again by that body.
I am convinced there are more miscarriages of justice now than at any time since I have been a student of the system-a study going back over half a century. I am personally aware of well over a hundred, serious, cases that scream out to be looked at again.
And I repeat, I believe the situation is set to worsen a) because of cut backs in legal aid and b) the massive increase in convictions for historical sexual offences.
The latter area concerns me greatly – in the current, post-Saville, climate, I expect the conviction rates for these offences to take a surge. And yet this is one area where greater care than ever ought to be taken in deciding guilt or innocence. Almost uniquely, as far as criminal trials are concerned, a defendant can be convicted on the uncorroborated word of the accuser. There are usually no witnesses to such crimes and, because of the passage of time, no forensic or medical evidence to support the allegations. It is one person’s word against another.
I have researched several convictions for historical sexual offences and, in some cases, my findings are deeply troubling. It is a murky world to peer into and any concern for the safety of such a conviction can be taken as having some sympathy for people deemed beyond the pale in the court of public opinion.
Questioning some of those convictions is to risk being accused of having no understanding of the awful trauma endured by victims of sexual abuse. But two wrongs never made a right and some things need to be said.
Consider this: Albany prison, on the Isle of Wight holds some 560 prisoners – virtually all sex-offenders, many convicted of historical offences. Around half of the population of Albany is in denial. This means they are not addressing their offending behaviour and not participating in treatment programmes. Because of their plea of innocence, they will never become eligible for parole. Many are serving extremely long sentences, so they count the difference in years and some will die in prison. They will not have their security classification downgraded – a move which invariably means better prison conditions – and, on their eventual release, will find their place on the sex offenders register coming under intense scrutiny.
Without doubt, some of these men will be in denial because they cannot come to terms with the offences they have committed. But over 250 of them, in one jail? Something is wrong.
Like many, I hoped, with the freeing of the Birmingham Six, Guildford Four et al and the setting up of the CCRC, we had seen the back of wholesale wrongful convictions. The ever burgeoning case file of alleged miscarriages of justice tells me the hope was in vain. We are back to where were before we thought: ‘This cannot happen again’.
http://www.thejusticegap.com/2013/03/im-convinced-there-are-more-miscarriages-of-justice-than-ever/
What I'd like to know from any one of those people in the list above, and you David, if you are able to put your bias to one side, is:
What is the blueprint of how people like Simon Hall can con people like me and the criminal justice system and their agencies. I'll give you a clue. It's the exact same blueprint used by Jeremy Bamber.
How was I conned by Simon Hall?
How did Simon Hall con the criminal justice system and other agencies?
How did Simon Hall com Dr Michael Naughton?
How did Simon Hall con Sir Keir Starmer QC
How did Simon Hall con private eye?
How did Simon Hall con the CCRC?
How did Simon Hall con Rough Justice?
How was I conned by all those before me? Did they con me?
You see David to quote Eric Allison; "There is a pattern, a template, in virtually all of these cases"
Holly in response to Simon Hall's confession you stated:
I don't know - confused :-\ :-\ :-\. As Caroline said perhaps the prospect of release has made him
feel guilty
I assume for the prison authorities to make such an announcement and the ccrc to close their files SH's mental state wld have been taken into account?
I think I'm right in saying he fought shy of taking a lie detector test?
I'm sure there will be more to come...
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg186659.html#msg186659
You were wrong!! As you are in the Bamber case.
"Prospect of release made him feel guilty?" What on earth is that meant to mean Holly?
And please tell me what you think you know about Simon Hall's mental state back then.
What did you mean by "I think I'm right in saying he fought shy of taking a lie detector test." You appear to just pull things out of thin air.
FYI - Lie detector tests are not admissible in a court of law. And psychopaths can pass them, no problem.
Have a read of Stephanie Bon's quite apparent hypocrisy
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg187623.html#msg187623
and how she used Simon Halls confession to attack me, and others, further.
Her posts were self serving.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg187646.html#msg187646
This was highly narcissist behaviour imho.
Her psychological projections laid bare for all to see 8((()*/
Yes I admit I was conned by Jeremy even if only about the money.
I also believed until the end that Simon Hall was innocent. The evidence didn’t point to him. Whose DNA was on the murder weapon? It wasn’t Simons. Also the footprint outside the window he climbed in was of a much smaller shoe size. I often wonder why he confessed so near to the end of his sentence. He could have been released and got on with his life as most people believed he was innocent.
We are going off topic Daisy and will be chastised by the moderators 8(0(* but I'm more than happy to debate either of these cases with you.
Are you saying you still believe Bamber to be innocent, even after he attempted to con you?
The police originally believed the murder of JA had been sexually motivated. Maybe the reason they chose to go with the theory of it being a burglery gone wrong was because it would be easier to prove? Who knows.
There was no DNA found on the murder weapon as far as I am aware. During Simon Hall's confession he asserted he had taken his socks off and used these as gloves. He claimed he looked for the "biggest" knife from his victims drawer in order to "scare her?"
Simon Hall wore office shoes on the night he murdered. His mother lied about the chunky boots. He had small feet but did wear varying sizes at varying times.
Simon Hall confessed because he could no longer sustain the lies. He was extremely angry with me for badgering him over his wealth of discrepancies.
Simon Hall confessed because he could no longer sustain his lies. He was extremely angry with me for badgering him over his wealth of discrepancies and deceitfulness. Add to this the fact he was also being exposed by his older brother, and others - those who know him best - at the material time. The Zenith burglary, drug taking, alleged historic sexual abuse claims, sexual promiscuity, authoritarian parenting, twisted reciprocal relationships, the list goes on Daisy.
If you are doubting Simon Hall's confession and are alluding to me making things up, have at it Daisy.
If you think this stance supports your reasoning in the Mark Alexander case, you are only fooling yourself.
Simon Hall chose to confess when he did and he chose to end his life when he did.
He was a dangerous and highly disordered individual.
He'd publicly maintained innocence for over a decade, choosing to keep hidden his real personality.
When his real personality came out he could no longer keep up the charade.
Have copied this here Daisy incase you wish to discuss it further.
Have a read of Stephanie Bon's quite apparent hypocrisy
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg187623.html#msg187623
and how she used Simon Halls confession to attack me, and others, further.
Her posts were self serving.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4548.msg187646.html#msg187646
This was highly narcissist behaviour imho.
Her psychological projections laid bare for all to see 8((()*/
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipswich-social-club-manager-scott-doughty-s-sex-assault-trial-to-reopen-in-june-1-5444344
Ipswich man convicted of sexually assaulting two teenage boys
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/scott-doughty-sexual-assault-trial-conviction-1-5710726
"......The only reference of this suggestion during trial was when Scott Doughty (Pub landlord) had been asked to tell the court if he and SH had kissed. Apparently Scott lied and said no. Yet there was evidence from other witnesses which supported this claim, like for example an ex girlfriends of SH's who had stated they broke up weeks before the murder because she believed SH was having sex with Scott.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8112.msg383924.html?PHPSESSID=p74ebt045d1tnkvbgm9qe53pb7#msg383924
Following his confession, Simon Hall disclosed he regularly watched gay pornography and had sex with then pub landlord Scott Doughty in return for drugs.
Appears to me Scott Doughty's evidence during the murder trial of JA was fabricated in order to protect his own self interests? What other reason would a witness for the prosecution lie during a murder trial of a defenceless 79 year old lady and what type of person would do this? What were his motivations for doing so?
Did Simon Hall lie about having sex with Scott Doughty for drugs? Was his ex girlfriend wrong in her belief her then boyfriend was having a homosexual relationship and ultimately betraying her? It was her young son who Simon Hall was accused of assaulting. This was another allegation he admitted to before his suicide.
"All the way through the investigation and also the trial, Simon remained helpful and calm and surely at such a traumatic time one would expect temper and frustration to show if naturally there. Also throughout all his time in prison, on remand and now, Simon is described by the prison staff as a model prisoner. http://web.archive.org/web/20080511202109/http://justice4simon.co.uk/whyIsSimonInnocent.php
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8112.msg383930.html?PHPSESSID=p74ebt045d1tnkvbgm9qe53pb7#msg383930
I found the info re Hall's previous.
Prosecutor Simon Spence revealed that Hall had previously been sentenced to a total of 17 months at a young offenders' institute for assault causing actual bodily harm and wounding. He was sentenced at Bury St Edmund's Crown Court in June 1997.
He said the assault conviction, which had incurred eight months of the sentence, had happened when Hall approached a young man called Martin Russell in McDonalds in Ipswich, pushed him and asked: "What's all this about your dad accusing me of doing it in his car?"
The victim was left with cuts to his ear needing two stitches, a grazed chin and a cracked tooth on January 13, 1997.
Mr Spence added that on January 6, 1997, Hall lay in wait for a man called Stefan Bell outside a doctor's surgery in Ipswich. He went up and said hello, then for no reason punched him in the face and continued kicking him when he fell to the ground, while a co-defendant hit him over the head with a bottle.
After today's murder verdict, Mrs Justice Rafferty said: "Only one sentence is permitted by law and that is life imprisonment."
But she ordered reports to be prepared before officially proclaiming the sentence.
EX-GIRLFRIEND TELLS OF MOOD SWINGS AND VIOLENCE – two pages of background on the killer and his victim only in TONIGHT'S EVENING STAR.
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/life-behind-bars-for-capel-killer-1-132809
So Hall was 19 yoa when he first carried out acts of violence which escalated to murder by the time he was 24 yoa.