UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Jeremy Bamber and the callous murder of his father, mother, sister and twin nephews. Case effectively CLOSED by CCRC on basis of NO APPEAL REFERRAL. => Topic started by: John on November 22, 2017, 12:26:08 PM
-
Holly, do you think he was disturbed in some manner by his upbringing and the revelation of his adoption?
42
-
Holly, do you think he was disturbed in some manner by his upbringing and the revelation of his adoption?
I certainly do, he found out about the same time as he was ushered off to boarding school, that must have been a double whammy.
-
Holly, do you think he was disturbed in some manner by his upbringing and the revelation of his adoption?
SC and JB were both adopted as babies and brought up by NB and June. Both went to boarding school. What separates them is that SC had a number of primary caregivers during the first 3/4 years of her life whereas JB didn't. June also suffered mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care in the early crucial years of SC's development which again wasn't the case with JB. All the science underpinning 'attachment' shows that babies/infants who fail to form secure attachments with caregivers are at risk of suffering the types of issues we know SC suffered.
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/
Recent research shows a correlation between adult attachment styles and filicide ie mothers with disorganised attachment styles are more likely to commit filicide than those with mental illness and/or from low socio-economic groups:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213414001458
-
I certainly do, he found out about the same time as he was ushered off to boarding school, that must have been a double whammy.
Have you read Kate Adie's autobiography: The Kindness of Strangers? Thought you might as she's from your neck of the woods. Anyway in it she tells that her adoptive parents told her she was adopted just before she went to boarding school.
-
SC and JB were both adopted as babies and brought up by NB and June. Both went to boarding school. What separates them is that SC had a number of primary caregivers during the first 3/4 years of her life whereas JB didn't. June also suffered mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care in the early crucial years of SC's development which again wasn't the case with JB. All the science underpinning 'attachment' shows that babies/infants who fail to form secure attachments with caregivers are at risk of suffering the types of issues we know SC suffered.
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/
Recent research shows a correlation between adult attachment styles and filicide ie mothers with disorganised attachment styles are more likely to commit filicide than those with mental illness and/or from low socio-economic groups:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213414001458
What about the research in relation to adopted sons/attachment styles-issues etc
Jeremy Bamber ticks each and every box of the Hare psychopathy check list.
-
SC and JB were both adopted as babies and brought up by NB and June. Both went to boarding school. What separates them is that SC had a number of primary caregivers during the first 3/4 years of her life whereas JB didn't. June also suffered mental illness requiring in-patient psychiatric care in the early crucial years of SC's development which again wasn't the case with JB. All the science underpinning 'attachment' shows that babies/infants who fail to form secure attachments with caregivers are at risk of suffering the types of issues we know SC suffered.
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/
Recent research shows a correlation between adult attachment styles and filicide ie mothers with disorganised attachment styles are more likely to commit filicide than those with mental illness and/or from low socio-economic groups:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213414001458
What about the primal wound?
You not only appear to be cherry picking with regards your theories, you also appear to be suggesting that SC was worse off than Bamber regarding attachment styles/issues
What about Bambers criminal versatility?
SC's mental health issues were well documented.
WHERE are Jeremy Bambers?
Why do ALL of Bambers supporters BLATENTLY IGNORE his quite apparent ISSUES?
-
"An average of about 225 people kill a parent every year in the United States (according to research by Kathleen M. Heide, a professor of criminology at the University of South Florida, Tampa). While the majority of Serial Killers are adoptees, the largest number of adopted killers appears to be Adoptees Who Kill Their Adopters and/or Adoptive Relatives. The total number of Adopted Killers is unknown, but appears to be an over-representation. The 300 adopted killers profiled, by category of killer type, is an attempt to explain how adoption can create a killer, so 300 are just the tip of the iceberg. Indexed.
https://www.loricarangelo.com/killers/
“…although adopted children commit murders more often than commonly believed, there is resistance to making an issue of this fact. This may be because of the secrecy associated with many adoptions and the failure of criminal justice agencies to record the nature of an offender's family background. From a legal posture, an adopted child is simply the child of his adoptive parents. …the psychodynamics of adoption are easily overlooked in forensic mental health evaluations.”
“Of the 500 estimated serial killers in U.S. history, 16 percent were adopted as children, while adoptees represent only 2 or 3 percent of the general population. Adoptees are 15 times more likely to kill one or both of their adoptive parents than biological children.”
-
What about the primal wound?
You not only appear to be cherry picking with regards your theories, you also appear to be suggesting that SC was worse off than Bamber regarding attachment styles/issues
What about Bambers criminal versatility?
SC's mental health issues were well documented.
WHERE are Jeremy Bambers?
Why do ALL of Bambers supporters BLATENTLY IGNORE his quite apparent ISSUES?
"The loss for the adoptee is unlike other losses we have come to expect in a lifetime, such as death and divorce. Adoption is more pervasive, less socially recognized, and more profound." - Dr. David M. Brodzinsky and Dr. Marshall D. Schechter in Being Adopted: The Lifelong Search for Self.
Often adopted children appear to be just "fine" however research has shown that many adoptees have built walls around themselves to keep others from getting too close. They may hide behind perfectionism, achievement and even self-sufficiency. They often resist what they need and want most of all. Many adoptees deny their feelings or thoughts about their birth parents out of fear that they adoptive parents will feel rejected or unappreciated. Maybe on the child's birthday the child may be very quiet and if asked what he/she is thinking about the child may say nothing at all, when in fact he was thinking about his birth parents. Many adoptees act out their grief through their behavior which at times can be quite challenging for the family. Some adoptive parents, after years of struggle may even conclude that they are not cut out to be parents after all leaving the adoptee to once again feel rejected and to be too much to handle.
Why don't adoptees talk about their grief? They are petrified of rejection. They worry that if someone knew how needy or hurting they were inside they may be rejected all over again. This is true even in the best adoptive homes and families. Add the fear of rejection with the fear of hurting their adoptive parents' feelings and often this grief goes underground. Adopted children, teens and adults can learn how to emotionally connect with others and form intimate and trusting relationships. However it helps to understand the obstacles and challenges that the adoptee has to navigate through.
http://www.griefspeaks.com/id93.html
"There are 3 types of adopted families according to many professionals who work in with adoptive families:
Blind: These parents communicate that adoption has been simply wonderful for their family. "I can't imagine that any of the problems we are having have anything to do with adoption." "There are no differences", "We are so much alike that most people have no idea that Sarah is adopted. In fact her relatives often comment how much she looks like her dad." These families often avoid discussion about adoption or birth parents or may even be angry if the adolescent brings up the topic.
Balanced: The adoptive parents acknowledge the differences adoption brings and can openly discuss and honestly the compatibility issues inherent in adoption. "We know that John struggles with his racial identity. We try so hard to support him and strive to be a multiracial family. We know that there are times that he can't talk about this with us." In these families, open discussion of fantasies about birth parents, wishes to search for these parents and even the limitations of the perceived compatibility between child and parents can be openly explored without any sense of danger to the basic bond between family members.
Blaming: These parents have a narrow range of perceived compatibility. They often exaggerate the importance of the adtoptive status of their child, especially when problems arise or the teen doesn't live up to their wishes and expectations. Any shortcomings are explained on the basis of the adoption, rarely their own mistakes or flaws as parents. If the teen does things in sync with their expectations they say," he is my husband's son, made the honor roll again." In contrast, if he doesn't please them, "Your father was an incredible athlete. I don't understand why you are not interested in sports. You keep wanting to be in those ridiculous plays at school." or even " He must have inherited his laziness from his birth father."
-
Common disorders, such as ADHD or conduct disorder, are being ‘grossly under-identified’ amongst adopted and fostered children, according to a new study by King’s College London. Instead, clinicians are over-identifying more complex ‘attachment disorders’, and as a result children are missing out on appropriate treatments.
The findings are published today in the journal Child and Adolescent Mental Health.
Researchers reviewed 100 consecutive referrals from across the UK to the National Adoption and Fostering Service, a specialist service based at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM).They compared the referral letters with each child’s clinical assessment within the service, and to the expected rate of mental health disorders from national data.
Best current estimates of the prevalence of mental health disorders for adopted or fostered children are based on the mental health of ‘looked after children’ (children in the care of the state)who have significantly higher rates of common disorders such as conduct problems, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), learning problems and neurodevelopmental disorders compared to children in birth families.
The researchers found that attachment disorders were over diagnosed among adopted and fostered children whereas common disorders, such as conduct problems, ADHD, anxiety or autism were under diagnosed.
Attachment problems were mentioned in 31% of the referrals. Upon clinical assessment, only one child was identified as having potential attachment symptoms but this was for a child in the 69% not initially identified with attachment problems.
Only 4% of referrals identified conduct disorder but rates of conduct disorder were approximately 10 times higher in the national data. In the clinical assessment, common disorders were diagnosed much more frequently than attachment disorders, with conduct disorders diagnosed 13 times more frequently than attachment disorders.
Attachment disorders occur when infants and young children have not had the opportunity to form attachments to their primary caregivers, usually because of grossly inadequate childcare, or extremely frequent changes in caregivers. Whilst disruptions to early caregiving are almost always present in adopted or looked after children,attachment disorders are relatively rare. Unlike more common mental health disorders, there are no evidence based treatments for attachment problems.
Dr Matt Woolgar, lead author of the paper from the National Academy of Parenting Research at King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry, and consultant clinical psychologist at the National Adoption and Fostering Service at SLaM, says: “There is real confusion around the term ‘attachment disorder’. Clinicians appear to be using this diagnosis to try and capture the complex mental health problems that adopted or fostered children often have. It seems that clinicians may be making the diagnosis based more on the assumptions due to the child’s history, rather than because of specific symptoms. In doing so, the danger is that they are blinded to some of the more straightforward diagnoses, like ADHD, or conduct disorders, for which there are good, evidence-based treatments. As a result, children are missing out on the treatments they need.” https://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/news/records/2014/January/Adopted-children-missing-out-on-mental-health-treatments.aspx
-
Holly, do you think he was disturbed in some manner by his upbringing and the revelation of his adoption?
It appears John that Jeremy Bambers mental health/issues linked to his upbringing and the revelation of his adoption are the elephant in the room for some - including Bamber
-
Questions are often asked about the effect of adoption on JB along with his experiences at boarding school. Imo the questions are often asked in such a way implying that these experiences were negative and somehow gave way to murderous intent.
But we know SC and JB's backgrounds were similar: adopted as babies, brought up by NB and June and both went to boarding school.
We also know there doesn't appear to be anything adverse in their biological backgrounds eg a history of anti-social personality disorder etc. Although nothing is known about SC's birth father. Bearing in mind also SC and JB were adopted in the 50's/60's due to societal stigma attached to illegitimacy as opposed to being at risk of abuse/neglect by birth parents. Babies/children adopted today tend to have suffered abuse/neglect within their birth families and/or harm in-utero from alcohol/drugs putting the developing foetus at risk of problems in later life.
According to SC's second cousin, Helen Grimster, who testified at court, SC did not enjoy her time at the first boarding school she attended in Sussex where she claims she was bullied.
I think BC claimed JB was sexually assaulted at boarding school but I've no idea how reliable this is. If it is true it doesn't seem to be something JB discussed with others.
The relatives often pass comment on the fact SC and JB were adopted and went to boarding school. This ranges from RWB's excerpts in his diary where he states JB was regarded as the b........ at school to DB claiming JB probably felt insecure because he was adopted and went to boarding school.
What seems to fall under the radar is how well, or not, NB and June adjusted to their adopted babies/children and status as adoptive parents. The following is an excerpt from a book entitled 'The Psychology of Adoption'
https://www.amazon.com/Psychology-Adoption-David-M-Brodzinsky/dp/0195082737
Infertility is not usually something that "happens". Rather, it is a reality that is forced on a couple over a period of months which then stretch on into years. It includes anxieties about sexual performance and bodily intergrity. It includes medical investigations and the possibility of drugs and of surgical interventions. It includes the allocation of responsbility for the infertility - to the man, to the woman or to both. And it requires mourning.
I use the term "mourning" deliberately, as infertility implies some very significant losses. There is the loss of an image of oneself or of one's partner as biologically intact and capable of conceiving a child. There is the loss of the hoped-for status of biolgocial parent (which includes a fantasy of presenting a grandchild to one's own parents). And there is the loss of the hoped-for biological child, a child who carried both one's own genes and one's own dreams. This last loss, is for many people, an especially painful one. Paradoxically (except within a psychoanalytic framework) it is this loss of which they often are not conscious. Fantasies regarding their imagined biological child often remain hidden until they are exposed by a discrepancy between the real adopted child and the imagined biological child.
Unfortunately the adoptive parents' fantasies regarding their (nonexistent) biological child are not at all inactive. They silently colour many aspects of the relationship between the adoptive parents and their adopted child. And, of course they are not alone in this process; sooner or later the adopted child also develops his own fantasies about his biological parents.
These fantasies whether they reside within an adoptive parent or within the adopted child - are not necessarily pathogenic. However, the clinical literature contains many examples of families in which such fantasies prevented one person from seeing the real person in front of them. (The adopted playwright, Edward Albee, uses an especially powerful example of such fantasies as the focal point for his play, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? In this play the "son" of the two major protagonists, George and Martha, is gradually revealed to be a fantasy - a fantasy who has himself wondered if, perhaps, he was adopted.)
If the adoptive parents are to be able to see their adopted child for whom he is, and if the adopted child is to be able to see his adoptive parents for whom they are, they must mourn the loss of their respective fantasied biological child and fantasied biological parents. The lost (fantasied) relationships must be mourned before the new (real adoptive) relationships can flourish".
It seems to me June did not adjust well to her status of adoptive mother. NB and June married in 1949. June suffered a mental breakdown requiring in-patient psychiatric care during 1955 as a result of her inability to conceive birth children. SC was born in July 1957 and placed with the Bambers during October 1957 and formally adopted shortly afterwards. By 1959 June once again suffered a mental breakdown requiring in-patient psychiatric care and electro-convulsive treatment. The cause appears to have been once again bound up with her inability to bear birth children and her decision to adopt (Dr Ferguson's wit stat attached below). I doubt someone goes from fine one day to requiring in-patient psychiatric care and electro-convulsive treatment the next. I guess there's a gradual decline over weeks, months or possibly years. My concern here is how well was June able to meet SC's needs and interact with her on a day-to- day basis leading up to her breakdown in 1959?
The scientific evidence relating to 'attachment' shows that babies/children who have been unable to forum secure attachment with caregivers are at risk of suffering the sort of issues SC suffered:
- underachieved at school
- victim of bullying at school
- unplanned pregnancies during teenage years
- unable to form stable relationships
- unable to hold down permanent employment
- difficulty parenting children
- drug abuse
- mood swings
- mental illness
The following link provides access to a resource library from the world's experts:
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/
The links relating to reports and working papers entitled the 'Science of Neglect' and 'Maternal Depression' seem particularly relevant but I think all this is probably best illustrated by Dr Tronick's 'Still Face Experiment':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apzXGEbZht0&list=PL829spV3rkSySvSQUpxrTlbHsjpoJYxbb
How might it have been for SC if June was unresponsive most of the time due to her mental health issues and how might this have altered SC's brain architecture?
-
In answer to the question above:
"How might it have been for SC if June was unresponsive most of the time due to her mental health issues and how might this have altered SC's brain architecture"?
Re-cap on the 'Still face experiment':
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apzXGEbZht0
The following 3 vids:
-Experiences build brain architecture
-Serve and return interaction shapes brain circuitry
-Toxic stress derails healthy development
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/three-core-concepts-in-early-development/
Healthy development in the early years provides the building blocks for educational achievement, economic productivity, responsible citizenship, lifelong health, strong communities, and successful parenting of the next generation. This three-part video series from the Center and the National Scientific Council on the Developing Child depicts how advances in neuroscience, molecular biology, and genomics now give us a much better understanding of how early experiences are built into our bodies and brains, for better or for worse.
-
The third vid above:
Without caring adults to buffer children, the unrelenting stress caused by extreme poverty, neglect, abuse, or severe maternal depression can weaken the architecture of the developing brain, with long-term consequences for learning, behavior, and both physical and mental health.
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/the-science-of-neglect-the-persistent-absence-of-responsive-care-disrupts-the-developing-brain/
https://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/maternal-depression-can-undermine-the-development-of-young-children/
-
Happy new year Holly and Jeremy and all the good people fighting this monstrous injustice.
From down under with love.
-
Happy new year Holly and Jeremy and all the good people fighting this monstrous injustice.
From down under with love.
Bamber is deffo no MoJ!!! St Theresa has never heard of him, and wouldn't free him even if she did!
Whatever happened to Lundy... I thought you said he would be out last October!!!?
From ooop North without lo....
-
Regarding adoption I don't believe it greatly influenced Bamber's decision. Except to make it easier for him knowing he was not a blood relation.
There have been a lot of other inheritance killings where the killer had not been adopted.
-
Happy new year Holly and Jeremy and all the good people fighting this monstrous injustice.
From down under with love.
Happy New Year to you too Samson x
-
Bamber is deffo no MoJ!!! St Theresa has never heard of him, and wouldn't free him even if she did!
Whatever happened to Lundy... I thought you said he would be out last October!!!?
From ooop North without lo....
(ty6e[ Welcome back!
Oh yes he is!!!
I can't find any outcome for Lundy's appeal. Samson? I assume it's to be continued?
-
Regarding adoption I don't believe it greatly influenced Bamber's decision. Except to make it easier for him knowing he was not a blood relation.
There have been a lot of other inheritance killings where the killer had not been adopted.
There's no reason why an adult who has grown up with non-biological parents will think any less of his/her non-biological parents than adults who grew up with birth parents providing the non-biological parents were loving and supportive towards their non-biological child. And yet I can see perhaps at JB's trial how some were maybe prejudiced against JB on the basis he was the adopted son even if maybe they were not consciously aware of such.
The inheritance motive was/is simply a theory put forward to explain the murders which IMO lacks substance.
Other cases involving so-called inheritance killers the jury had to decide whether or not the accused murdered to fast-forward his/her inheritance or whether there was some other explanation. In JB's case the jury had a clear choice JB or SC.
32 years on from JB's trial and far more is now known about the effects of severe maternal depression and neglect on the brains and biological systems of infants in the care of mothers/caregivers suffering severe depression. This puts the infant at risk of attachment trauma and a 'disorganised attachment' style in adulthood. This new science renders trial testimony from Dr Ferguson and Dr Bradly largely obsolete.
All the science underpinning attachment points to SC suffereing attachment trauma due to June's mental health issues during critical periods of SC's development.
Dr Ferguson told the court he did not regard SC at risk of suicide or capable of harming herself or others. This was on the basis he diagnosed SC suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. If SC was a paranoid schizophrenic all the evidence also supports her suffering attachment trauma which if left untreated leaves such individuals at risk of suicide and committing acts of violence.
Dr Dan Siegal explains how individuals suffering disorganised attachments are most at risk of losing control and committing acts of violence:
http://www.drdansiegel.com/about/biography/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkEcpBU3TpE
Dr Allan Schore explains attachment trauma, the roots of suicide and the effect of early attachment on brain development and how an infant's cognitive structure is effected by a mother's depression:
http://www.allanschore.com/bio.php
https://www.psychalive.org/video-dr-allan-schore-attachment-trauma-effects-neglect-abuse-brain-development/
https://www.psychalive.org/video-dr-allan-schore-roots-suicide-early-attachment/
https://www.psychalive.org/video-dr-allan-schore-explains-infants-cognitive-structure-effected-mothers-depression/
The following study led by Prof Barone has shown that mothers with disorganised/helpless/entangled attachment styles are more likely to commit filicide than mentally ill mothers:
https://www.laviniabarone.com/home-2
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213414001458
The above will obviously make for a very compelling appeal point at JB's next hearing.
Just to say we all have adult attachment styles. Hopefully 'secure' ones! Here's a questionnaire for those interested in determining their own adult attachment style:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/tests/relationships/relationship-attachment-style-test
-
The CoA hearing notice highlights how June's severe depression requiring in-patient psychiatric care in 1955 and 1959 and its likely adverse effect on SC has so far been completely overlooked:
14. June Bamber was also 61 years old. Religion had always played a strong part in her life. In her latter years her interest in this regard had to an extent come to dominate her thinking, to a point that might have been thought to be obsessive. In 1982, she received treatment at a psychiatric hospital in Northampton.
15. Nevill and June Bamber married in 1949 and shortly afterwards took a tenancy of White House Farm. They were unable to have children of their own and adopted two children, Sheila and Jeremy, the appellant.
http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html
Although Dr Ferguson's WS does state:
I also treated Sheila's adoptive [sic] mother Mrs June Bamber at St Andrews hospital Northants. I can say that June after suffering a long period of childlessness was examined and eventually an ovarian cyst was removed. She made a decision to adopt and having done this suffered severe depressions. This was around 1959. She required ECT as an in-patient and made a full recovery.
-
There's no reason why an adult who has grown up with non-biological parents will think any less of his/her non-biological parents than adults who grew up with birth parents providing the non-biological parents were loving and supportive towards their non-biological child. And yet I can see perhaps at JB's trial how some were maybe prejudiced against JB on the basis he was the adopted son even if maybe they were not consciously aware of such.
The inheritance motive was/is simply a theory put forward to explain the murders which IMO lacks substance.
Other cases involving so-called inheritance killers the jury had to decide whether or not the accused murdered to fast-forward his/her inheritance or whether there was some other explanation. In JB's case the jury had a clear choice JB or SC.
I'm afraid the inheritance motive is far from a theory Holly, Julie Mugford's testimony put pay to that. Surely you don't still believe she made it all up?
As for the adoption issue, Bamber was very resentful of what happened to him in that as a baby he was given away to strangers yet his younger siblings born to the same parents were not. I would think that as he grew up his hatred manifested itself in his actions which ultimately saw him murdering them all.
-
I'm afraid the inheritance motive is far from a theory Holly, Julie Mugford's testimony put pay to that. Surely you don't still believe she made it all up?
Yes I do. I find JM's testimony totally unreliable.
-
Yes I do. I find JM's testimony totally unreliable.
Julie had no reason to lie and every reason to tell the truth. And far from being unreliable she was an extremely credible witness by all accounts, far more credible than Jeremy Bamber.
-
(ty6e[ Welcome back!
Oh yes he is!!!
I can't find any outcome for Lundy's appeal. Samson? I assume it's to be continued?
Oh no he isn't!
-
Bamber is deffo no MoJ!!! St Theresa has never heard of him, and wouldn't free him even if she did!
Whatever happened to Lundy... I thought you said he would be out last October!!!?
From ooop North without lo....
We expect Lundy to have his appeal allowed about february. There is a focus group compiling a simple A4 page of facts to explain to the villagers how they have been hoaxed. Love is a four letter word, nothing more. More for dear Holly, but in the PC world, in downunder we are very very very flexible.
-
(ty6e[ Welcome back!
Oh yes he is!!!
I can't find any outcome for Lundy's appeal. Samson? I assume it's to be continued?
Oh no he isn't!
Hi Holly and Caro...I'll only be online for short periods this year, too much to do in the real world at present.
Jeremy B is a lost cause, I'm afraid.
See ya both!
-
Hi Holly and Caro...I'll only be online for short periods this year, too much to do in the real world at present.
Jeremy B is a lost cause, I'm afraid.
See ya both!
Me too!
Yep see you both at the 'coming out' party. I've secured some tickets for the guilty camp. The menu will include humble pie with a red hot chilli dipping sauce! ENJOY!
-
Me too!
Yep see you both at the 'coming out' party. I've secured some tickets for the guilty camp. The menu will include humble pie with a red hot chilli dipping sauce! ENJOY!
Didn't he come out a few years ago? ?{)(**
-
Hi Holly and Caro...I'll only be online for short periods this year, too much to do in the real world at present.
Jeremy B is a lost cause, I'm afraid.
See ya both!
Hi Myster, great to see you back - even for just a fleeting visit! ()678%
-
Me too!
Yep see you both at the 'coming out' party. I've secured some tickets for the guilty camp. The menu will include humble pie with a red hot chilli dipping sauce! ENJOY!
How long are you willing to wait before you eat your own humble pie? How many more years of 'he'll be out soon' will be enough?
-
Didn't he come out a few years ago? ?{)(**
Hehehe.
Not much choice I guess where he is!
-
How long are you willing to wait before you eat your own humble pie? How many more years of 'he'll be out soon' will be enough?
I don't do pie humble or otherwise. Too dry!
These cases take years to unravel even when they're well supported eg David Bain, Knox and Sollecito. You need good support on the outside to win an appeal. If you found yourself needing such support would you want to rely on Mike, CT, the one with a fondness for sherry, GDS etc.
-
I don't do pie humble or otherwise. Too dry!
These cases take years to unravel even when they're well supported eg David Bain, Knox and Sollecito. You need good support on the outside to win an appeal. If you found yourself needing such support would you want to rely on Mike, CT, the one with a fondness for sherry, GDS etc.
Hmm. I wonder if he deliberately expunges those who might have been of REAL help or capable of finding out the truth? Perhaps he thinks it better to surround himself with fruitloops he has some control over?
-
Hmm. I wonder if he deliberately expunges those who might have been of REAL help or capable of finding out the truth? Perhaps he thinks it better to surround himself with fruitloops he has some control over?
Blimey that's a good point &%%6
He drove me nuts in the end waffling on about aspects of the case that will never go anywhere.
-
I don't do pie humble or otherwise. Too dry!
These cases take years to unravel even when they're well supported eg David Bain, Knox and Sollecito. You need good support on the outside to win an appeal. If you found yourself needing such support would you want to rely on Mike, CT, the one with a fondness for sherry, GDS etc.
If I was really guilty and wanted a group of people I could manipulate and who were fond of a conspiracy - then yes! If I were guilty, the quality of support might not be as important as the quantity.
-
Blimey that's a good point &%%6
He drove me nuts in the end waffling on about aspects of the case that will never go anywhere.
Tell me Holly. Was the &%%6 because it was MY point....................or because it wasn't yours? *%6^ 8(0(* 8)--)) D'ya think -on reflection- he might have been hoping to deflect you from a more pertinent point?
-
Tell me Holly. Was the &%%6 because it was MY point....................or because it wasn't yours? *%6^ 8(0(* 8)--)) D'ya think -on reflection- he might have been hoping to deflect you from a more pertinent point?
Do you want the truth or something beautiful?
I think he's innocent and as such he's clueless. I would be too without access to mass debating sessions on the forum, forensic textbooks and the aid of the internet as a research tool. Plus Mike had a bad influence on him early on.
-
Do you want the truth or something beautiful?
I think he's innocent and as such he's clueless. I would be too without access to mass debating sessions on the forum, forensic textbooks and the aid of the internet as a research tool. Plus Mike had a bad influence on him early on.
He is FAR from clueless.
-
He is FAR from clueless.
I guess, from that observation, if he's deliberately playing "clueless", he's being manipulative. After 30+ years, he'll have found ways of making it work for him.
-
I guess, from that observation, if he's deliberately playing "clueless", he's being manipulative. After 30+ years, he'll have found ways of making it work for him.
That's just it, he doesn't 'act' clueless either.
-
He is FAR from clueless.
I agree, Jeremy Bamber for all his faults was an intelliegent guy. Unfortunately, he has become institutionalised and no longer appreciates the worldly reality we all take for granted.
-
I agree, Jeremy Bamber for all his faults was an intelliegent guy. Unfortunately, he has become institutionalised and no longer appreciates the worldly reality we all take for granted.
He is still quite manipulative
-
He is still quite manipulative
I believe so.