Why would Julie do this? Say this?

[Robittybob1]

"But Julie is still haunted by the murders almost 35 years ago and still suffers from nightmares." 
Jeremy Bamber's girlfriend haunted by murders in her dramatically different new life.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/jeremy-bambers-girlfriend-haunted-murders-21476661

Headline: https://inews.co.uk/culture/television/jeremy-bamber-girlfriend-now-julie-mugford-what-happened-white-house-farm-itv-series-1367513

"Jeremy Bamber's girlfriend: how Julie Mugford was involved in the White House Farm murders trial"

"A key witness in the trial
Despite supporting Bamber as he cried uncontrollably at the funeral of his parents, sister and nephews, Mugford later came forward as a witness against him.


Police initially believed Bamber’s story that his mentally ill sister had shot her parents and young twin sons, before then turning the gun on herself.

However, new evidence came to light about Bamber allegedly bragging about the murders.

When the inquest opened on 14 August 1985 - a week after the murders took place - police gave evidence in relation to the murder-suicide theory.

Almost a month later, on 7 September, Mugford changed her statement to police and later testified against him in court."

[Robittybob1]

https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/

https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg   Her story seems to change.  Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?

"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone."   That seems to be an error IMO.  https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/

[Brietta]

https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/

https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg   Her story seems to change.  Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?

"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone."   That seems to be an error IMO.  https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/

I would not place too much reliance on an "Officialbambervideo", Rob.

[Caroline]

https://jeremybamber.org/julie-mugford/

https://youtu.be/JuiXtdq51Bg   Her story seems to change.  Is it possible she is an unreliable witness?

"But the judge told the jury they could convict Bamber on her testimony alone."   That seems to be an error IMO.  https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10846774/who-jeremy-bambers-ex-girlfriend-julie-mugford-where-now/

That's a CT video - nuff said.

[John]

It is disappointing to note that despite numerous warnings, some members continue to use crude and totally uncalled-for language when responding to other members. This will no longer be allowed to continue.

I have instructed the moderation team to clamp down heavily on rule breakers from now on.

There will be no exceptions!

[Aunt Agatha]

I would not place too much reliance on an "Officialbambervideo", Rob.

I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.

What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.

[Aunt Agatha]

JM lied consistently and changed her mind and her statements .

She consistently lied!!

[Nicholas]

I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.

What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.

And I suspect one of the reasons why Bamber keeps on failing to overturn his murder convictions on a technicality

[Nicholas]

JM lied consistently and changed her mind and her statements .

She consistently lied!!

She didn’t Aunt Agatha

Though it’s possible she may have suffered some cognitive dissonance given her situation at the time - the long term abuse by Bamber, his constant gaslighting and manipulation of her

The trauma of the nightmare she found herself in when he phoned her from a pay phone that morning to tell her the police would be picking her up

Did he tell her his family had been murdered or did he leave it to the police to inform her ?

[Aunt Agatha]

And I suspect one of the reasons why Bamber keeps on failing to overturn his murder convictions on a technicality

It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.

Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.

Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.

Why wait 4 hrs?

Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.

Give me a break!!!


He has an impossible task on his hands.

He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.

[Caroline]

It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.

Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.

Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.

Why wait 4 hrs?

Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.

Give me a break!!!


He has an impossible task on his hands.

He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.

It is protocol to wait in a situation like that, they not only have those in the house to look out for they have their own people. They would have been aware that SC knew the outlay of the house and had to familiarise themselves also, which is why they asked Jeremy to draw the plan.

Jeremy wasn't told that there was one dead male and one dead female, that is what the person wrote on the log and the clarification for that came long before his trial.

[Holly Goodhead]

It’s a dreadful state he finds himself in.

Sheila was found to be unable to shoot the family dead, there by default only, Jeremy was proven guilty.

Now, 35 years later he has to convince a panel that he didn’t commit the murders, that he wasn’t there during the murders and was outside with the police during a police stand off, whilst police noted a possible figure at a bedroom window AND Having ongoing discussions with someone inside the house and later learning somebody was seen running away from the direction of the house in the early hours of the morning, but that ok, it was never EVER looked into further, And in addition waiting approx (but I’m so ready to be corrected on this) about 4 hrs for the house to be raided.

Why wait 4 hrs?

Then, in addition to all that, Jeremy is told that one dead male and one dead female had been found in the kitchen.....oh to suddenly be told that ‘sorry mate, we got it wrong, it’s one dead male in the kitchen and four bodies upstairs’.....and with all this, in addition to NOT having all the information available to him for his defence...he still has to prove he didn’t kill them.

Give me a break!!!


He has an impossible task on his hands.

He’s not going anywhere soon, you can be sure of that.

How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?

And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon? 

[Caroline]

I’d place a lot more reliance on that than what,some guilters spout out here.

What is stated in the video is exactly how it was relayed to me.about 30 years ago.

Of course it would because it all originates from Bamber.

[Caroline]

How do you know he has an impossible task on his hands?

And how do you know we can be sure he's not going anywhere soon?

He isn't

[Aunt Agatha]

It is protocol to wait in a situation like that, they not only have those in the house to look out for they have their own people. They would have been aware that SC knew the outlay of the house and had to familiarise themselves also, which is why they asked Jeremy to draw the plan.

Jeremy wasn't told that there was one dead male and one dead female, that is what the person wrote on the log and the clarification for that came long before his trial.

Caroline, i cannot be sure, i could be wrong here, but i dont think i am.

jeremy was told by someone on site that a male and a female had been either seen, or concluded to be dead.

Dead bodies do not move - unless someone else moves them.

Q:  Was she already dead when she was seen in the kitchen?  it appears not.