Why would Julie do this? Say this?

[Robittybob1]

I think you need to come forth with your knowledge.  Are you implying there were others present early in the evening before Jeremy says he returned home?

I suppose there could well be some farmworkers who have some knowledge about what happened early evening.

Here is a clue for me to work on. 

"On Tuesday, August 6, according to Jeremy and another relative, Nevill and June suggested to Sheila that the twins should be put into foster homes."  from article "Is Bambi's killer innocent?  by Bob Woffinden 19th May 2007" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1012.0

Does that mean both Jeremy and another relative were present when June made that suggestion?

[Caroline]

Here is a clue for me to work on. 

"On Tuesday, August 6, according to Jeremy and another relative, Nevill and June suggested to Sheila that the twins should be put into foster homes."  from article "Is Bambi's killer innocent?  by Bob Woffinden 19th May 2007" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1012.0

Does that mean both Jeremy and another relative were present when June made that suggestion?

There was no 'other relative' present.

[Robittybob1]

There was no 'other relative' present.

Well that is how I read the article.  How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?

[APRIL]

Well that is how I read the article.  How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?

Refer to what Colin says. He remarks that no one in the family seemed to be aware of Sheila's mental health problems. Why would they? She didn't live locally. June didn't share problems. So why on earth would they have been aware of a conversation which can't be validated?

[Robittybob1]

Refer to what Colin says. He remarks that no one in the family seemed to be aware of Sheila's mental health problems. Why would they? She didn't live locally. June didn't share problems. So why on earth would they have been aware of a conversation which can't be validated?

Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys.   I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.

[Caroline]

Well that is how I read the article.  How else would another relative know about the suggestion to foster the boys unless they were present at the conversation?

Then read it again.

[Caroline]

Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys.   I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.

Who are you to think they weren't?

[APRIL]

Well the author of the article felt someone else was aware of the conversation about fostering the boys.   I'm not sure how the author came to that conclusion but who are we to think only Jeremy and the ones killed that night were present in the home at around 9:00 PM the evening before.

There are authors and authors. Some write facts. Others would be better if they stuck to writing novels. One author, writing years after the event, appears to be sitting round the kitchen table with them during the "last supper". She speaks as if she's a family friend. She'd never met them.

[Robittybob1]

Who are you to think they weren't?

Only from the article.

[Caroline]

Only from the article.

Read Jeremy's witness statement.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5632.msg200222#msg200222

[Robittybob1]

Read Jeremy's witness statement.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5632.msg200222#msg200222

From Jeremy's statement he (and Nevill)  are not there continuously so there is no reason to assume someone else didn't turn up while he wasn't present.  Or that there was someone else present that he doesn't mention.

[APRIL]

From Jeremy's statement he (and Nevill)  are not there continuously so there is no reason to assume someone else didn't turn up while he wasn't present.  Or that there was someone else present that he doesn't mention.

So he just allowed himself to be charged with murder when there was another person who could have spoken on his behalf? You'l have to come up with something more plausible than that.

[Robittybob1]

So he just allowed himself to be charged with murder when there was another person who could have spoken on his behalf? You'l have to come up with something more plausible than that.

These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August.  Weeks before he was being charged with murder.  I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.

I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in.  He is not there continuously.

[APRIL]

These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August.  Weeks before he was being charged with murder.  I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.

I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in.  He is not there continuously.

So had there been anyone else there, it would have been fresh in his mind. Presumably this 'person' would have required feeding. Jeremy says nothing of an extra place being set. Nor does he mention any sort of tension in the house -not even Sheila, who was useful to take the blame for his crimes- which would have been useful in his defence.

[Caroline]

These statements I have seen are written on the 7th and 8th of August.  Weeks before he was being charged with murder.  I have yet to see any statements made after the 8th of August.

I'm saying this other person could have turned up at WHF while he was working getting the harvest in.  He is not there continuously.

There was no other person, because if there was, we would know who it was.