Lets review the evidence which convicted Jeremy Bamber.

[scipio_usmc]

One of either of these theories. Either Nevill got to the phone and tried to make a call. The killer not knowing if Nevill had made a call or not, panicked and rang JB as they were not sure of how to proceed. They concocted the flimsy Nevill to JB phonecall story. Or....

Nevill didn't call Jeremy. The third party called Jeremy to establish JB's alibi. Jeremy seems shocked, almost disappointed in his interview, that the Police/ BT do not have the technology to ascertain whether a call was made from WHF.

So you are saying Jeremy was still involved and lied about receiving a call from Neville.  Your third person theory isn't a third person theory at all it is a theory that Jeremy had an accomplice merely. 

[david1819]

Several people including myself who don't take sides in this, cannot understand why the CCRC has not passed his case on to the court of appeal. With all the evidence and information that exists today that did not at the time of the conviction.

The CCRC does state that it will only refer cases on that they believe might possibly lead to the conviction being quashed by the court of appeal. Therefore I can only speculate that the appeal courts have in advance broke protocol due to the nature of this case and told the CCRC that they will never ever change their mind as there is too much at stake. So what ever is produced by JB legal team they will just have to make up reasons why.

Has anyone got or seen the CCRC 109 page document from 2011/12? That would be an interesting read




 

[scipio_usmc]

Several people including myself who don't take sides in this, cannot understand why the CCRC has not passed his case on to the court of appeal. With all the evidence and information that exists today that did not at the time of the conviction.

What evidence exists today that did not exist at the time of his trial that establishes he is innocent?

The most recent submissision to the CCRC had no such evidence tha tis why the application was rejected.  The CCRC trashed the position of the defense so badly that Jeremy's lawyers will not even allow it to be published on his website because they don't want anyone to see how pathetic their arguments were. 

The CCRC does state that it will only refer cases on that they believe might possibly lead to the conviction being quashed by the court of appeal. Therefore I can only speculate that the appeal courts have in advance broke protocol due to the nature of this case and told the CCRC that they will never ever change their mind as there is too much at stake. So what ever is produced by JB legal team they will just have to make up reasons why.

Has anyone got or seen the CCRC 109 page document from 2011/12? That would be an interesting read

Your claim you are not tkaing sides is a joke.  You don't even know what was in the latest CCRC submission but have decided it was evidence of Jeremy's innocence and decided that wrongdoing by the Court of Appeals resulted in the CCRC not passing the matter over to the Court of Appeals. You are indeed taking sides and making ridiculous allegations form a position of complete ignorance.

[John]

Several people including myself who don't take sides in this, cannot understand why the CCRC has not passed his case on to the court of appeal. With all the evidence and information that exists today that did not at the time of the conviction.

The CCRC does state that it will only refer cases on that they believe might possibly lead to the conviction being quashed by the court of appeal. Therefore I can only speculate that the appeal courts have in advance broke protocol due to the nature of this case and told the CCRC that they will never ever change their mind as there is too much at stake. So what ever is produced by JB legal team they will just have to make up reasons why.

Has anyone got or seen the CCRC 109 page document from 2011/12? That would be an interesting read

Scipio is correct, the CCRC will these days only refer a case to the Appeal Court where there is an excellent chance of success.  In past years the Court has criticised the agency for referring cases too readily.

In Bambers case regardless of the crap produced across on blue, there is NO EVIDENCE to support any referral.  Basically, short of someone coming forward and confessing, I cannot realistically see the case being referred to the Court ever again.

I fear the old get-out of claiming a conviction is unsafe won't wear where JB is concerned.

[Holly Goodhead]

What evidence exists today that did not exist at the time of his trial that establishes he is innocent?

The most recent submissision to the CCRC had no such evidence tha tis why the application was rejected.  The CCRC trashed the position of the defense so badly that Jeremy's lawyers will not even allow it to be published on his website because they don't want anyone to see how pathetic their arguments were. 


Your claim you are not tkaing sides is a joke.  You don't even know what was in the latest CCRC submission but have decided it was evidence of Jeremy's innocence and decided that wrongdoing by the Court of Appeals resulted in the CCRC not passing the matter over to the Court of Appeals. You are indeed taking sides and making ridiculous allegations form a position of complete ignorance.

You misunderstand the English legal system.  It is not necessary to establish innocence.  At trial it is based on beyond reasonable guilt or guilt.  At CoA it is based on the conviction being unsafe. 

[david1819]

What evidence exists today that did not exist at the time of his trial that establishes he is innocent?

The most recent submissision to the CCRC had no such evidence tha tis why the application was rejected.  The CCRC trashed the position of the defense so badly that Jeremy's lawyers will not even allow it to be published on his website because they don't want anyone to see how pathetic their arguments were. 

Your claim you are not tkaing sides is a joke.  You don't even know what was in the latest CCRC submission but have decided it was evidence of Jeremy's innocence and decided that wrongdoing by the Court of Appeals resulted in the CCRC not passing the matter over to the Court of Appeals. You are indeed taking sides and making ridiculous allegations form a position of complete ignorance.

Hang on! where did I claim there is proof he is innocent? If there was such 'proof' he would be released. What I meant was there is evidence that puts doubt on his guilt, And that the Jury was misled 'unintentionaly' by the Judge making several claims that we now no are false and several prosecution claims. I'm not going to go into detail about it. we will just go off topic and back into the same circles.

I don't take sides or at least I try not to. Sometimes I sway from one side to the other slightly and its always circumstantial or opinianted claims that makes me do so. I was not there that night so I don't know what took place. Fact of the matter is the only one who knows is what took place is Jeremy. The only reason I would want a retrial is for the sake of my own entertainment to see what happens TBH.

Have you seen the latest CCRC report? can I get it anywhere?

Just for the record if such 'proof' existed that he was innocent which it don't but if it did knowing this bizarre saga it would probably leave more questions than answers 

[Holly Goodhead]

Scipio is correct, the CCRC will these days only refer a case to the Appeal Court where there is an excellent chance of success.  In past years the Court has criticised the agency for referring cases too readily.

In Bambers case regardless of the crap produced across on blue, there is NO EVIDENCE to support any referral.  Basically, short of someone coming forward and confessing, I cannot realistically see the case being referred to the Court ever again.

I fear the old get-out of claiming a conviction is unsafe won't wear where JB is concerned.

Ched Evans' case is currently with the CCRC - we will see!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2929795/Rapist-Ched-Evans-submitted-fresh-evidence-previously-unavailable-appeal-against-sex-attack-conviction.html

Since its inception the CCRC have referred just over 3% of applications to the CoA. Obviously one of these cases was JB's.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/about/criminal-cases-review-commission

[scipio_usmc]

Hang on! where did I claim there is proof he is innocent? If there was such 'proof' he would be released. What I meant was there is evidence that puts doubt on his guilt, And that the Jury was misled 'unintentionaly' by the Judge making several claims that we now no are false and several prosecution claims. I'm not going to go into detail about it. we will just go off topic and back into the same circles.

I don't take sides or at least I try not to. Sometimes I sway from one side to the other slightly and its always circumstantial or opinianted claims that makes me do so. I was not there that night so I don't know what took place. Fact of the matter is the only one who knows is what took place is Jeremy. The only reason I would want a retrial is for the sake of my own entertainment to see what happens TBH.

Have you seen the latest CCRC report? can I get it anywhere?

Just for the record if such 'proof' existed that he was innocent which it don't but if it did knowing this bizarre saga it would probably leave more questions than answers 

An unsafe verdict is one where there is new evidence that establishes the defendant is innocent or where evidence made it in front of the jury that should not have and without it a jury could potentially choose to acquit.

The former results in someone being released period the latter results in the state being able to retry a case if prosecutors so choose.

There is no new evidence that undercuts the case against Jeremy. Jeremy supporters make a large number of allegations but none that are legally significant or have any solid support evidence wise.

For instance the allegation from Laurel and Hardy that based on a photo they can tell the wounds occurred 2 hours earlier is not scientifically valid or reliable.  Worse yet, in order to be true her wounds had to be inflicted after she was declared dead by Dr Craig. 

The defense is long on allegations short on valid evidence to back up any of their claims.
 

[david1819]

An unsafe verdict is one where there is new evidence that establishes the defendant is innocent or where evidence made it in front of the jury that should not have and without it a jury could potentially choose to acquit.

The former results in someone being released period the latter results in the state being able to retry a case if prosecutors so choose.

There is no new evidence that undercuts the case against Jeremy. Jeremy supporters make a large number of allegations but none that are legally significant or have any solid support evidence wise.

For instance the allegation from Laurel and Hardy that based on a photo they can tell the wounds occurred 2 hours earlier is not scientifically valid or reliable.  Worse yet, in order to be true her wounds had to be inflicted after she was declared dead by Dr Craig. 

The defense is long on allegations short on valid evidence to back up any of their claims.

You know, I don't know why I am bothering trying to have a constructive conversation with you. If your comparing medical expert opinion to the likes of Laurel and Hardy then the CCRC report was put together by the Chuckle Brothers and Mr Bean!

If this case was such a 'slam dunk' as you put it why are you wasting your time on this forum ranting about it?

Don't expect a reply from me on this board in future unless I find a fair reason to do so, our exchange of words seem rather meaningless.

[david1819]

You misunderstand the English legal system.  It is not necessary to establish innocence.  At trial it is based on beyond reasonable guilt or guilt.  At CoA it is based on the conviction being unsafe.

That's what I am getting at. By legal definition Bamber's conviction is unsafe but that is not in anyway implying he is innocent. Not guilty is not synonymous with innocence.

[scipio_usmc]

You know, I don't know why I am bothering trying to have a constructive conversation with you. If your comparing medical expert opinion to the likes of Laurel and Hardy then the CCRC report was put together by the Chuckle Brothers and Mr Bean!

If this case was such a 'slam dunk' as you put it why are you wasting your time on this forum ranting about it?

Don't expect a reply from me on this board in future unless I find a fair reason to do so, our exchange of words seem rather meaningless.

I called irrational opinion totally lacking in any scientific foundation Laurel and Hardy claims.  You are either too foolish or too dishonest to face that there is no way to look at a photo and assess time of death or when blood dried based upon the photo.  Either way it doesn't bode well for you.  That you are too dishonest or topo clueless doesn't mean the courts are so hapless.  The Courts did not consider any of their claims to have any merit because they were not scientifically valid.

That you can't comprehend such demonstrates why you are foolish enough to believe all the other claims of the defense as well. But the best of all was when you claimed to be objective, you ar enot objective you are someone who is peddling the BS that Jeremy supporters peddle.     

[scipio_usmc]

That's what I am getting at. By legal definition Bamber's conviction is unsafe but that is not in anyway implying he is innocent. Not guilty is not synonymous with innocence.

A verdict is unsafe where someone is established as innocent or there is new evidence that undercuts the case to the point where a jury should retry it.

You have not pointed to a single thing that undercuts the verdict and renders it unsafe.  Rather you have made vague allegations and the few things you did mention ended up being complete BS that the defense made up such as the BS claim form the Iatlian Laurel and hardy claiming they coudl tell time of death by looking at a photo.  What's worse the time of death they assessed would put it after she was declared dead by Dr Craig.

Anything specific you identify to suggest the verdict was unsafe can easily be shown to be utter BS and that is why such has been rejected already or was not even argued to the CCRC.

[John]

I have been following the blue forum for several years and occasionally someone comes up with the 'new evidence' claim.  Of course those of us who are wise to it all know immediately that it is simply another ruse.  The one thing the blue forum has achieved in all this time is to dispel any possibility that the Bamber conviction is unsafe.

[Nicholas]

Several people including myself who don't take sides in this, cannot understand why the CCRC has not passed his case on to the court of appeal. With all the evidence and information that exists today that did not at the time of the conviction.

The CCRC does state that it will only refer cases on that they believe might possibly lead to the conviction being quashed by the court of appeal. Therefore I can only speculate that the appeal courts have in advance broke protocol due to the nature of this case and told the CCRC that they will never ever change their mind as there is too much at stake. So what ever is produced by JB legal team they will just have to make up reasons why.

Has anyone got or seen the CCRC 109 page document from 2011/12? That would be an interesting read

[Nicholas]

Hang on! where did I claim there is proof he is innocent? If there was such 'proof' he would be released. What I meant was there is evidence that puts doubt on his guilt, And that the Jury was misled 'unintentionaly' by the Judge making several claims that we now no are false and several prosecution claims. I'm not going to go into detail about it. we will just go off topic and back into the same circles.

I don't take sides or at least I try not to. Sometimes I sway from one side to the other slightly and its always circumstantial or opinianted claims that makes me do so. I was not there that night so I don't know what took place. Fact of the matter is the only one who knows is what took place is Jeremy. The only reason I would want a retrial is for the sake of my own entertainment to see what happens TBH.

Have you seen the latest CCRC report? can I get it anywhere?

Just for the record if such 'proof' existed that he was innocent which it don't but if it did knowing this bizarre saga it would probably leave more questions than answers