I think the letter was orchestrated.
PH was banned from Red - this is true but he only made half a dozen posts or so to counter some stick - he didn't use Red as a platform to promote himself/his book as he did on Blue.
It's unlikely anyone knows for certain what PH's stance is on the case either now or historically. Unless he was/is working on any book as a shared project why is he going to take others into his confidences despite what they may think?
I've seen previous attempts by others to get close to those they think might have key info. Eg when Mat joined the forum it was rumoured he worked for the CCRC and a female poster quite literally tried to get inside his pants! And it wasn't Preecey!
I'm not sure what PH hoped to gain by introducing himself as an author on the forum? I would have thought far better to mingle anonymously? He would still have access to the library/archives and could debate on the forum and in pm's if necessary? Note his post here:
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3151.msg120865.html#msg120865"Contractually, I cannot/ will not be be divulging anything about my research, but I will add to discussions and debates and ask many reasoned questions which I hope all parties will sensibly answer"
Anyone ever see him do this? I certainly didn't? So what does that tell you?
His background certainly seems to lend itself to writing about true crime: ex police and judge's clerk. On this basis he would seem to have some advantage over other authors who have written about the case: Caffell, Lomax, Powell, Wilkes. Any book might have a different twist but the idea that it would be capable of demonstrating conclusive guilt or innocence is imo very doubtful.
As our legal system is adversarial it is not necessary to demonstrate guilt or innocence. Acquittals/convictions are based on 'not guilty' or 'guilty' which is based on 'beyond reasonable doubt'. Often there's no conclusive evidence to support an acquittal or conviction. If JB's conviction is quashed it will be on the basis that it is unsafe and therefore cannot be sustained. It's not necessary to prove innocence. I would be absolutely stunned if in JB's case there's a piece, or pieces, of evidence in existence capable of showing conclusive innocence or guilt. Even if the soc had been treated as it should have been from day 1 I doubt conclusive guilt/innocence would be possible. It would just have made an acquittal or conviction less contentious.
Even if a biased (pro or anti) book is published it's unlikely to have any or little effect on JB's case. If JB believes he's the victim of a MoJ he will need to convince the CCRC and COA that his conviction is unsafe based on the law as it stands.
I wonder what happened to Carol Ann Lee's book? This was due to be published on 14th April 2014 in Australia and Canada. I wonder if any book by CAL might focus on SC? CAL has previously written about females: Ruth Ellis, Ann Frank, Myra Hindley.
CAL if you read this forum, good on yer girl for remaining professional and not going down the Paul Harrison route. Another fine example of female supremacy. Girl power all the way CAL.
[ edited ]
