For alias and other Jeremy supporters arguing the following illogical claim

[Holly Goodhead]

Thank you Holly. I will only post if there is a question asked which I know the answer to. I don't want to get involved in arguments with others.  However I will say still no submissions to the CCRC despite Jeremy telling me 16 months ago "we have the last pieces of the jigsaw. I will soon be free"

I know what you mean by his ...'I'll soon be free'...Perhaps it's how he keeps himself sane whether he's innocent or guilty. 

[scipio_usmc]

What evidence established JB lied?

Only someone who ignores everything posted on this site would ask such a foolish question.

Jeremy lied claiming he received a call from a terrified Nevill who wanted him to come over right away because Sheila was going crazy and had a gun.  The evidence establishes that Nevill had no reason or ability to call Jeremy and that this was a lie.  The murderer entered the master bedroom and emptied the gun into the parents.  While Nevill's wounds didn't immobilize him they did prevent him from speaking. There was no opportunity to make a call.  Nor would there be any point of making a call to Jeremy if she did have a gun the need to disarm her would be immediate ot one of waiting for Jeremy to get dressed and come over.  Nevill was larger and stronger than Jeremy so why would he need Jeremy to fdo it?  If too scared to do it disarmed he coudl arm himself with any of the wide variety of available weapons including but not limited to firearms, a non-lethal airgun, knives and pokers. The evidence proves Sheila didin't load a gun, fire a gun, beat anyone and didn't kill herself.  Someone else did these things.  Why would Nevill call Jeremy with the lie that Sheila had the gun and was going crazy?  Obviously he lied about the call. His actions after allegedly receiving the call further demonstrate he hadn't received such a call. SOmeone receiving such a call would either call 999 or dress and rush over.  He did neither he called Julie before police and didn't even dial 999.  Julie said that before the murders he told her part of his plan was to pretend he received a phone call from WHF.  Collectiviely all of these things prove for sure he made up the claim he received a phone call from Nevill.

Jeremy lied claiming he immediately tried to call Nevill back but the phone was busy so then immediately called police.  Had he actually received the call claimed and the phone have been left off the hook then he would have to have waited a couple of minutes for the line to clear, He woudl have thought something was wrong with his phone.  Furthermore he called Julie before police.  He lied about calling police before Julie.

Jeremy lied by telling numerous police Sheila had fired all guns in the house and that he had trained her how to use the murder weapon.  When he filled out his written statement he totally backtracked and echoed the claims of his relatives admitting he had not known her to ever fire a weapon.

Jeremy lied to police telling them there was no spare key to the house though there was one hidden in the coal shed which even the gas man knew about.  He lied saying there was no way in the house though he knew how to get in through the windows and knew how to lock the kitchen window from the outside to make it appear the house was all locked up tight so no one could have gotten in or out.

Jeremy lied to police claiming he left the gun out and bullets out in the kitchen to make it appear there was a wepaon of opportunity for Sheila to come across. The evidence proves he mad eup the story about taking the gun out to shoot rabbits, leaving it out sans moderator and leaving the bullets by the phone. He left too many bullets revealing he staged the bullets after the murders.

Jeremy told the police his sister was a nutter not revealing she was currently being successfully treated.

Julie didn't tell police what she knew and tried to protect Jeremy.

All of these things helped to cause the police to have the initial impression Sheila did it.  Had he told the truth police would have had a different impression from the outset. Some saw problems anyway like the raid team felt she was too clean but they were not in charge of the investigation.   

Before Julie came forward and before the evidence was fully processed a new investigator was put in charge of the case.  There were concerns that Taff Jones was unwilling to keep an open mind to the possibility it was not a murder suicide and ignored any evidence that pointed in that direction.  The lab finally processed the evidence fully and Julie came forward with the truth when it was already in the hands of a new lead investigator. 

That is what happened.  To try claiming that because police initially believed she could have done it when they were unaware there was a way into and out of the house, unaware that Sheila can't have killed herself and didn't kill anyone else and unaware of Julie's claims- thus operating from a position of ignorance- proves she could have done it is ludicrous.  It proves no such thing all it proves is that the initial police impression was wrong nothing more. 

Jeremy supporters have no way to refute the evidence that Jeremy was planning these murders for a long time and evidence that he killed them then removed the moderator and put it away and lied about receiving a call from his father.  So Alias and other Jeremy supporters (she wants to pretend she isn't one though her posts betray her) assert that the subjective opinion of police early on when they not aware of all the facts amounts to evidence that Sheila could have done it. It is a ridiculous argument that makes no sense at all.



 

[Holly Goodhead]

Only someone who ignores everything posted on this site would ask such a foolish question.

Jeremy lied claiming he received a call from a terrified Nevill who wanted him to come over right away because Sheila was going crazy and had a gun.  The evidence establishes that Nevill had no reason or ability to call Jeremy and that this was a lie.  The murderer entered the master bedroom and emptied the gun into the parents.  While Nevill's wounds didn't immobilize him they did prevent him from speaking. There was no opportunity to make a call.  Nor would there be any point of making a call to Jeremy if she did have a gun the need to disarm her would be immediate ot one of waiting for Jeremy to get dressed and come over.  Nevill was larger and stronger than Jeremy so why would he need Jeremy to fdo it?  If too scared to do it disarmed he coudl arm himself with any of the wide variety of available weapons including but not limited to firearms, a non-lethal airgun, knives and pokers. The evidence proves Sheila didin't load a gun, fire a gun, beat anyone and didn't kill herself.  Someone else did these things.  Why would Nevill call Jeremy with the lie that Sheila had the gun and was going crazy?  Obviously he lied about the call. His actions after allegedly receiving the call further demonstrate he hadn't received such a call. SOmeone receiving such a call would either call 999 or dress and rush over.  He did neither he called Julie before police and didn't even dial 999.  Julie said that before the murders he told her part of his plan was to pretend he received a phone call from WHF.  Collectiviely all of these things prove for sure he made up the claim he received a phone call from Nevill.

Jeremy lied claiming he immediately tried to call Nevill back but the phone was busy so then immediately called police.  Had he actually received the call claimed and the phone have been left off the hook then he would have to have waited a couple of minutes for the line to clear, He woudl have thought something was wrong with his phone.  Furthermore he called Julie before police.  He lied about calling police before Julie.

Jeremy lied by telling numerous police Sheila had fired all guns in the house and that he had trained her how to use the murder weapon.  When he filled out his written statement he totally backtracked and echoed the claims of his relatives admitting he had not known her to ever fire a weapon.

Jeremy lied to police telling them there was no spare key to the house though there was one hidden in the coal shed which even the gas man knew about.  He lied saying there was no way in the house though he knew how to get in through the windows and knew how to lock the kitchen window from the outside to make it appear the house was all locked up tight so no one could have gotten in or out.

Jeremy lied to police claiming he left the gun out and bullets out in the kitchen to make it appear there was a wepaon of opportunity for Sheila to come across. The evidence proves he mad eup the story about taking the gun out to shoot rabbits, leaving it out sans moderator and leaving the bullets by the phone. He left too many bullets revealing he staged the bullets after the murders.

Jeremy told the police his sister was a nutter not revealing she was currently being successfully treated.

Julie didn't tell police what she knew and tried to protect Jeremy.

All of these things helped to cause the police to have the initial impression Sheila did it.  Had he told the truth police would have had a different impression from the outset. Some saw problems anyway like the raid team felt she was too clean but they were not in charge of the investigation.   

Before Julie came forward and before the evidence was fully processed a new investigator was put in charge of the case.  There were concerns that Taff Jones was unwilling to keep an open mind to the possibility it was not a murder suicide and ignored any evidence that pointed in that direction.  The lab finally processed the evidence fully and Julie came forward with the truth when it was already in the hands of a new lead investigator. 

That is what happened.  To try claiming that because police initially believed she could have done it when they were unaware there was a way into and out of the house, unaware that Sheila can't have killed herself and didn't kill anyone else and unaware of Julie's claims- thus operating from a position of ignorance- proves she could have done it is ludicrous.  It proves no such thing all it proves is that the initial police impression was wrong nothing more. 

Jeremy supporters have no way to refute the evidence that Jeremy was planning these murders for a long time and evidence that he killed them then removed the moderator and put it away and lied about receiving a call from his father.  So Alias and other Jeremy supporters (she wants to pretend she isn't one though her posts betray her) assert that the subjective opinion of police early on when they not aware of all the facts amounts to evidence that Sheila could have done it. It is a ridiculous argument that makes no sense at all.

Oh I thought you said there was evidence that established JB lied! 

[scipio_usmc]

Oh I thought you said there was evidence that established JB lied!

To someone with [ moderated ] that is what I posted. Claims proven false or mutually exclusive are lies.  To someone without one mutually exclusive claims cna both be true and impossible claims are not lies.

[Holly Goodhead]

Does anyone know if the two dissenters were female?   

Roger Wilkes makes ref to two female jurors weeping at the end of the trial, so I think the assumption is that they were the two capable of independent thought and returned verdicts of not guilty 

It doesn't surprise me as firstly females would know for sure that loading a magazine and firing a rifle 25 times would not necessarily result in any damage to fingernails.

Also they would observe from soc photos that SC did not suffer with "very poor coordination" as evidenced by her shaped eyebrows, manicured and polished nails, well groomed hair, hair free legs so must have removed hair in some way, fastened her watch strap.  These are all tasks requiring fine motor skills and would be impossible to carry out with "very poor coordination".

Females would then think along the lines ok we know the above is wrong so what else is wrong  &%+((£

Females might be less inclined to see JM as a reliable prosecution witness.

The jury was unfairly gender balanced 7 males : 5 females:

Verdict By Gender

7 Males          :  Guilty           58.33%
                        Not Guilty            0%

5 Females      :  Guilty           24.99%
                        Not Guilty     16.66%

The entire investigation and trial was male dominated:

- All EP male other than WPC Jeapes

- All staff at FSS male other than Glynnis Howard

- All expert witnesses male

- All members of defence, prosecution and trial judge male

- As far as I can see all media by way of journalists were male

A very unhealthy situation.  No doubt if JB's conviction is ever quashed we will have a deluge of males telling us (50% females) how and why it went wrong and what lessons will be learned; even though no females played any part other than WPC Jeapes and Glynnis Howard 

[scipio_usmc]

Roger Wilkes makes ref to two female jurors weeping at the end of the trial, so I think the assumption is that they were the two capable of independent thought and returned verdicts of not guilty 

It doesn't surprise me as firstly females would know for sure that loading a magazine and firing a rifle 25 times would not necessarily result in any damage to fingernails.

Also they would observe from soc photos that SC did not suffer with "very poor coordination" as evidenced by her shaped eyebrows, manicured and polished nails, well groomed hair, hair free legs so must have removed hair in some way, fastened her watch strap.  These are all tasks requiring fine motor skills and would be impossible to carry out with "very poor coordination".

Females would then think along the lines ok we know the above is wrong so what else is wrong  &%+((£

Females might be less inclined to see JM as a reliable prosecution witness.

The jury was unfairly gender balanced 7 males : 5 females:

Verdict By Gender

7 Males          :  Guilty           58.33%
                        Not Guilty            0%

5 Females      :  Guilty           24.99%
                        Not Guilty     16.66%

The entire investigation and trial was male dominated:

- All EP male other than WPC Jeapes

- All staff at FSS male other than Glynnis Howard

- All expert witnesses male

- All members of defence, prosecution and trial judge male

- As far as I can see all media by way of journalists were male

A very unhealthy situation.  No doubt if JB's conviction is ever quashed we will have a deluge of males telling us (50% females) how and why it went wrong and what lessons will be learned; even though no females played any part other than WPC Jeapes and Glynnis Howard 

All you are doing is insulting your own gender by ascribing your failings onto other women.  Your refusal to face that Jeremy did it makes you [ moderated ]

Rational people regardless of gender realize:

1) that she can't have shot herself then after dead go put the moderator away. 

2) That she would have broke her nails and gotten medium velocity spatter from Nevill on her clothing and body if she had been the one bashing Nevill with the rifle

3) That she would have broken the nail of her index finge rif she had pushed the trigger with said finger.

and the list goes on and on.

You seem to want all women to be emotional instead of using their heads. Fortunately most women are not like that or there would have been good cause for our forefathers denying women the right to vote, leadership positions etc.  The whole reason women are considered equals is because such concerns were unfounded yet that is apparently what you want to pretend is the case. 


 

[Holly Goodhead]

To someone with [ moderated ] that is what I posted. Claims proven false or mutually exclusive are lies.  To someone without one mutually exclusive claims cna both be true and impossible claims are not lies.

There's no evidence to prove JB lied re these aspects of the case.  They are open to interpretation.  And I am not going round the houses with you.

In any event EP were aware of the various aspects in your post, all of which were/are open to interpretation, well before JB was interviewed under caution on 10th September.  EP were unable to charge JB due to lack of evidence.  He was free. In fact so much so he was allowed to leave the country and returned of his own accord.  It was only after the silencer 'evidence' and JM's testimony were brought into the equation that EP were able to charge JB on 29th September.  The various aspects of your post, all of which were/are open to interpretation, were then used to construct a case around the silencer and JM's testimony.

Hear it from the horse's mouth:

 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6145.msg228175#msg228175

[Holly Goodhead]

All you are doing is insulting your own gender by ascribing your failings onto other women.  Your refusal to face that Jeremy did it makes you [ moderated ]

Rational people regardless of gender realize:

1) that she can't have shot herself then after dead go put the moderator away. 

2) That she would have broke her nails and gotten medium velocity spatter from Nevill on her clothing and body if she had been the one bashing Nevill with the rifle

3) That she would have broken the nail of her index finge rif she had pushed the trigger with said finger.

and the list goes on and on.

You seem to want all women to be emotional instead of using their heads. Fortunately most women are not like that or there would have been good cause for our forefathers denying women the right to vote, leadership positions etc.  The whole reaosn women are considered equals is because such concerns were unfounded yet that is apaprently what you want to pretend is the case.

All I am doing is highlighting what all the research shows ie that gender diversity leads to less group think which is widely accepted as one of the causes of the financial crisis 2008/09.  All you do is show yourself up as [ moderated ] with every post you make.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/how-lehman-siblings-might-have-stemmed-the-financial-crisis/

1)  I have never claimed SC used the silencer and returned it to the gun cupboard.  I don't believe the silencer left the gun cupboard on that fateful night.

2)  EP, Dr Craig and Dr Vanezis have never commented on the lack of medium and high velocity spatter.  And it  didn't form part of the prosecution' case.  Please provide some OFFICIAL documents referring to the lack of medium and high velocity spatter on SC.  I have no idea whether the injuries inflicted on the victims would result in spatter [ moderated ]     

3)  When Dr Vanezis was asked about the impact on SC's fingernails from loading and firing the rifle he said it was the province of ballistics.  As far as I am aware this wasn't followed up?  [ moderated ]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html

See Farm Girl's long polished nails loading and firing a rifle without causing any damage to her nails/polish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc @ 1.20 in

You prefer to rely on DB @ 6.20 in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo

[scipio_usmc]

There's no evidence to prove JB lied re these aspects of the case.  They are open to interpretation.  And I am not going round the houses with you.

In any event EP were aware of the various aspects in your post, all of which were/are open to interpretation, well before JB was interviewed under caution on 10th September.  EP were unable to charge JB due to lack of evidence.  He was free. In fact so much so he was allowed to leave the country and returned of his own accord.  It was only after the silencer 'evidence' and JM's testimony were brought into the equation that EP were able to charge JB on 29th September.  The various aspects of your post, all of which were/are open to interpretation, were then used to construct a case around the silencer and JM's testimony.

Hear it from the horse's mouth:

 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6145.msg228175#msg228175

There is no dispute that Julie's testimony and the drawback evidence is the strongest.  That doesn't mean the other evidence is meaningless.  You though choose to ignore the moderator everidence, Julie's evidence and all other evidence.  Your efforts to refute some of such evidence failed miserably and you simply choose not to accept it though you can't refute it. 

Your illogical claims never cease helnce trying to salvage the pathetic point Alias and other defenders make which is the bogus claim that subjective opinions of police investigators mean a thing when evaluating evidence of guilt.  The fac tpolice were fooled has no ability at all to establish Sheila could have done it.  At most it can establish they were fooled nothing more.  Those Jeremy supporters who have zilch to hang their hat on try hanging it on any desperate claim they can think up including this one.  If the facts were on the side of Jeremy supporters then it would not be necessary to cling to such depseration and the facts instead would be discussed like Knox defenders do. 

You are so biased you are trying to pretend that it is reasonably likely that a dozen police including people who didn't routinely work together all made up the claim that Jeremy Jeremy said Sheila had fired all the weapons in the house and that he had taught her how to use the Anschutz.  You ignroe reality and just pretend anything you desire- a perfect example is how you constantly ignore what your own sources state and pretend they say something different than they do including pretending they say backspatter always has tissue beyond blood. 

The evidence that Jeremy called Julie before police is quite strong but again you just ignore it and say he didn't lie.  You just make up excuse after excuse to defend someone obviously guilty for no rational reason.  In some cases alleged to be MOJs there is evidence to establish innocence and that is why people believe in the innocence of such people. Cases like this though are driven by lies and nonsense.  Lies about Sheila being killed in other rooms, being killed by police, lies about Nevill phoning police, lies about multiple moderators being doctored, the list goes on and on.  These lies are told because there is no legitimate claims to actually make.

This happens with case after case it is hardly unique to th eBamber case.  Indeed a number of people on the Bamber forum were insisting the convicted murderer of Sarah Cherry, Dechaine, was framed.  Dechaine supporters allege:  someone decided to rape and kill Cherry and to frame Dechaine for it.  This person followed his truck around and then when Dechaine walked away ran to his truck and took rope, papers with Dechain's name, a scarf and bandana.  The person left the papers in the driveway of the house they kidnapped Cherry from in order to implicate Dechaine and used the rope to tie her hands up, the bandana as a gag and strangled her with the scarf. The person either drove around looking for Dechaine's truck to bury the body near and was clairvoyant and knew police would catch Dechaine walking out of the woods before he could move his truck or alternatively waited till after police found his truck and somehow knew where police had found his truck and decided to go bury the body near that location and somehow was able to avoid all the police in the area searching for her and right under their noses buried the body.

Some people who want to believe a convict is innocent will make up anything no matter how ridiculous.  They close their eyes to logic and make up excuse after excuse to try to pretend evidence doesn't mean something. It happens in case after case.

Real MOJs don't need to have anything made up because there is actual evidence to rely upon in contrast and logical arguments to be made.

[scipio_usmc]

All I am doing is highlighting what all the research shows ie that gender diversity leads to less group think which is widely accepted as one of the causes of the financial crisis 2008/09.  All you do is show yourself up as a [ moderated ] with every post you make.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/how-lehman-siblings-might-have-stemmed-the-financial-crisis/

1)  I have never claimed SC used the silencer and returned it to the gun cupboard.  I don't believe the silencer left the gun cupboard on that fateful night.

The defense argued at trial it was used on all victims except Sheila then put away before she killed herself. On appeal they tried the same thing.

Your opinion it sat in the closet and was never used is not based on anything except your own desire to believe Jeremy is innocent.  You have failed to come up with a shred of evidence to suggest the blood was planted and blood that blood had been found in the rifle muzzle but this was concealed.  You don't follow the evidence you choose to ignore it.

2)  EP, Dr Craig and Dr Vanezis have never commented on the lack of medium and high velocity spatter.  And it  didn't form part of the prosecution' case.  Please provide some OFFICIAL documents referring to the lack of medium and high velocity spatter on SC.  I have no idea whether the injuries inflicted on the victims would result in spatter [ moderated ]

Yes they did- they commented that the only blood found on her gown was her own. The tesimony at trial was that it would be expected that she would have blood of the citims on her had she done the killings.  Even if they had failed to note such it is a consideration known to science today so something that can and should be considered by US in assessing the issue of guilt.  At any rate, why do you think the defense came up with their stupid ritualistic cleaning claims?  It wasn't for their health it was to try to explain away the lack of any victim blood on her and lack of GSR.  The court of appeals didn't summarize this for no reason:   "Mrs Caffell's nightdress was bloodstained. When tested the blood was consistent with being her own blood." The reaosn to mention no victim blood was found was because the lack of it was evidence to support that she didn't beat oor kill anyone.   

3)  When Dr Vanezis was asked about the impact on SC's fingernails from loading and firing the rifle he said it was the province of ballistics.  As far as I am aware this wasn't followed up?  [ moderated ]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18124332.600-fingernails-have-the-strength-of-hooves.html

See Farm Girl's long polished nails loading and firing a rifle without causing any damage to her nails/polish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdAI9j_lDbc @ 1.20 in

You prefer to rely on DB @ 6.20 in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo

The only incoherent ramblings are from you.  You know that bashing someone with a rifle would have damaged her nails so ignore it.  You are the one who asked what they were claiming with respect to the nails and trigger and were informed that the only way for her to activate the trigger was by pushing it like pushing the button of a telephone and thus her nail would have struck the trigger instead of her finger tip. You ignroe such things because you don't want to face Jeremy did it and want to pretend he is innocent.  Ignoring evidence makes you wrong and sad, not right. 

[Holly Goodhead]

There is no dispute that Julie's testimony and the drawback evidence is the strongest.  That doesn't mean the other evidence is meaningless.  You though choose to ignore the moderator everidence, Julie's evidence and all other evidence.  Your efforts to refute some of such evidence failed miserably and you simply choose not to accept it though you can't refute it. 

Your illogical claims never cease helnce trying to salvage the pathetic point Alias and other defenders make which is the bogus claim that subjective opinions of police investigators mean a thing when evaluating evidence of guilt.  The fac tpolice were fooled has no ability at all to establish Sheila could have done it.  At most it can establish they were fooled nothing more.  Those Jeremy supporters who have zilch to hang their hat on try hanging it on any desperate claim they can think up including this one.  If the facts were on the side of Jeremy supporters then it would not be necessary to cling to such depseration and the facts instead would be discussed like Knox defenders do. 

You are so biased you are trying to pretend that it is reasonably likely that a dozen police including people who didn't routinely work together all made up the claim that Jeremy Jeremy said Sheila had fired all the weapons in the house and that he had taught her how to use the Anschutz.  You ignroe reality and just pretend anything you desire- a perfect example is how you constantly ignore what your own sources state and pretend they say something different than they do including pretending they say backspatter always has tissue beyond blood. 

The evidence that Jeremy called Julie before police is quite strong but again you just ignore it and say he didn't lie.  You just make up excuse after excuse to defend someone obviously guilty for no rational reason.  In some cases alleged to be MOJs there is evidence to establish innocence and that is why people believe in the innocence of such people. Cases like this though are driven by lies and nonsense.  Lies about Sheila being killed in other rooms, being killed by police, lies about Nevill phoning police, lies about multiple moderators being doctored, the list goes on and on.  These lies are told because there is no legitimate claims to actually make.

This happens with case after case it is hardly unique to th eBamber case.  Indeed a number of people on the Bamber forum were insisting the convicted murderer of Sarah Cherry, Dechaine, was framed.  Dechaine supporters allege:  someone decided to rape and kill Cherry and to frame Dechaine for it.  This person followed his truck around and then when Dechaine walked away ran to his truck and took rope, papers with Dechain's name, a scarf and bandana.  The person left the papers in the driveway of the house they kidnapped Cherry from in order to implicate Dechaine and used the rope to tie her hands up, the bandana as a gag and strangled her with the scarf. The person either drove around looking for Dechaine's truck to bury the body near and was clairvoyant and knew police would catch Dechaine walking out of the woods before he could move his truck or alternatively waited till after police found his truck and somehow knew where police had found his truck and decided to go bury the body near that location and somehow was able to avoid all the police in the area searching for her and right under their noses buried the body.

Some people who want to believe a convict is innocent will make up anything no matter how ridiculous.  They close their eyes to logic and make up excuse after excuse to try to pretend evidence doesn't mean something. It happens in case after case.

Real MOJs don't need to have anything made up because there is actual evidence to rely upon in contrast and logical arguments to be made.

How can you talk about logic and make the statement highlighted above? 

The following high profile long running MoJ's, where the convictions have since been quashed, are no different to JB's and include the following features:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3394.msg129016#msg129016

- Police wrongdoing

- Fabrication of evidence

- Unsafe evidence form expert witnesses

- Unreliable prosecution witnesses

- Judge misdirection and/or bias

 

[scipio_usmc]

How can you talk about logic and make the statement highlighted above? 

The following high profile long running MoJ's, where the convictions have since been quashed, are no different to JB's and include the following features:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3394.msg129016#msg129016

- Police wrongdoing

- Fabrication of evidence

- Unsafe evidence form expert witnesses

- Unreliable prosecution witnesses

- Judge misdirection and/or bias

The lack of logic is yours.  The way other MOJs were established is with evidence.  That is totally absent here.  No evidence of police securing false confessions, no evidence of police lying...

In MOJ's where police lied and that was the basis of the convictions being vacated there was evidence.  You keep ignoring that there is none here.

In the meantime what MOJ featured a lab faking evidence? The Bamber case features the allegation that the police all lied repeatedly, that the family lied, that Julie lies and that police, the family and lab all acted in concert to lie fake the moderator evidence. The most wideranging conspiracy in the history of the UK is alleged and yet zero evidence to establish Julie lied, police lied, that ank evidence was faked- you and other Jeremy supporters choose to believe it happened just because you want to believe it not because there is a shred of evidence.

Logic suggests that since evidence was found in cases where far less happened than alleged to have happened here that you could come up with evidence if your claims were actually true.

Your claims are not only illogical and lacking in any evidentiary support, time after time you ignore the evidence including what your own sources state all to pretend your irraitonal claims could be true. You want to pretend that drawback can't get in a moderator though if that had been true then the defense would have found an expert to state such.  It is documented drawback occurs with moderators.  Instead of a detailed inquiry of the lcoation of the wound you want to pretend backspatter only happens with head wounds.  This is intentioanl twisting on your part to try to find a way to pretend the moderator evidence was plante dbecause you have no evidence to establish it was planted.

You have no evidence to establish any of your claims and even ridiculously suggest you can better evaluate Sheial's mental problems than the doctor who spoke to her and treated her. 

The bottom line is that real MOJs have evidence to establish such whereas alleged MOJs that have no evidence to estbalish an MOJ occurred are bogus like the Bamber case.   

 

[Holly Goodhead]

While I'm on a roll...

http://vk.com/videos4894493?z=video4894493_143102559
Never realised you were so good-looking!  Ditch the psi (pounds per square inch) and we'll get on fine. 

I thought only Northerners were numpties?  &%+((£

I bet Susie Wolff could give you the ride of your life!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErvwBZrPx0

Hows about then the kinetic energy of the Eley subsonic hollow point bullets when expelled from the muzzle of the Anshutz .22 rifle/Parker Hale silencer instead of the reduction of pound force per square inch by using the silencer?  Its not looking good for draw-back    Certainly not as far back as the 8th baffle or even the 5th baffle.

JB has spent enough time in the North at Full Sutton, York, plus Mike's influence, to become a Northern Numpty.  Hope Andrea doesn't read this 

[scipio_usmc]

I bet Susie Wolff could give you the ride of your life!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErvwBZrPx0

Hows about then the kinetic energy of the Eley subsonic hollow point bullets when expelled from the muzzle of the Anshutz .22 rifle/Parker Hale silencer instead of the reduction of pound force per square inch by using the silencer?  Its not looking good for draw-back    Certainly not as far back as the 8th baffle or even the 5th baffle.

JB has spent enough time in the North at Full Sutton, York, plus Mike's influence, to become a Northern Numpty.  Hope Andrea doesn't read this 

All you keep doing is saying that you choose to believe that drawback can't get inside a moderator or can't get a few inches inside. You can't find any experts that assert this though you just made it up yourself.  Though all sources say one has to take a look at the area where the wound occurred and the conditions of the skin and availability of blood in that area you refuse to do so. You refuse to do so because such a look reveals her neck was full of blood and the conditions ideal for back spatter.

Courts and rational objective people don't care about your biased opinion.  Courts and rational objective people care about evidence.

The irrefutable evidence is that drawback has been found in moderators and your claims to the contrary are false.  Thus neither at trial nor on appeal has the defense attempted to argue to the courts that drawback can't occur with moderators attached to a weapon.

The irrefutable evidence is that 3 different things combine to cause drawback getting into a weapon during a contact wound- temporary cavity, the effect of the gases and tailsplash. 

The irrefutable evidence is that the volume of blood available for drawback/backspatter is significantly more when there is a previous nearby wound that caused bleeding.

The irrefutable evidence is that the first wound filled her neck with blood.

The testimony at trial that drawback would be virtually certain to occur form a shot to the area of the fatal shot under all the conditions described was neither challenged at trial nor on appeal by any experts.   

Your claims are just unsupported claims you mad eup nothing more and your mad eup claims don't deal with either leg of the prosecution's argument.

The prosecution's argument was two-fold:

1) Had the moderator not been attached blood would have gotten inside the muzzle of the rifle.  You have not dealt with this at all. Your arguments about reduced gas pressure do not apply with the moderator unattached. You have no way at all to refute the argument that the rifle san's moderator would have resulted in drawback getting inside the rifle. 

2) The fact blood got inside the moderator proves it was used in the murders- the distribution of the blood was consistent with drawback- atomized particles projected inside at all different angles thus manageng to strike 8 baffles. Blood can only get more than 5mm inside when a wound is a contact wound. Sheila's fatal wound was a contact wound while her non-fatal wound wasn't so that proves the drawback was from the fatal wound.  So her fatal wound was fired with the moderator attached. 

Either of the above is sufficient to establish the the moderator was used but combined it is even more powerful.

Evidence that drawback happens less frequently with moderators would not help dent either of the above points in fact it makes the first point even stronger. In this case blood did get in the moderator despite the gas pressure reduction so without the moderator even more blood would have gotten inside and it definitely would have gotten inside. That is the import of the things you keep claiming.

So congrats you helped the prosecution's case instead of hurting it.

The distance the blood was found inside was not too far for backspatter to travel.  The volume of blood was small but significant.  Had the blood been planted then blood would have been inside the rifle muzzle. 

The only way to prove the blood was planted it through evidence establishing who planted what blood when and who concealed the finding of blood in the moderator.  Saying you choose to believe it was planted doesn't prove squat, it is not evidence.

No one who asserts the moderator evidence was faked has any such evidence.  They simply decide they want to believe it was planted and that is the end of it.  In the real world that amounts to nothing and fails to refute it. You have bare suspicion it was planted and nothing more. Suspicion doesn't mean anything to to rational objective people decided what to accept as fact and thus means nothing at all to the courts.

 

       

[Myster]

Confess Jeremy pleeease!... before even I lose the will to live refereeing this endless virtual boxing mismatch. 

When you're next on the canvas for the umpteenth time Holly, I'll stop the show and send you back to the blue corner* permanently.