Author Topic: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?  (Read 487348 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #225 on: April 25, 2018, 02:30:57 PM »
What is the biggest piece of released & accepted evidence that makes you believe Bamber is innocent ?

Supporters spend most of their time disputing the evidence that makes him guilty.

I'm not really sure what you mean by released and accepted?  Released and accepted by whom? 

I believe JB innocent based on my own research.  If I just sat around reading/listening to other 'supporters' I would probably think him guilty! 

I believe I have 10 rock solid points for a successful appeal.  Afaik these points originate from my research.  This excludes:

-  The claim JM signed NOTW deal pre trial/verdict.
-  Criticism of trial/appeal lawyers
-  Criticism of FSS particularly Fletcher and Elliot

I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit. 



Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Angelo222

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #226 on: April 25, 2018, 02:48:30 PM »
I'm not really sure what you mean by released and accepted?  Released and accepted by whom? 

I believe JB innocent based on my own research.  If I just sat around reading/listening to other 'supporters' I would probably think him guilty! 

I believe I have 10 rock solid points for a successful appeal.  Afaik these points originate from my research.  This excludes:

-  The claim JM signed NOTW deal pre trial/verdict.
-  Criticism of trial/appeal lawyers
-  Criticism of FSS particularly Fletcher and Elliot

I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit.

I'll say one thing for you Holly, you don't give up easily but I think you are flogging a dead horse.  Even if you discard everything we know about the assaults on Neville and Sheila, the testimony by Julie Mugford is damning.  Bamber wanted to kill his parents and then they are discovered dead along with everyone else who would have benefitted from their estate.  Can you not see that for yourself.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 02:53:15 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline adam

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #227 on: April 25, 2018, 02:52:29 PM »
I'm not really sure what you mean by released and accepted?  Released and accepted by whom? 

I believe JB innocent based on my own research.  If I just sat around reading/listening to other 'supporters' I would probably think him guilty! 

I believe I have 10 rock solid points for a successful appeal.  Afaik these points originate from my research.  This excludes:

-  The claim JM signed NOTW deal pre trial/verdict.
-  Criticism of trial/appeal lawyers
-  Criticism of FSS particularly Fletcher and Elliot

I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit.

Released and accepted is June was shot 7 times.

Released and not accepted is Nevill called Essex Police.

Julie signing NOTW deal pre trial/verdict does not make Bamber innocent.

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #228 on: April 25, 2018, 03:34:06 PM »
I'm still waiting for Holly to reply to my various posts including those regarding Kerry Daynes.

Holly may be interested to learn I am in the process of emailing Michael Spurr.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #229 on: April 25, 2018, 04:16:47 PM »
Released and accepted is June was shot 7 times.

I think it's more likely June sustained 8 gsw's whereby 1 was a graze only wound independent of the other 7 and accounts for spent bullet DRH/5.  This also accounts for the 12 casings found in the main bedroom and landing excl. the 2 that pertain to SC.  At trial Fletcher agreed with Lawson this was the case through a process of elimination.

Released and not accepted is Nevill called Essex Police.

I don't think there's any evidence NB called EP.

Julie signing NOTW deal pre trial/verdict does not make Bamber innocent.

No it doesn't but it does undermine her testimony. 

My 10 points don't necessarily make JB innocent.  But it's not about innocence is it?  At trial it's 'not guilty' or 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt'.  At appeal it's about finding 'fresh evidence' which had jurors heard at trial may have caused them to return a different verdict rendering the conviction unsafe.

   
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #230 on: April 25, 2018, 04:18:06 PM »
I'm not really sure what you mean by released and accepted?  Released and accepted by whom? 

I believe JB innocent based on my own research.  If I just sat around reading/listening to other 'supporters' I would probably think him guilty! 

I believe I have 10 rock solid points for a successful appeal.  Afaik these points originate from my research.  This excludes:

-  The claim JM signed NOTW deal pre trial/verdict.
-  Criticism of trial/appeal lawyers
-  Criticism of FSS particularly Fletcher and Elliot

I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit.

 @)(++(*

Surely Holly even you can see how daft this sounds?
« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 04:20:37 PM by Stephanie »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #231 on: April 25, 2018, 04:19:55 PM »
I think it's more likely June sustained 8 gsw's whereby 1 was a graze only wound independent of the other 7 and accounts for spent bullet DRH/5.  This also accounts for the 12 casings found in the main bedroom and landing excl. the 2 that pertain to SC.  At trial Fletcher agreed with Lawson this was the case through a process of elimination.

I don't think there's any evidence NB called EP.

No it doesn't but it does undermine her testimony

My 10 points don't necessarily make JB innocent.  But it's not about innocence is it?  At trial it's 'not guilty' or 'guilty beyond reasonable doubt'.  At appeal it's about finding 'fresh evidence' which had jurors heard at trial may have caused them to return a different verdict rendering the conviction unsafe.

   

No it doesn't! I get the sense you have once again been taken in by others and/or you are deluded

I follow the evidence Holly, no more no less

« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 04:23:04 PM by Stephanie »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #232 on: April 25, 2018, 04:24:34 PM »
I'm still waiting for Holly to reply to my various posts including those regarding Kerry Daynes.

Holly may be interested to learn I am in the process of emailing Michael Spurr.

I'll be spending less time posting due to taking things forward in the real world.

KD is an irrelevance in the grand scheme of things. 

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/psychopathy
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #233 on: April 25, 2018, 04:25:02 PM »
I'm about to write to JB outlining my proposals to take things forward which will be on my terms not his/CT's/any lawyer(s) he may have working for him currently/or any other person(s).  He can take it or leave it as he sees fit.

As you know Holly, Bamber will jump at any opportunity presented to him as he has no options left available to him.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #234 on: April 25, 2018, 04:35:53 PM »
No it doesn't! I get the sense you have once again been taken in by others and/or you are deluded

I follow the evidence Holly, no more no less

Stephanie why do you have to resort to insults when anyone disagrees with you?   Why can't you just say I disagree and here's why instead of resorting to 'I've been taken in' and 'I'm deluded'?  If you're unable to exchange posts with me on a civil basis I will simply stop responding. 

Read the CoA doc and the judge's comments and I think you will find if it can be proved JM signed her deal with NOTW before the end of the trial her evidence will be ruled inadmissible.  It doesn't bother me one iota either way. It's not neccessary for a successful appeal.

Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #235 on: April 25, 2018, 04:36:54 PM »
I'll be spending less time posting due to taking things forward in the real world.

KD is an irrelevance in the grand scheme of things. 

http://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/psychopathy


You'll be pleased to hear Holly I shall be addressing this point in my email to Michael Spurr



"Psychopathy?
The recent TV programme on Sky three contained testimony by Ms Kerry Daynes, a psychologist, who misled the viewers into thinking that she had met Jeremy Bamber, had read reports on him, or carried out a diagnosis. She said that he 'showed all the traits of a psychopath'. This is not the case and Ms Daynes’ testimony is incorrect and her remarks are pure fallacy. To read more on Jeremy's psychologist reports click here

This programme made assumptions based on prejudicial witness accounts. Jeremy had homosexual friends, as you or I would today, except that in 1985 if you mixed with 'gay' people you clearly were one. By using Kerry Daynes misleading account of Jeremy ‘wanting to attract attention and this being a trait of a psychopath’, Sky have tricked the audience into believing that this was NOT an attack on Jeremy's sexuality but merely a reflection of psychopathic behaviour. Their argument is not valid, there is no psychopathy, therefore, the implied sexual behaviour of Jeremy was merely normal, and certainly so by today's standards.

As Jeremy said, Kerry Daynes is not a member of the Healthcare Professions Council or the British Psychological Society, nor has she answered letters sent to her business address. Why did Kerry Daynes not state clearly that she had not examined Jeremy Bamber and why did Ofcom not take into account psychological reports that Jeremy was not a psychopath? Their argument appears to be based on this appalling and misleading 'guesswork'. The ruling not only breeds hatred of minority groups but makes a mockery of equality expected within the broadcasting standards of the 21st century. Jeremy's sexuality had no bearing on his conviction and is therefore not in the public interest and never was.

If you would like to air your views on the TV Programme 'Killing Mum and Dad' which was aired on Tuesday 14th September 2010 at 9pm (and also on subsequent days) please contact: Viewer Relations, Sky Services Ltd, PO Box 43, Livingston, West Lothian, EH54 7DD.

You might also want to complain to Ofcom the TV regulator about the programme's misleading content and their subsequent prejudicial ruling. Yesterday's ruling on the programme by Ofcom can be read here (page 43 onwards). Clearly, Ofcom and Sky are suggesting that it is acceptable to ridicule the sexuality of someone, along with their gender. The content of the programme was not reflective of Jeremy Bamber's conviction. The programme presented witnesses whose accounts showed prejudice and it is these foundations upon which the judgments have been made.

Jeremy says:

“As a high profile case, a category ‘A’ prisoner, and a whole life tariff prisoner I have undergone a number of psychological assessments by twenty seven different psychologists. Each carried out numerous tests on me and some interviewed me for twenty hours or more over many weeks.

The most recent assessment of me was carried out in 2009 by Professor Vincent Egan a Chartered Clinical psychologist and senior lecturer in forensic psychology at Leicester University. He was provided with my complete psychological file and all my medical records. He also interviewed me, and I completed various psychological tests before he wrote his report on me.

His conclusion is that I am not a psychopath. During the last quarter of a century and twenty seven different psychologists, not a single one of these experts has concluded that I show any traits consistent with psychopathy.

On the ‘Hare’ psychopathy test it was concluded that 95% of the population show more psychopathic traits than I do. I have also had 3 P.C.L.R tests that are designed specifically to reveal psychopathy and all 3 concluded the same, I am not a psychopath. Nor do I have any personality disorder.

Interestingly, I have just received a letter from the British Psychological Society. MS Kerry Daynes is no longer a member of the society and they have suggested that I should complain to the health professions council, curiously, they confirm she is not registered with them either. Mail sent to her address is returned as 'gone away'.”

Remember that prisoners, particularly those convicted of murder, are very easy targets to make up lies about. Jeremy needs people on the outside to make a stand for him.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #236 on: April 25, 2018, 04:42:37 PM »
Stephanie why do you have to resort to insults when anyone disagrees with you?   Why can't you just say I disagree and here's why instead of resorting to 'I've been taken in' and 'I'm deluded'?  If you're unable to exchange posts with me on a civil basis I will simply stop responding. 

Read the CoA doc and the judge's comments and I think you will find if it can be proved JM signed her deal with NOTW before the end of the trial her evidence will be ruled inadmissible.  It doesn't bother me one iota either way. It's not neccessary for a successful appeal.

I take it when you refer to "anyone" you are referring to yourself?
« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 05:52:29 PM by Angelo222 »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #237 on: April 25, 2018, 04:44:31 PM »
As you know Holly, Bamber will jump at any opportunity presented to him as he has no options left available to him.

I disagree.  I think he's very much dictated to by the CT specifically Sarah Hanover who I think is very controlling and alienates a lot of sensible people who are actually able to contribute something worthwhile.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #238 on: April 25, 2018, 04:59:45 PM »
@)(++(*

Surely Holly even you can see how daft this sounds?

The proof will be in the pudding. 

Forensics are looking good though.
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline Nicholas

Re: The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?
« Reply #239 on: April 25, 2018, 05:00:05 PM »
I disagree.  I think he's very much dictated to by the CT specifically Sarah Hanover who I think is very controlling and alienates a lot of sensible people who are actually able to contribute something worthwhile.

How can Sarah Hanover or any other supporter for that matter alienate Jeremy Bamber?

Please provide evidence for your assertions
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation