The Jeremy Supporters : Help, Hindrance or Harmful?

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Bamber’s control over his ‘targets’ is self evident

Robert Greene is a brilliant author, and is amazingly accurate in reading the mind.


This excerpt here is fitting for JB, especially as he runs his group of recruits mainly online...he explains how they control people and gives an insight into what type of people are drawn to psychopaths.


“Psychopaths are also expertly skilled at surrounding themselves with givers—insecure people who find self-worth in taking care of others. This is why your giving seems so insignificant and replaceable during the relationship. They adore qualities in others who are nothing like you—sometimes even the exact opposite of you. The message is simple: you are no longer special. You are replaceable. If you don’t give them the worshipping they deserve, they’ll always have other sources. And even if you do give them positive energy, they’ll get bored of you eventually. They don’t need you. Their current round of fans will always spoil and admire them, making you believe that they truly must be a great person. But take a careful look around. You’ll notice that they all seem to have an unspoken misery about them.”

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Then why has Bamber changed his timings? A few years ago Jeremy was adamant that he called the police at 03:26, accusing West of altering the log from 03:26 to 03:36. I have the document that the CT formulated detaining how they believed West perjured himself over the logs. In their argument, EP were supposed to have changed the times to make it look as though Bamber had called Julie first and he was adamant he called police around 03:20 (at that point). Now he and they are arguing the that Bamber did indeed call West at 03:36 in order to bluff a call from Nevill. The CCRC aren't stupid!

Do they realise how stupid they all are?

I’ve always believed JB is a tad thick anyway, or maybe it’s just his arrogance that prevents him from realising normal people can see through his lies.

How can they possibly think the CCRC would take this madness seriously?

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Exactly but now he is arguing that he called at 03:36. After he found out I had changed my mind about his innocence, he wrote to me asking why. One of the reasons was his changing of the timings - when I mentioned this to him, he wrote back saying he hadn't changed them at all (I guess he thinks we are idiots and can't read or that he is so clever, we might not notice  ) - he followed the denial by telling me he had new logs, not the ones on the internet. I guess he forgot that he had previously sent me copies of the logs he had - they were the same as those on the internet 

Did you find him thick, Caroline?

[ISpyWithMyEye]

Good grief. 

He is just like a child caught with an empty cookie jar, he thinks because no one saw him actually eat the cookies he can just deny it and still have pudding!

The first item of evidence they are demanding on their pointless petition is the recordings of the "two" phone calls so voice analysis can prove JB didn't make them both! - They cannot be serious?

He phoned the local police station — he knows the calls aren’t recorded.

He’s doing this to suggest he can prove he AND Nevill phoned police too, when he knows full well no recordings exist.

When EP say they haven’t got recordings, his CT will say they’re withholding evidence

No wonder the courts can’t stand hearing his latest demands...

[Nicholas]

”Last Resorts: Decisions and Discretion at the Criminal Cases Review Commission”
https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/content/last-resorts-decisions-and-discretion-criminal-cases-review-commission

Excerpts:
”Thursday 2 November marked the CCRC’s celebration of twenty years of investigations and referrals back to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division at their 20th Anniversary Conference in London. The audience represented the range of stakeholders concerned with tackling miscarriages of justice: appeal lawyers, CCRC commissioners, members of parliament, forensic scientists, charity workers, investigative journalists, academics, and a handful of victims of wrongful conviction, including two who participated in panel discussions - Michael O’Brien and John Kamara.

”Commissioners too were keen to express their frustrations, agreeing that police misconduct and failure to disclose exculpatory evidence are two of the most common points raised by their applicants. Forensic experts concurred with the CCRC and others that such cases are likely to increase in number and severity as agencies struggle to manage the vast data sources made possible by mobile and satellite communications and other devices that takes considerable resources to search, making accidental and incompetent non-disclosure more likely.

“What is causing this declining rate was of interest to most in the audience, but Commissioners seemed unable to account for it. On the one hand, the Chair suggested that austerity could be a cause: a representative from the Ministry of Justice spoke about underfunding of criminal justice and cuts that might be affecting the quality of applications to the CCRC, with fewer applicants being legally represented due to restrictions on Legal Aid (this is currently being researched by the University of Sussex). In light of Hodgson and Horne’s research, which found that CCRC applications with legal representation were more likely to be successfully referred than those who weren’t, this is cause for concern.

“So where to from here? Many raised the need for more thorough research into contemporary threats to fair and equal justice, including a thematic review of miscarriages of justice cases.David Rose proposed a very sensible suggestion of making full trial and appeal transcriptions freely available to appellants and legal representatives in order to increase the chances of discovering flaws in the prosecution case and producing more robust applications to the CCRC. In turn, the CCRC proposed a new initiative to increase transparency in the form of a user group forum of interested stakeholders to share information as well as frustrations.

[ISpyWithMyEye]

He has living relatives, not that I think any of them support him!

Do you mean the Eatons?

Or Nevill’s nice and nephew?

I’d say they don’t give him a second’s thought...

[Caroline]

Do you mean the Eatons?

Or Nevill’s nice and nephew?

I’d say they don’t give him a second’s thought...

Except when he keeps popping up in the news or the CT perform another. ridiculous publicity stunt.

[Nicholas]

We'll have to see but hopefully, the non-disclosure issue will be sorted out once and for all.

Maybe overturning Bamber’s murder convictions on a technicality - where another guilty man goes free - will put a stop to 10 innocent men going to jail?

[Nicholas]

He told me years ago that he had 'almost' all of the withheld stuff, he told CAL that he had all of it. You can go on forever saying evidence if withheld and people will believe it.

Almost all isn’t the same as ALL

Bamber wants it ALL

[Nicholas]

Robert Greene is a brilliant author, and is amazingly accurate in reading the mind.


This excerpt here is fitting for JB, especially as he runs his group of recruits mainly online...he explains how they control people and gives an insight into what type of people are drawn to psychopaths.


“Psychopaths are also expertly skilled at surrounding themselves with givers—insecure people who find self-worth in taking care of others. This is why your giving seems so insignificant and replaceable during the relationship. They adore qualities in others who are nothing like you—sometimes even the exact opposite of you. The message is simple: you are no longer special. You are replaceable. If you don’t give them the worshipping they deserve, they’ll always have other sources. And even if you do give them positive energy, they’ll get bored of you eventually. They don’t need you. Their current round of fans will always spoil and admire them, making you believe that they truly must be a great person. But take a careful look around. You’ll notice that they all seem to have an unspoken misery about them.”

Robert Greene wrote this you say?

Can you post a link 

[Nicholas]

Except when he keeps popping up in the news or the CT perform another. ridiculous publicity stunt.

Was this another ‘ridiculous publicly stunt’ ?

In an article published today on The Justice Gap “Not Innocent Enough to be Compensated?”, Mark Newby and Matthew Stanbury write:

“Current and future claimants will likely find that their prospects of success are not improved in any substantial way by this decision; however they will at least now be able to have some confidence that the secretary of state will be required to respect judicial rulings on the state of the evidence, and to have proper regard to the rules of evidence that applied in the original and any subsequent trial. They should at the very least know that if the Secretary of State does seek to go behind such rulings, he must give reasons for doing so, that may be amenable to judicial review, and that he should only make such a departure in exceptional circumstances.”

“Overall, they remain faced with a system in which the successive secretaries of state have demonstrated themselves only too willing to find ways to avoid paying out compensation no matter how hard the search for reasons to do so.”

https://gcnchambers.co.uk/miscarriage-compensation-test-case-succeeds-as-other-claimants-fail/

”The Court of Appeal needs to acknowledge miscarriages of justice – and ensure that they don’t occur in the future”
(2018)
https://www.thejusticegap.com/the-court-of-appeal-needs-to-acknowledge-miscarriages-of-justice-and-ensure-that-they-dont-occur-in-the-future/

Ian Lawless had his murder conviction overturned on a technicality thanks to Mark Newby

Apparently,

“Mr Lawless successfully appealed his conviction for murder in 2009 based on the fact that the only evidence against him was his own false confessions given due to mental health problems he had at the time.

I’ve no idea if Ian Lawless was monitored under MAPPA like Barry George was after being acquitted of murdering Jill Dando but after the CoA deemed his murder conviction ‘unsafe’ he went on to be ‘banned from every football ground in the country after an incident at Barnet.
https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/grimsby-town-fan-who-cleared-1187985

Imagine the carnage someone like Bamber could cause if he were to over turn his murder convictions ?

[Nicholas]

“Overall, they remain faced with a system in which the successive secretaries of state have demonstrated themselves only too willing to find ways to avoid paying out compensation no matter how hard the search for reasons to do so.”

https://gcnchambers.co.uk/miscarriage-compensation-test-case-succeeds-as-other-claimants-fail/

Have the ‘successive Secretaries of State’ recognised innocence fraud and is this why compensation hasn’t been paid out in some cases? I believe so.

Ian Lawless had his murder conviction overturned on a technicality thanks to Mark Newby

Apparently,

“Mr Lawless successfully appealed his conviction for murder in 2009 based on the fact that the only evidence against him was his own false confessions given due to mental health problems he had at the time.

I’ve no idea if Ian Lawless was monitored under MAPPA like Barry George was after being acquitted of murdering Jill Dando but after the CoA deemed his murder conviction ‘unsafe’ he went on to be ‘banned from every football ground in the country after an incident at Barnet.
[/i] https://www.grimsbytelegraph.co.uk/news/grimsby-news/grimsby-town-fan-who-cleared-1187985

Imagine the carnage someone like Bamber could cause if he were to over turn his murder convictions ?

Would these things be of concern to Mark Newby ? I don’t think they would.

’Attention-seeker' has murder conviction quashed’
“His solicitor, Mark Newby, said: "Ian is delighted to have his liberty today," but added that the case showed the continuing risk of "vulnerable people being pushed through the court process without the necessary safeguards in place".https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/jun/16/ian-lawless-murder-conviction-quashed

He’s helped overturn Ian Lawless’s murder conviction. Him & Matt Stanbury then help him win compensation - to thank them he’s back in trouble and banned from every football ground in the country.

But what if Ian Lawless committed innocent fraud?

Who investigates this?

[Nicholas]

Matt Stanbury & Mark Newby

”Current and future claimants will likely find that their prospects of success are not improved in any substantial way by this decision”
https://www.thejusticegap.com/not-innocent-enough-to-be-compensated/


What  was  the point of it ?


And if you click on the above link to the article - at the side and foot it states the author is Jon Robins and in the body of the article it reads,

“Barry George, wrongly convicted of the murder of BBC TV presenter Jill Dando, has lost a bid for compensation, ruled the High Court today. Three other people whose convictions had been quashed also failed to win compensation but Ian Lawless, jailed for eight years for murder before being freed by the Court of Appeal in 2009, was successful.

“This article is written by Mark Newby, solicitor advocate with QualitySolicitors Jordans and advisor to the Innocent Network UK, and Matthew Stanbury, a barrister at Garden Court North Chambers who practices in human rights, public law, prison law and crime.
Mark Newby and Matthew Stanbury acted for Ian Lawless.


Talk about ‘confusing’

Interestingly Matthew (Matt) Stanbury & Dean Kingham are representing Charles Salvador

Excerpts:

“Salvador’s legal team argues that the parole board rules’ blanket ban on public hearings is unlawful and, if successful, the challenge would force the government to change the regime. In particular, they argue that Parole Board Rules 2019, rule 15(3) requiring parole board hearings to be held in private offends the well-established principle of open justice as well as being in breach of the article six right to a fair and public hearing.

‘It is hoped that by providing Charles Salvador with the right to apply for a public parole hearing the public can gain a proper understanding of the parole process and it will push the secretary of state for justice to fully respect the independence of the Parole Board,’ comments his solicitor Dean Kingham of Swain and Co Solicitors.

The challenge is being brought by the same legal team, Dean Kingham together with barrister Matt Stanbury of Garden Court North, behind the recent challenge over concerns about the independence of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (the Gary Warner case – as reported on the Justice Gap here).

The government counters that open justice requirements are met by the possibility for a parole board to allow for observers and for a summary of a decision to be published. That falls ‘significantly short’ of what would be expected under the principles of open justice, the prisoner’s lawyers argue.

‘Charles Bronson’ became a fixture of the tabloid press over the years and is frequently referred to as ‘Britain’s most violent prison’. He now insists that he is a changed man. He changed his name in 2014 in tribute to the artist Salvador Dali.
https://www.thejusticegap.com/britains-most-notorious-prisoner-launches-legal-challenge-to-have-parole-hearing-held-in-public/

[Nicholas]

Do you see Bamber as ‘vulnerable’ Holly?

[Nicholas]

The usual BS.

The CT actually state themselves that the original handwritten log could not be located, not that disclosure was refused.

I'm willing to bet the CCRC have seen the "undisclosed" photographs they bleat on about and found nothing of value in them too - something their 2012 statement of reasons could shed light on.

It's the ultimate hypocrisy for team Bamber to harp on about non disclosure and the police "hiding the truth"

Maybe they don’t?

Maybe the CCRC omitted this?