The moment the mask slipped

[John]

Absolutely not the words of an innocent man. An innocent man in the dock would be horrified about being accused of lying. He was simply too arrogant to keep up the facade. He would have got away with this in a police interview, not a high profile murder trial. The Bamber apologists simply don't have a good explanation as to why an "innocent" man would ever say such a thing.

Horribly arrogant. Like the stupid smirk on his face when he was arrested. His problem then, and now, is that he thinks everyone else is dim, and he is so clever. That's why he treats people like Mike, Aggy, Jackie et al so badly over the years when they have done their best to help him. He knows that he is guilty, and he despises them. So he dumps them and moves on to the next poor sod.

Funny you should say that. Remind you of anyone from Ipswich?

Totally. I was mucking out this morning (the horses, not BT) and listening to the news. It was all about barristers googling jury members, and jury members googling defendants, and it made me realise just how fantastically stupid anyone would be to act like a complete f..king loony tune on the interweb. All I could think of was silly old Blumpkin, and her mad mate. Why would you want to make a complete, paranoid show of yourself, like Fuzzy-Felt, or do that revolting black-talk (put your tenna ladies on your dutty pussy) when you're raison detre is releasing your loved one from prison? Crazy.

I don't read the blue forum much these days for obvious reasons zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  but a wee birdie tells me she is still slagging off one of ours and having the posts deleted faster than she makes them...   

[puglove]

Absolutely not the words of an innocent man. An innocent man in the dock would be horrified about being accused of lying. He was simply too arrogant to keep up the facade. He would have got away with this in a police interview, not a high profile murder trial. The Bamber apologists simply don't have a good explanation as to why an "innocent" man would ever say such a thing.

Horribly arrogant. Like the stupid smirk on his face when he was arrested. His problem then, and now, is that he thinks everyone else is dim, and he is so clever. That's why he treats people like Mike, Aggy, Jackie et al so badly over the years when they have done their best to help him. He knows that he is guilty, and he despises them. So he dumps them and moves on to the next poor sod.

Funny you should say that. Remind you of anyone from Ipswich?

Totally. I was mucking out this morning (the horses, not BT) and listening to the news. It was all about barristers googling jury members, and jury members googling defendants, and it made me realise just how fantastically stupid anyone would be to act like a complete f..king loony tune on the interweb. All I could think of was silly old Blumpkin, and her mad mate. Why would you want to make a complete, paranoid show of yourself, like Fuzzy-Felt, or do that revolting black-talk (put your tenna ladies on your dutty pussy) when you're raison detre is releasing your loved one from prison? Crazy.

I don't read the blue forum much these days for obvious reasons zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  but a wee birdie tells me she is still slagging off one of ours and having the posts deleted faster than she makes them...   

Hmm. She posts stuff, mainly having a pop at Jo, which is like punching a lovely kitten, then a certain little foot soldier has to drag himself away from his supernoodles and deletion follows. What a waste of time and energy. And, all the time, a creature who shot 2 small boys in their heads while they slept in their safe beds, tries to redeem himself.

[insider]

Hmm. She posts stuff, mainly having a pop at Jo, which is like punching a lovely kitten, then a certain little foot soldier has to drag himself away from his supernoodles and deletion follows. What a waste of time and energy. And, all the time, a creature who shot 2 small boys in their heads while they slept in their safe beds, tries to redeem himself.

Its a good job she doesnt know about the other women to wrote to Simon and visited him at Kingston when she couldnt be bothered dragging her sorry ass down the road to see him.   

[goatboy]

And, for Cliff, I'm sure that we were all disgusted by the shouty shite that Mike posted today, in answer to your genuine post. Horrible, and wrong. Good luck to any little soldier who tried to justify it.

Much respect to Buddy for standing up to Mike. As we all know Mike only tends to become abusive when he realises someone has seen through his lies and BS. As we know, Buddy is on Mike's side but like a lot of the more intelligent posters on the blue forum he realises a lot of what Mike is doing is genuinely harmful rather than helping Bamber's case.

Incidentally Mike is this time denying that he has ever burgled a house. It just doesn't ring true to me that the police would target a completely innocent man with burglary. Surely he must have come under their radar prior to his arrest as he was clearly known to them? That's the only reason I can see that they would have tried to fit him up (if this is the case). Back in the 90s when I was a student, student houses were often burgled. I heard of students reporting these crimes to the police, who were actually quite sympathetic but admitted it was highly unlikely they would ever get their stuff back or that the burglars would be caught and convicted. The police would then write down a name and address on a piece of paper. When the students asked what this was for they were told in no uncertain terms that the police were virtually certain the name on the paper was the person who had committed the burglary and if the students and some friends wished to go and give the man a kicking the police would happily turn a blind eye! I think this illustrates that a lot of the time the police may know who has committed a certain crime but the issue is then providing the evidence to prove it.

[puglove]

And, for Cliff, I'm sure that we were all disgusted by the shouty shite that Mike posted today, in answer to your genuine post. Horrible, and wrong. Good luck to any little soldier who tried to justify it.

Much respect to Buddy for standing up to Mike. As we all know Mike only tends to become abusive when he realises someone has seen through his lies and BS. As we know, Buddy is on Mike's side but like a lot of the more intelligent posters on the blue forum he realises a lot of what Mike is doing is genuinely harmful rather than helping Bamber's case.

Eeew. Mike. When will someone front up to you and tell you that you are a short-ar$ed little burglar with a potty mouth? Cliff is worth a squillion of you. He's a good man with a good heart. You, I'm afraid, are just a prick. SHAME ON YOU.

[Andrea]

Mike says he is an experienced convicted criminal, then denies any wrong doing in the next breath. Where did he get his experience from then?

Horrible post to Buddy, uncalled for.
It doesnt look good when the site owner speaks to a long term member in that way.

[Admin]

And, for Cliff, I'm sure that we were all disgusted by the shouty shite that Mike posted today, in answer to your genuine post. Horrible, and wrong. Good luck to any little soldier who tried to justify it.

Much respect to Buddy for standing up to Mike. As we all know Mike only tends to become abusive when he realises someone has seen through his lies and BS. As we know, Buddy is on Mike's side but like a lot of the more intelligent posters on the blue forum he realises a lot of what Mike is doing is genuinely harmful rather than helping Bamber's case.

Incidentally Mike is this time denying that he has ever burgled a house. It just doesn't ring true to me that the police would target a completely innocent man with burglary. Surely he must have come under their radar prior to his arrest as he was clearly known to them? That's the only reason I can see that they would have tried to fit him up (if this is the case). Back in the 90s when I was a student, student houses were often burgled. I heard of students reporting these crimes to the police, who were actually quite sympathetic but admitted it was highly unlikely they would ever get their stuff back or that the burglars would be caught and convicted. The police would then write down a name and address on a piece of paper. When the students asked what this was for they were told in no uncertain terms that the police were virtually certain the name on the paper was the person who had committed the burglary and if the students and some friends wished to go and give the man a kicking the police would happily turn a blind eye! I think this illustrates that a lot of the time the police may know who has committed a certain crime but the issue is then providing the evidence to prove it.

If he wasn't a burglar why was he on the run from the police when they flushed him out hiding in a pals loft?   

[jackiepreece]

Andrea I wasn't targeting you I was just replying to a post

Is there any evidence Mike is a convicted criminal or is it just speculation?
Has he ever said that?

[puglove]

Andrea I wasn't targeting you I was just replying to a post

Is there any evidence Mike is a convicted criminal or is it just speculation?
Has he ever said that?

He's bragged about it often enough, Jac. And obviously he was convicted, he met Bamber in the nick.

I f..king loathe and despise burglars. If you want something, go out and earn the money to buy it, don't just take it. And he wasn't a daft young kid when he was stealing from others. Ugh.

[Andrea]

Mike said in a post earlier he was an experienced criminal.

[Padgates staff]

I read that too, I just can't find the post now.

[goatboy]

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3808.30.html

Here he describes himself as "an experienced convicted criminal". His own words. Clearly implies that he is experienced in criminal acts, if he meant otherwise he should have chosen his words better. But as you can see from his foul mouthed and unnecessarily nasty post to Buddy he's not good at choosing his words carefully.

[Padgates staff]

Thats the one Goatboy #40. I knew I'd read it!