Mike has issued me a permanent ban on the blue forum

[John]

Why are you sure Scipio will be allowed back?  I find him a most unpleasant poster.  He's intolerant of anyone that doesn't share his views often resorting to verbal aggression and/or attempts to intimidate.  He doesn't debate just gets all shouty.  When losing the debate, which he often does, he lies, cheats and refuses to provide any documentary evidence to support his assertions.  Instead he resorts to 'find it yourself' or 'the burden of proof is with you' or 'I dont have to prove a negative'. 

I wouldn't mind betting there are a few paid internet shills on these forums and Scipio might well be one of  them.     

Paid by whom Holly?   

[Holly Goodhead]

Paid by whom Holly?

I've no idea John.   Never even heard of a paid internet shill until by chance I noticed a comment on the McCann board.  I've often thought when reading product reviews it would be easy for those who have a vested interested in selling the product to talk products up and competitors products down but never really thought about paid shills attempting to influence opinion on forums such as this one.   It seems to go on though and is of course all very shadowy. 

I just struggle to understand the likes of Scipio who appear to spend hours and hours trying to convince  everyone JB is guilty as charged and become verbally aggressive with others who don't share their views.  I appreciate over the years a number of posters from the innocent camp have acted strangely to say the least ie Mike with his ridiculous claims and theories and others who I understand snooped into the private lives of various others and "stalked" family members (if true).  I would never condone this but I can see how some could get carried away if they believe JB is the victim of a MoJ.  I dont understand the likes of Scipio when JB has been behind bars for 30 years and without very compelling new evidence is extremely unlikely to have his conviction overturned. 

[puglove]

I've no idea John.   Never even heard of a paid internet shill until by chance I noticed a comment on the McCann board.  I've often thought when reading product reviews it would be easy for those who have a vested interested in selling the product to talk products up and competitors products down but never really thought about paid shills attempting to influence opinion on forums such as this one.   It seems to go on though and is of course all very shadowy. 

I just struggle to understand the likes of Scipio who appear to spend hours and hours trying to convince  everyone JB is guilty as charged and become verbally aggressive with others who don't share their views.  I appreciate over the years a number of posters from the innocent camp have acted strangely to say the least ie Mike with his ridiculous claims and theories and others who I understand snooped into the private lives of various others and "stalked" family members (if true).  I would never condone this but I can see how some could get carried away if they believe JB is the victim of a MoJ.  I dont understand the likes of Scipio when JB has been behind bars for 30 years and without very compelling new evidence is extremely unlikely to have his conviction overturned.

As long as Mike writes his offensive, disingenuous crap, I'm guessing that Scipio will feel the need to disprove it. Ironically, Mike's forum (isn't it time that it was retitled?) has been responsible for Bamber losing almost all of the supporters he had. The one who's left (Hitler in knickers) manages to make Bamber look like a complete cock.

 

[puglove]

As long as Mike writes his offensive, disingenuous crap, I'm guessing that Scipio will feel the need to disprove it. Ironically, Mike's forum (isn't it time that it was retitled?) has been responsible for Bamber losing almost all of the supporters he had. The one who's left (Hitler in knickers) manages to make Bamber look like a complete cock.

 

You're right about the snooping and stalking though, Holl. Old Colly Cropper (ooh-er, Robert Halfon!) googled me so much, she knew more about me than I do.

[puglove]

The only good thing about "The Jeremy Bamber Forum" is that it keeps Mike busy, so his neighbours don't have to worry about their lawn mowers getting nicked by "Spring Heeled Jack". And Mike makes Bamber look more guilty by the day when he changes his story. And, when he's backed into a corner, Mike says "f*ck off, pigshit breath." Always a winner.

Actually, I blame Admin. Lurking about. With strange agenda.     &%+((£

[scipio_usmc]

Why do you want to waste your time/energy responding to MT's posts if no one else bothers to read them?  If no one reads MT's posts do you think they are likely to read your responses?

It annoys him having his lies pointed out and that is why I did it as well as why I was banned even though he used the pretext of saying it was because I was rude to him which just shows what  anut he is that he wants peopel to bow to him.

[scipio_usmc]

Why are you sure Scipio will be allowed back?  I find him a most unpleasant poster.  He's intolerant of anyone that doesn't share his views often resorting to verbal aggression and/or attempts to intimidate.  He doesn't debate just gets all shouty.  When losing the debate, which he often does, he lies, cheats and refuses to provide any documentary evidence to support his assertions.  Instead he resorts to 'find it yourself' or 'the burden of proof is with you' or 'I dont have to prove a negative'. 

I wouldn't mind betting there are a few paid internet shills on these forums and Scipio might well be one of  them.     

When people post false claims and lies I call them on it.  When people make allegations I challenge them to prove their claims because the burden of proof rests with the proponent.  At the end of the day you grossly distort every aspect of the ballistic issues in this case.  You take a broad conceptual claim made by someone not addressing this specific case and then distort claiming that it disproves specific science that applies to this case.

Jeremy's lawyers already raised nonsense of the sort that was rejected but you go further and make up nonsense they didn't even try because they had no scientists willing to spout such tripe. If you can't stand the heat of having your nonsense challenged then don' go into the kitchen...

[david1819]

Why are you sure Scipio will be allowed back?  I find him a most unpleasant poster.  He's intolerant of anyone that doesn't share his views often resorting to verbal aggression and/or attempts to intimidate.  He doesn't debate just gets all shouty.  When losing the debate, which he often does, he lies, cheats and refuses to provide any documentary evidence to support his assertions.

You get used to it after a while. American Lawyers are stereotyped for being the kind of people that just want to win arguments and cases at any cost without any regard for the truth of the matter.

[Holly Goodhead]

When people post false claims and lies I call them on it.  When people make allegations I challenge them to prove their claims because the burden of proof rests with the proponent. At the end of the day you grossly distort every aspect of the ballistic issues in this case.  You take a broad conceptual claim made by someone not addressing this specific case and then distort claiming that it disproves specific science that applies to this case.

Jeremy's lawyers already raised nonsense of the sort that was rejected but you go further and make up nonsense they didn't even try because they had no scientists willing to spout such tripe. If you can't stand the heat of having your nonsense challenged then don' go into the kitchen...

And you conveniently forget SIZEmatters!

The bullets used at WHF .22 are the least likely to cause draw-back aka blow-back, high impact back spatter and an abundance of GSR.  Look at the size compared with a range of other ammo.  I'm not an expert but I know enough to highlight your cranky ill informed theories.  It's a hugely complex subject involving different branches of science.  Bullet size is a determining factor; anatomical location another; anything that might impede flight of blood such as hair and clothes; surrounding objects such as floors, ceilings and furniture; angle and distance of shot.  It is way beyond the likes of us and Malcolm Fletcher a general scientific officer. 

If JB was the perp and fired 25 shots, with the last two fired at SC, said to be contact or near contact, and staged a sucide with the rifle remaining on her body and her hand resting against it then why wasn't any GSR found on her hand and nightie, if as you claim an abundance of GSR is discharged with every shot and remains for several hours after discharge and doesn't transfer with movement?  You would have us believe a .22 is akin to a cannon being fired!



[attachment deleted by admin]

[scipio_usmc]

You get used to it after a while. American Lawyers are stereotyped for being the kind of people that just want to win arguments and cases at any cost without any regard for the truth of the matter.

Funny coming from someone who cited an allegation by Jeremy's lawyer that Julie was granted immunity as proof she was.  You have no idea what truth or evidence are.

The 2002 Appeal fully explored the allegations and totally rejected the notion she was granted immunity. BUt reality is something Jeremy supporters ignore because if they faced relaity they would not support him and would admit his guilt.