Author Topic: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?  (Read 10823 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #60 on: October 27, 2017, 02:41:12 PM »
There's a section here which touches on MM https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Rj14BwAAQBAJ&pg=PA302&lpg=PA302&dq=jeremy+bamber+secure+windows+insecure+windows&source=bl&ots=h8HoPINfVj&sig=QzLGZOOfb86Co0wLCsexvGhkaoA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi2l9Xz54zXAhUDVhoKHTHUDIMQ6AEIMjAB#v=onepage&q=jeremy%20bamber%20secure%20windows%20insecure%20windows&f=false

And how he didn't know one end of a rifle from the other

Interesting also are the comments made by the women Bamber surrounded himself with after the murders.

And of course the comments made by the police regarding Bambers behaviour

After reading the above link and absorbing its content it would be helpful to compare it to the following http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8541.msg428224#msg428224


Which reminds me, where are ALL of Bambers ex girlfriends and "girlfriends" witness statements? Why do we only have JM's?

What is in the statements of other "girlfriends" Bamber does not want us to see
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Angelo222

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #61 on: October 27, 2017, 05:21:41 PM »
The discussion is about Julie Mugford, anything else will be removed as per admins orders.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #62 on: October 27, 2017, 05:24:38 PM »
The discussion is about Julie Mugford, anything else will be removed as per admins orders.

I was discussing JM and indeed her vilification?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Angelo222

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #63 on: October 27, 2017, 05:25:29 PM »
The fact she held her hands up to the cheque fraud and indeed told officers she was with Bamber when he broke into his families caravan park further support the fact she had the capacity to admit to her wrong doings.

Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2017, 05:35:57 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 Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #64 on: October 27, 2017, 05:43:00 PM »
Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.

Where is your evidence to prove beyond any reasonable doubt JM recognised in Bamber that he was a highly disordered and dangerous individual capable of carrying out his threats?

What did JM, at the age of 21, understand a psychopath to be?

What did she know about personality disorders?

What would EP police have known about psychopaths and personality disordered individuals?

« Last Edit: October 27, 2017, 05:50:46 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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #65 on: October 27, 2017, 07:10:55 PM »
Look forward to seeing this. Just out of interest. There seems to be some confusion over whether MM met Julie.

Julie's WS just says she 'knew who he (Bamber) was referring to.

Even Bamber in his police interviews says he didn't know MM well.

I suspect Bamber used MM as a proxy as MM had a local reputation as some sort of mercenary, which Julie knew about.

Bamber also knew there was no way Julie would come into contact with MM as MM was not part of Bamber's jolly up crowd. She couldn't go looking for MM as she was with Bamber & wouldn't know where to start anyway.  Bamber had also told her MM had gone abroad.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1057.0;attach=3286

I'm convinced drugs play a far bigger role in this case than most of us could possibly imagine.
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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #66 on: October 27, 2017, 08:39:46 PM »
Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.

If Essex police could make the mistake of believing Bambers lies, what makes JM's reasoning of events any different?

Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #67 on: October 28, 2017, 02:38:07 PM »
Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.

Jeremy Bambers pre trial assessment report suggested he was a possibly psychopath

He was found guilty in a court of law for mass murder of his family

On that basis - JM was subjected to psychological abuse by Bamber for 18 months during their relationship


"Using mind control techniques alternating abuse with offering crumbs of hope or social kindness, they keep targets pervasively off balance, wanting to help, resenting how they are being treated, and constantly emotionally, physically, and psychologically off balance.

It takes approximately as long as you were exposed to their maniacal behavior to recover. If you only were involved with them for a few days, a few weeks, or a few months, count your lucky STARS.

The damage their mental abuse tactics do (gaslighting, triangulating, undermining, ridiculing, shaming) takes far longer to heal from than any physical act of violence they do to you.


Even if they do bodily harm that caused PTSD, C-PTSD tends to develop rapidly for ever person who truly risks remaining in close personal touch with one.

It might seem fun to party with a lunatic when you are a wayward teen, not understanding what the red flags of a personality disorder this extreme actually are, but by the time you pass the age of 28?

http://flyingmonkeysdenied.com/definition/psychopath/


Today there is a wealth of material on the www about psychopaths. What was available back in the 80's?

JM did appear to be intelligent but intelligence does not mean she wasn't naive, especially with regards an 18 months relationship with a highly disordered and dangerous individual

« Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 02:59:30 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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #68 on: October 28, 2017, 04:29:40 PM »
How does UK law view the public vilification of prosecution witnesses like JM?

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/mentally_disordered_offenders/

And where does Jeremy Bamber stand in relation to this is; are the public, like JM protected?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #69 on: October 28, 2017, 04:55:45 PM »
Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.

I am of the opinion the CPS recognised JM as a victim of psychopathic abuse at the hands of Jeremy Bamber

"At some point, however, the evidence of a highly disturbed personality shows through, especially once the psychopath is no longer invested in a given victim and thus no longer makes a significant effort to keep his mask on. Then total denial is no longer possible. The floodgates of reality suddenly burst open and a whole slew of inconsistencies, downright lies, manipulations, criticism and emotional abuse flows through to the surface of our consciousness.
However, even then it’s difficult to absorb such painful information all at once. Our heart still yearns for what we have been persuaded, during the luring phase, was our one true love. Our minds are still filled with memories of the so-called good times with the psychopath. Yet, the truth about the infidelities, the constant deception, the manipulation and the backstabbing can no longer be denied. We can’t undo everything we learned about the psychopath; we cannot return to the point of original innocence, of total blindness. The result is a contradictory experience: a kind of internal battle between clinging to denial and accepting the truth.
Cognitive dissonance is a painful incredulity marked by this inner contradiction in the victim’s attitude towards the victimizer. In 1984, perhaps the best novel about brainwashing that occurs in totalitarian regimes, George Orwell coined his own term for this inner contradiction: he called it doublethink. Doublethink is not logical, but it is a common defense mechanism for coping with deception, domination and abuse. Victims engage in doublethink, or cognitive dissonance, in a partly subconscious attempt to reconcile the contradictory claims and behavior of the disordered individuals who have taken over their lives.
The denial itself can take several forms. It can manifest itself as the continuing idealization of the psychopath during the luring phase of the relationship or it can be shifting the blame for what went wrong in the relationship from him, the culprit, to ourselves, or to other victims. In fact, the easiest solution is to blame neither oneself nor the psychopath, but other victims. How often have you encountered the phenomenon where people who have partners who cheat on them lash out at the other women (or men) instead of holding their  partners accountable for their actions? It’s far easier to blame someone you’re not emotionally invested in than someone you love, particularly if you still cling to that person or relationship.https://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/a-painful-incredulity-psychopathy-and-cognitive-dissonance/
« Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 05:05:50 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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #70 on: October 28, 2017, 04:59:36 PM »
I am of the opinion the CPS recognised JM as a victim of psychopathic abuse at the hands of Jeremy Bamber

"At some point, however, the evidence of a highly disturbed personality shows through, especially once the psychopath is no longer invested in a given victim and thus no longer makes a significant effort to keep his mask on. Then total denial is no longer possible. The floodgates of reality suddenly burst open and a whole slew of inconsistencies, downright lies, manipulations, criticism and emotional abuse flows through to the surface of our consciousness.
However, even then it’s difficult to absorb such painful information all at once
. Our heart still yearns for what we have been persuaded, during the luring phase, was our one true love. Our minds are still filled with memories of the so-called good times with the psychopath. Yet, the truth about the infidelities, the constant deception, the manipulation and the backstabbing can no longer be denied. We can’t undo everything we learned about the psychopath; we cannot return to the point of original innocence, of total blindness. The result is a contradictory experience: a kind of internal battle between clinging to denial and accepting the truth.
Cognitive dissonance is a painful incredulity marked by this inner contradiction in the victim’s attitude towards the victimizer. In 1984, perhaps the best novel about brainwashing that occurs in totalitarian regimes, George Orwell coined his own term for this inner contradiction: he called it doublethink. Doublethink is not logical, but it is a common defense mechanism for coping with deception, domination and abuse. Victims engage in doublethink, or cognitive dissonance, in a partly subconscious attempt to reconcile the contradictory claims and behavior of the disordered individuals who have taken over their lives.
The denial itself can take several forms. It can manifest itself as the continuing idealization of the psychopath during the luring phase of the relationship or it can be shifting the blame for what went wrong in the relationship from him, the culprit, to ourselves, or to other victims. In fact, the easiest solution is to blame neither oneself nor the psychopath, but other victims. How often have you encountered the phenomenon where people who have partners who cheat on them lash out at the other women (or men) instead of holding their  partners accountable for their actions? It’s far easier to blame someone you’re not emotionally invested in than someone you love, particularly if you still cling to that person or relationship.https://psychopathyawareness.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/a-painful-incredulity-psychopathy-and-cognitive-dissonance/

I am further of the opinion JM went to the police when Bambers mask slipped one to many times and she could no longer deny her gut feeling that he had murdered his family
« Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 05:03:21 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 adam

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #71 on: October 28, 2017, 06:08:15 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1057.0;attach=3286

I'm convinced drugs play a far bigger role in this case than most of us could possibly imagine.

Thanks. Obviously Nugs's theory has been dismissed MM didn't know who Julie was. 

He does come up with some strange theories. Recently saying The Sun met Bamber but turned down a big free exclusive from him, so they could commit serious libel instead. 

Offline Nicholas

Re: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #72 on: October 28, 2017, 07:07:45 PM »
Mugford had no option but to confess.  It was either that or be charged along with Bamber.  She was intelligent enough to know where her future lay.  After all, she did admit to knowing of Bamber's threats towards his family yet she did nothing choosing instead to feather her own nest.  Little wonder she is now vilified imo.

What about Anji Greaves "feathering her nest?"

How much did she receive for her story?

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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #73 on: October 28, 2017, 07:21:57 PM »
Thanks. Obviously Nugs's theory has been dismissed MM didn't know who Julie was. 

He does come up with some strange theories. Recently saying The Sun met Bamber but turned down a big free exclusive from him, so they could commit serious libel instead.

Well I don't know what you mean by "MM didn't know who Julie was".  They obviously met at JB's cottage as per MM's WS.  MM describes her as "studenty". 
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: Are 'supporters' justified in their vilification of JM?
« Reply #74 on: October 28, 2017, 07:40:36 PM »
What about Anji Greaves "feathering her nest?"

How much did she receive for her story?

So she has a brief fling with the mass murderer Bamber, betraying her sister in the process, turns on JM, vilifying her for no apparent reason, does a deal with a national newspaper, then disappears  *&^^&

« Last Edit: September 15, 2021, 09:23:21 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation