Dr Vanezis Trial Testimony

[ISpyWithMyEye]

I share your disdain for the CT and those that repeat their desperate stupid dishonest nonsense but I take the view that the there is some room for legitimate doubt about aspects of the case and respect others differing opinions where they are based on fact.

Unlike the Bamberettes, I have no emotional investment here, I couldn't care less if it turns out he is innocent after all but I have been waiting 34 years for something concrete to convince me and so far.. nothing

I’m afraid I can’t agree there.

I’ve seen nothing at all that gives any room for doubt whatsoever. Nothing.

He, and only he was capable of killing those five members of his family. And believe me, if I did indeed think he could in any way be innocent I’d fight his corner, but he’s as guilty as sin — and there’s absolutely nothing but ludicrous conspiracies to try and make some people doubt his conviction.

He’s lied profusely, throughout, changed his stories...and innocent men don’t change their stories do they...

[Common sense]

Is it taxpayers money paying for this nonsense?  I thought he’d been begging people for money and to take out loans.

I did suggest that a reconstruction of Sheila shooting herself would be better than the one Holly wants of the “perp” shooting everyone....we all know they were shot, and we all know it was easy. Not so with Sheila, though...

But Holly failed to comment. She avoids awkward questions/points...

Holly seems to think the CCRC will pay for reconstructions once the privately funded forensic analysis persuades them the conviction is unsafe. I won't be holding my breath.

[G-Unit]

I have no interest in the CT either: some of the "supporters" I have come across are quite objectionable. So are some "guilters"-----it's almost like opposing religions at times!

I'm not really interested in Jeremy either, but I am very interested in the case, which is intriguing.  I have never been able to make up my mind whether or not he's guilty, and personally, I suspect we will never find out for sure.

I agree completely. I don't know whether Jeremy Bamber was guilty or not, but I'm not convinced that the trial was properly conducted. Paul Terzeon of Kingsley Napier said in 2002 that the defense would have acted differently had they known some facts they were unaware of at the time of the trial.

[Caroline]

I agree completely. I don't know whether Jeremy Bamber was guilty or not, but I'm not convinced that the trial was properly conducted. Paul Terzeon of Kingsley Napier said in 2002 that the defense would have acted differently had they known some facts they were unaware of at the time of the trial.

So you wouldn't mind if a 5 times murderer had gotten off with. it?

[mrswah]

So you wouldn't mind if a 5 times murderer had gotten off with. it?

It's not about a murderer getting off, but about the defence being in possession of all the facts.

[Nicholas]

I’m afraid I can’t agree there.

I’ve seen nothing at all that gives any room for doubt whatsoever. Nothing.

He, and only he was capable of killing those five members of his family. And believe me, if I did indeed think he could in any way be innocent I’d fight his corner, but he’s as guilty as sin — and there’s absolutely nothing but ludicrous conspiracies to try and make some people doubt his conviction.

He’s lied profusely, throughout, changed his stories...and innocent men don’t change their stories do they...

So why do you think Mark Newby has decided to represent him and advance yet more nonsense? as I see it

[Nicholas]

It's not about a murderer getting off, but about the defence being in possession of all the facts.

So what do the defence know about Bamber’s activities that they’ve not shared ?

Would they have a timeline of his apparent over lapping ‘relationships’ for example and would they know JM was abused by Bamber?

The abuse of JM was never explored during Bamber’s trial - the defence attempted to portray her as a ‘scorned women’ instead

The jury nor prosecution it seems were never in possession of the full facts of this aspect of the case

[Caroline]

It's not about a murderer getting off, but about the defence being in possession of all the facts.

Which facts do you believe would have changed the juries mind had they know about them?

[Nicholas]

I’m afraid I can’t agree there.

I’ve seen nothing at all that gives any room for doubt whatsoever. Nothing.

He, and only he was capable of killing those five members of his family. And believe me, if I did indeed think he could in any way be innocent I’d fight his corner, but he’s as guilty as sin — and there’s absolutely nothing but ludicrous conspiracies to try and make some people doubt his conviction.

He’s lied profusely, throughout, changed his stories...and innocent men don’t change their stories do they...

Mark Newby has claimed publicly Bamber’s narrative has remained the same?

[Caroline]

Mark Newby has claimed publicly Bamber’s narrative has remained the same?

It hasn't - he has completely changed the times of the phone calls for one thing!

[mrswah]

Which facts do you believe would have changed the juries mind had they know about them?

I haven't a clue----we would have to ask Paul Terzeon which facts he is referring to.

[mrswah]

It hasn't - he has completely changed the times of the phone calls for one thing!

Who has, JB or Newby?

Which calls are you referring to?  The one from JB to the police is logged with a time.

[Common sense]

I have no interest in the CT either: some of the "supporters" I have come across are quite objectionable. So are some "guilters"-----it's almost like opposing religions at times!

I'm not really interested in Jeremy either, but I am very interested in the case, which is intriguing.  I have never been able to make up my mind whether or not he's guilty, and personally, I suspect we will never find out for sure.

I agree. I simply despair of modern day tribalism. This forum isn't twitter, we can have a civilised debate and learn more about this complicated case from those that have studied it in depth.

Have you read the appeal court judgement? I find it difficult to believe anyone can read that and still have the confidence to declare him completely innocent.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2002/2912.html

[Common sense]

It hasn't - he has completely changed the times of the phone calls for one thing!

He's also changed the movement PC Myall thought he saw in the window to a clear silhouette which they all saw and those corrupt coppers lied about in court - yet another conspiracy against poor Jem!

[Caroline]

He's also changed the movement PC Myall thought he saw in the window to a clear silhouette which they all saw and those corrupt coppers lied about in court - yet another conspiracy against poor Jem!

Absolutely CS - there are various other things too. Some subtle - some not so.