Re-evaluation of the blood and silencer evidence

[Caroline]

A bit rude that, Caz girl.

Well, what can I say - I'm Northern 

[The General]

Well, what can I say - I'm Northern 

Me too. Straight talking. Can't beat it.

[Holly Goodhead]

I think it's pretty clear and I don't have time to draw you a diagram!

We're talking about ONE particular story, not the history of the newspaper - a story that was backed cup by the ex husband of Sheila. Bamber told him about the photographs, showing him some of them and stating that there were others where "you could see everything right down to the last details'. Colin was shocked to later see the pictures mentioned in The Sun in which he stated to Michael Fielder (the reporter) that n the photographs "you can see everything right down to the last detail. That's what I'm talking about!

But why should we see CC's accounts as infallible? 

[Caroline]

But why should we see CC's accounts as infallible?

He is backing up what someone else said and vice versa. Why should we see anyone's point of view as fallible in that case? When you cite someone, you cling onto it for grim death, even they couldn't possibly have made a mistake, even though the rest of the evidence shows they must have. Too many excuses and denials just make a mockery of the whole thing. Everyone lied except Bamber - it just doesn't wash.

[Holly Goodhead]

He is backing up what someone else said and vice versa. Why should we see anyone's point of view as fallible in that case? When you cite someone, you cling onto it for grim death, even they couldn't possibly have made a mistake, even though the rest of the evidence shows they must have. Too many excuses and denials just make a mockery of the whole thing. Everyone lied except Bamber - it just doesn't wash.

CC's claims often contradict with others.  Eg his claim his mother observed JB naked or semi-naked running out of the bathroom at CC's. He even said recently on prime TV that JB had his hair soaped up in spikes which he did to copy the twins and yet his mother makes no ref to this meeting in her wit stat. 

[Nicholas]

CC's claims often contradict with others.  Eg his claim his mother observed JB naked or semi-naked running out of the bathroom at CC's. He even said recently on prime TV that JB had his hair soaped up in spikes which he did to copy the twins and yet his mother makes no ref to this meeting in her wit stat.

An omission doesn’t mean it didn’t occur Holly

[Holly Goodhead]

An omission doesn’t mean it didn’t occur Holly

I never said otherwise.

[Nicholas]

An omission doesn’t mean it didn’t occur Holly

I never said otherwise.

You alluded to it

CC's claims often contradict with others.  Eg his claim his mother observed JB naked or semi-naked running out of the bathroom at CC's. He even said recently on prime TV that JB had his hair soaped up in spikes which he did to copy the twins and yet his mother makes no ref to this meeting in her wit stat.

[John]

It is disappointing to note that despite numerous warnings, some members continue to use crude and totally uncalled-for language when responding to other members. This will no longer be allowed to continue.

I have instructed the moderation team to clamp down heavily on rule breakers from now on.

There will be no exceptions!

[Vertigo Swirl]

CC also claims NB and JB like to play practical jokes on farm reps by placing large orders and then cancelling them.  Why couldn't this extend to The Sun?

Are you seriously suggesting that shortly after his sister’s murder JB approached the Sun with thr offer of selling nude photos to them as a practical joke?

[Vertigo Swirl]

He is backing up what someone else said and vice versa. Why should we see anyone's point of view as fallible in that case? When you cite someone, you cling onto it for grim death, even they couldn't possibly have made a mistake, even though the rest of the evidence shows they must have. Too many excuses and denials just make a mockery of the whole thing. Everyone lied except Bamber - it just doesn't wash.

It’s utterly astounding to me the level of denial and excuse making being made in defence of JB, it totally comfirms my view that his supporters are very misguided indeed (that’s the polite word for it).

[mrswah]

It’s utterly astounding to me the level of denial and excuse making being made in defence of JB, it totally comfirms my view that his supporters are very misguided indeed (that’s the polite word for it).

There are supporters and supporters.

There are "guilters" and "guilters".

And, there are people like me who honestly don't know.

Any of us can be very misguided.

[Brietta]

There are supporters and supporters.

There are "guilters" and "guilters".

And, there are people like me who honestly don't know.

Any of us can be very misguided.

Luckily the court managed to sort the wheat from the chaff ... do you think they were misguided too?

[mrswah]

Luckily the court managed to sort the wheat from the chaff ... do you think they were misguided too?

The judges, jury and witnesses did their best, IMO.

Whether or not they got it right, I'm not sure.

[Vertigo Swirl]

There are supporters and supporters.

There are "guilters" and "guilters".

And, there are people like me who honestly don't know.

Any of us can be very misguided.

People who are “guilters” do n’t dispute the official, accepted narrative so where does the misguided bit come into it?