Re-evaluation of the blood and silencer evidence

[Holly Goodhead]

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

Officialdom often calls the big issues wrong.  I say this as someone who spent nearly a 1/4 of a century in financial services.  Former chairman of the financial regulator Lord Turner re the crisis that almost caused the entire global financial system to collaps:

"I think we, as authorities, central banks, regulators, those who are involved today, are the inheritors of a 50-year-long, large intellectual and policy mistake".

[Vertigo Swirl]

Officialdom often calls the big issues wrong.  I say this as someone who spent nearly a 1/4 of a century in financial services.  Former chairman of the financial regulator Lord Turner re the crisis that almost caused the entire global financial system to collaps:

"I think we, as authorities, central banks, regulators, those who are involved today, are the inheritors of a 50-year-long, large intellectual and policy mistake".

What the effing jeff has that got to do with what I wrote?  You think I’m misguided for accepting that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family?  I also accept the moon landings happened and that Oswald acted alone, but I guess some people would think I was misguided about that as well!

[Holly Goodhead]

What the effing jeff has that got to do with what I wrote?  You think I’m misguided for accepting that Jeremy Bamber murdered his family?  I also accept the moon landings happened and that Oswald acted alone, but I guess some people would think I was misguided about that as well!

Did I say you're misguided?

You said guilters don't dispute the official accepted narrative.  I pointed out that officialdom often calls it wrong.

[mrswah]

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

Something can be official and accepted, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's true.

[Caroline]

Something can be official and accepted, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's true.

Or that it isn't.

[Holly Goodhead]

Or that it isn't.

Obviously. 

[Caroline]

Obviously.

Indubitably.

[mrswah]

Or that it isn't.

Naturally!

[Vertigo Swirl]

Something can be official and accepted, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's true.

misguided
having or showing faulty judgement or reasoning.

Please explain how accepting the official and accepted narrative makes a “guilter” misguided?  There is no faulty reasoning or judgement in coming to the conclusion that Jeremy who has been found guilty in a court of law and who has had several appeals thrown out must be guilty, unless you can explain how doing so makes me misguided?

[Holly Goodhead]

misguided
having or showing faulty judgement or reasoning.

Please explain how accepting the official and accepted narrative makes a “guilter” misguided?  There is no faulty reasoning or judgement in coming to the conclusion that Jeremy who has been found guilty in a court of law and who has had several appeals thrown out must be guilty, unless you can explain how doing so makes me misguided?

Who said anything about misguided?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Who said anything about misguided?

I used the word to describe JB’s supporters’ constant denial and excuses for the huge wealth of evidence which points to the fact that he is lower than a snake’s belly.  Mrswah claimed some “guilters” and fencesitters could be misguided too, but misguided about what exactly I have no idea.

[Nicholas]

The pathologist didn't mess up but Essex Police did in that all exhibits were destroyed including victims' samples:

165. In February 1996, the Essex police destroyed many of the original trial exhibits without reference to the appellant or his legal representatives. It might have been necessary for this court to examine the circumstances in which this had happened. The police officer responsible contended that it was done without his appreciatling that there was any on-going legal process that might require the further use of the exhibits. However, during argument it was agreed that the court could protect the appellant's position by making assumptions in his favour and that, therefore, it was unnecessary to resolve precisely how this came about.

According to Forensic Scientist Mark Webster (2016)

‘Blood grouping evidence in Bamber case was investigated by McKenzie friends "The Manchester McKenzie Organisation" in the 1990s.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=276.0

[mrswah]

misguided
having or showing faulty judgement or reasoning.

Please explain how accepting the official and accepted narrative makes a “guilter” misguided?  There is no faulty reasoning or judgement in coming to the conclusion that Jeremy who has been found guilty in a court of law and who has had several appeals thrown out must be guilty, unless you can explain how doing so makes me misguided?

Ok, so perhaps I used the wrong word. "Mistaken" would have been better!  I was not suggesting that there is anything wrong with your reasoning. I do maintain, however, that even if someone has been found guilty and has lost appeals, that person could still be innocent.

As far as I can see (and I'm by no means an expert on this case), it is possible that the guilters have got it wrong. It's also possible that the supporters have got it wrong.

As for me, I haven't a clue, so I'm going to be wrong anyway!

[Vertigo Swirl]

Ok, so perhaps I used the wrong word. "Mistaken" would have been better!  I was not suggesting that there is anything wrong with your reasoning. I do maintain, however, that even if someone has been found guilty and has lost appeals, that person could still be innocent.

As far as I can see (and I'm by no means an expert on this case), it is possible that the guilters have got it wrong. It's also possible that the supporters have got it wrong.

As for me, I haven't a clue, so I'm going to be wrong anyway!

Come on, there are SOME clues!

[The General]

Come on, there are SOME clues!

How did this term 'guilter' evolve? What an odd label that is, almost as if it is to describe someone with an erroneous counter opinion and there's another option. There is no other option.