Those who agree with the trial verdict but continue to debate on forums

[Vertigo Swirl]

I'm inclined to think, in the main, supporters prefer the company of each other and perhaps gravitate towards detractor-free spaces, which saves the need to explain themselves.................i was going to say that I don't think they're as solidly together as detractors. But I had second thoughts.........

It’s quite clear to me that the MAIN reason JB supporters and McCann sceptics post on here is to engage in debate with the opposite side.  The opposition provides the traction against which they can hone and sharpen their arguments, and of course indulge in the their absolute favourite pastime - victim blaming.

[Caroline]

Do you think supporters don't generally like debating on forums?  Just asking as a matter of interest.

In the main no, otherwise why ask that question?

[Caroline]

If I was to start a thread to defend Myra Hindley as a misunderstood victim of Ian Brady’s who was coerced against her will to take part in the most heinous crimes against children and then proceeded to spend months and years on this forum posting my theories and defence of her, would you silently respect my views and allow me to continue unchallenged?  Or would you find such behaviour quite morally reprehensible and feel obliged to speak up to say so?

And also make excuses for behaviours which are clearly reprehensible continuously.

[Angelo222]

For those who firmly believe JB guilty as charged why bother?

Some appear to get defensive and say words to the effect 'it's up to me how I spend my time'.  Or bizzarely they will say something like 'I'm just correcting what supporters spout'.

It takes all sorts I guess.  All the cases I've posted on here I either consider to be MOJ's: JB and Rettendon murders or the cases are unsolved: MM, murder of Jill Dando.

I couldn't be bothered to post on the Vincent Tabak thread as I believe him to be guilty as charged.

So can I ask what motivates those who firmly believe JB guilty as charged to continue posting.

The reason is very simple.  Forums like the Jeremy Bamber forum promote lies and invent falsehoods constantly in order to influence public opinion in his favour.  I for one will counter this propaganda wherever I can because apologists for these killers must not go unchallenged.

[Caroline]

The reason is very simple.  Forums like the Jeremy Bamber forum promote lies and invent falsehoods constantly in order to influence public opinion in his favour.  I for one will counter this propaganda wherever I can because apologists for these killers must not go unchallenged.

Well said!

[mrswah]

In the main no, otherwise why ask that question?

I asked the question because I was, for a while, on a couple of Facebook forums discussing the WHF case. One of them was full of supporters, and I didn't feel welcome on there.  It's not as if I'm even an "opposer" !

[mrswah]

If I was to start a thread to defend Myra Hindley as a misunderstood victim of Ian Brady’s who was coerced against her will to take part in the most heinous crimes against children and then proceeded to spend months and years on this forum posting my theories and defence of her, would you silently respect my views and allow me to continue unchallenged?  Or would you find such behaviour quite morally reprehensible and feel obliged to speak up to say so?

I would allow you free speech, and I think I 'd even have some respect for someone who dared  defend Myra Hindley in any way, so long as I thought their motives for doing so were genuine.

And of course, I would challenge you!

[Vertigo Swirl]

I would allow you free speech, and I think I 'd even have some respect for someone who dared  defend Myra Hindley in any way, so long as I thought their motives for doing so were genuine.

And of course, I would challenge you!

I really don’t know how you could respect anyone prepared to defend the indefensible, that does not compute to me. 

[mrswah]

I really don’t know how you could respect anyone prepared to defend the indefensible, that does not compute to me.

I didn't say I'd respect what they said, just that I'd respect them for daring to say it.

I'm interested in people who "go against the crowd"-------just a quirk of mine!

[Holly Goodhead]

I would allow you free speech, and I think I 'd even have some respect for someone who dared  defend Myra Hindley in any way, so long as I thought their motives for doing so were genuine.

And of course, I would challenge you!

I don't think anyone doubted Hindley's involvement.  The likes of Lord Longford campaigned on the basis she was remorseful and reformed and deserved the opportunity for parole.

Has anyone read CAL's book re the Hindley? 

[mrswah]

I don't think anyone doubted Hindley's involvement.  The likes of Lord Longford campaigned on the basis she was remorseful and reformed and deserved the opportunity for parole.

Has anyone read CAL's book re the Hindley?

I have, and it is very good. "One of Your Own".

She also wrote a book about David Smith (Hindley's brother in law, who went to the police and spilled the beans). That is very good too. I think it's called "Evil Relations".

IMO, nobody doubts Hindley's involvement because the evidence against her was so sound.

[Robittybob1]

I don't think anyone doubted Hindley's involvement.  The likes of Lord Longford campaigned on the basis she was remorseful and reformed and deserved the opportunity for parole.

Has anyone read CAL's book re the Hindley?

Hi, could you help me by defining who CAL is please?

[mrswah]

Hi, could you help me by defining who CAL is please?

Carol Ann Lee. She also wrote a book about the White House Farm murders. I recommend it to you , seeing that you're new to the case.

[Holly Goodhead]

I have, and it is very good. "One of Your Own".

She also wrote a book about David Smith (Hindley's brother in law, who went to the police and spilled the beans). That is very good too. I think it's called "Evil Relations".

IMO, nobody doubts Hindley's involvement because the evidence against her was so sound.

Thanks.  I've read a fair bit online about Hindley as I was curious as to what sort of background could give rise to such depravity.  There's no doubt she was involved.  Her voice was heard on the Lesley Ann Downey tape.

[mrswah]

Thanks.  I've read a fair bit online about Hindley as I was curious as to what sort of background could give rise to such depravity.  There's no doubt she was involved.  Her voice was heard on the Lesley Ann Downey tape.

Indeed. That's what I meant by sound evidence.

Better than all that "circumstantial" stuff !