What Time Roughly Was The Bedroom Telephone Put In The Kitchen?

[mrswah]

Well, as you’re so disbelieving and distrushut upl, why do you believe everything Jeremy Bamber says is true despite him not being able to give any evidence, and despite him making contradictory claims in his statements which were proved to be lies?

What evidence do you have that any of us "believe everything Jeremy Bamber says is true" ???

[Robittybob1]

You’re wrong.

We had an answer machine in 1982. We had to keep one in the house for business reasons.

What's more, it took full size cassette tapes and could record messages depending on how much tape was left: so if there was an hour’s time of tape left people could speak for as long as they liked.

We could also record conversations without the person knowing, which later became illegal — you had to inform them you were recording the conversation — but I doubt everyone did, or still does. Those machines are still in existence, although you won’t find them on Amazon or suchlike 😌

I still have that machine packed away somewhere, but I don’t use it as I have voicemail etc.

OK, it might depend on the type of machine, but plenty of times an answerphone has shut off simply if I paused for too long.   Unless we know the type Jeremy possibly had we don't know the answer.

[John]

Had CAL provided cites for every single detail in her book, she’d have never got it written. You can console yourself with the fact that as Jeremy Bamber is so litigious and studies every single WORD, had he not had an answer machine he’d have immediately put out that CAL was making libellous comments. His silence speaks volumes, I find...

I am indeed saying he had an answer machine, because I’ve read several cites that says so.

It has always been forum policy to provide cites where appropriate. It is also good etiquette.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If there are official notes why didn't CAL use them as her source? I'm not saying there was an answer machine, so I don't need to look for evidence. It's those who are insisting that there was one who need to supply evidence to support their claims.

She cites the woman’s witness statement as her source, I already told you this so why are you deliberately ignoring it?

[APRIL]

She cites the woman’s witness statement as her source, I already told you this so why are you deliberately ignoring it?

Because it appears the goal posts have been moved from demanding cites, to sub dividing those cites into groups of official and non official...................and you can bet your life corroboration with be demanded of official cites when they're seen to favour guilt over innocence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Because it appears the goal posts have been moved from demanding cites, to sub dividing those cites into groups of official and non official...................and you can bet your life corroboration with be demanded of official cites when they're seen to favour guilt over innocence.

Oh right, so only the actual witness statement will do, otherwise CAL obviously made it up?  I getcha

[APRIL]

Oh right, so only the actual witness statement will do, otherwise CAL obviously made it up?  I getcha

That appears to be about the size of it. It remains to be seen how flexible are the requirements asked of supporters.

[Caroline]

It has always been forum policy to provide cites where appropriate. It is also good etiquette.

I wholeheartedly agree, the annoying thing is that some posters are deciding to pick and choose over references and you begin to think - what's the point? Specifically - we have quoted Wilkes's book which states that Bamber was classified as a psychopath by a psychiatrist post trial and some posters are insinuating that this was made up. Common sense would tell you that given that the book was written in the early 90's when the defence team were very much alive and kicking, that had this been made up, they would have said so - Bamber would have said so. If Wilkes decided not to reveal the psychiatrist's name, that's up to him, but the cite is a valid one.

[Caroline]

If there are official notes why didn't CAL use them as her source? I'm not saying there was an answer machine, so I don't need to look for evidence. It's those who are insisting that there was one who need to supply evidence to support their claims.

There was an answerphone, you have been given a cite, if you choose not to believe it then don't be surprised if people don't bother o provide cites to you in future!

[G-Unit]

There was an answerphone, you have been given a cite, if you choose not to believe it then don't be surprised if people don't bother o provide cites to you in future!

From what I've seen very few cites are provided anyway.

[Caroline]

From what I've seen very few cites are provided anyway.

I always provide cites!

[Vertigo Swirl]

From what I've seen very few cites are provided anyway.

I gave you a cite and you completely ignored it.

[Robittybob1]

Because it appears the goal posts have been moved from demanding cites, to sub dividing those cites into groups of official and non official...................and you can bet your life corroboration with be demanded of official cites when they're seen to favour guilt over innocence.

Absolutely.

[Robittybob1]

Oh right, so only the actual witness statement will do, otherwise CAL obviously made it up?  I getcha

No, I'd say we need photographic evidence as well.  Witnesses can lie.  You don't take Jeremy's witness statement as gospel do you.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's you who is suggesting that I believe everything Jeremy Bamber says, not me. In my opinion you're jumping to false conclusions.

So tell us - do you believe everything he says or not?