My "Forensic Breakthrough" does have valid sources to support it. NGBs endorsement and Jeremy's letter
The material sent to me by David1819 is in the form of a report, which includes images and diagrams as well as text. It is well written and well presented. It analyses an important part of the evidence in the case, using methods not applied previously. Although he accepts that he is not an expert in the relevant field, he has researched published works by experts in the field, quoting relevant extracts in support of his conclusions. He has also studied relevant photographs and made calculations and measurements using techniques which to me seem appropriate.
David1819's conclusions support the defence case on this issue and specifically counter conclusions reached on this by the Court of Appeal in the 2002 appeal.
I am not an expert in the field involved and clearly for this to be presented to the CCRC as part of new submissions David1819's report and conclusions would have to be reviewed and validated by a suitably qualified expert. However, I can see no reason to doubt the conclusions reached and have given david1819 my view in more detail.
NGB is so biased he ridiculously said that he finds Mike's claims of police moving Sheila's body from the kitchen credible. Holding him out as proof that you theory is valid is a complete waste of time.
Jeremy has a vested interest in advancing any nonsense he can think of and has done so in the past. That he said to forward it to his lawyer in no way means the theory is valid.
Your story of why you refused to release it constantly changed, you can't even post the real answer which is you are scared of your theory being rapidly disproved by people who are objective.
You claimed to me in a PM that you feared your theory would be proved wrong and yet the campaign team still deciding to use it for propaganda purposes and that this is why you didn't want it publicly released. You said you would not allow me to review it because you feared I would leak it publicly and could not trust my assurances I wouldn't.
I assured you I would not leak it but that if it is invalid I will not hold back and tear the crap out of it. That's the real reason you won't allow an objective review your ego can't take having it easily dismantled in the same way I dismantled your bogus claims about the moderator label having a case number not yet in use at the time of the creation of the label. The case number on the tag was in use since September 7, 1985 and the label was created after this so there was no problem at all except in your mind. No doubt the same ignorance tha led you to believe the label was flawed is behind your theory.
I didn't say she secretly read their diary's. What I was trying to point out is that Jeremy's "Confessions" do not corroborate the crime scene and that all her information can be traced back to sources other than Jeremy.
1) You started a thread suggesting that police should have wiretapped Jeremy's phone and made Julie call to try to get him to implicate himself or to wire her and have her meet him and try to get her to implicate himself and that the failure of them to do so suggests they knew she was lying. Your suggestions were ridiculous. Jeremy didn't even admit he personally carried out the murders when he was with Julie, why would anyone expect him to admit he personally killed them after? There was no viable way for her to contact him out of the blue in September and bring up the murders in a way that would prevent him from becoming suspicious let alone to admit he personally carried out the murders. They chose to interrogate his hitman and learned he lied about hiring MM as a hitman. What would be the purpose in wiring her to try to get him to admit on tape that he hired a hitman given he made the claim up?
2) You made the bogus claim that Julie definitely took items from Boutflour's diary and made up a fairytale around them. You claimed you proved this by virtue of not all her details being totally unique though this in reality proves nothing that you claimed. You have a very bad habit of claiming things prove things that they actually don't.
You also made up the absurd standard that only if every single detail were not new but rather totally unique could her account be trusted. For instance if Jeremy alone knew the kitchen window could be used to enter the premises then her account that Jeremy told her such before the murders could be trusted but since people other in addition to Jeremy were aware of this it means that Julie could have obtained this information from others and thus it must be discounted.
This standard you made up is one intended to prevent any of Julie's account from being used against Jeremy. Such a standard bears no relation to reality. Just because multiple people are aware of a fact that doesn't disprove one's claim that a particular person told it to her. The trier of fact must evaluate whether to believe such person.
You don't believe her solely because you are in the tank for Jeremy and thus would not accept anything short of a videotape of him committing the murders and even then might claim it was doctored.
The bottom line is that your claim that you proved Julie lied and adopted claims from Boutflour is false. You proved no such thing except in your own mind.
