Murderer Jeremy Bamber's legal bid for appeal refused - Oct 2012

[frank50]

Even Giovanni Di Stefano some time back said that there was nothing new in the further submissions and sadly ( for him) he couldnt see the case going anywhere. I really do think that , if the JR does fail ( as Im sure it will), Bamber's supporters will drop off. Whilst they go on, on the other forum, about making a fresh claim to the CCRC, that body has said that it wont entertain any further claims. All Bamber would then be able to do would be to bring yet another JR to make them re-open the case. Desperate stuff!

[frank50]

Theyre already going on about the judges ( as if anyone cares).

I think if it succeeds the JB forum will be celebrating for the next 25 years and if it fails, they'll be on about the corrupt state fr the next 25 and if Simon Hall's appeal fails too, that'll be a double dose or corruption to discuss until Kingdom come.

[ActualMat]

I knew it would be October by the way, and not November Mat !!!!

Although this is earlier than expected - there is still more to come. As John said, another couple of weeks.

[ActualMat]

But yes, this is GREAT news.

[Tim Invictus]

I knew it would be October by the way, and not November Mat !!!!

Although this is earlier than expected - there is still more to come. As John said, another couple of weeks.

A mere formality in a couple of weeks. Dennis Nilsen will be happy his boyfriend is never going to leave him!

[ActualMat]

I knew it would be October by the way, and not November Mat !!!!

Although this is earlier than expected - there is still more to come. As John said, another couple of weeks.

A mere formality in a couple of weeks. Dennis Nilsen will be happy is boyfriend is never going to leave him!

Yeah, it's over. Bamber won't get a CCRC hearing for a long, long, long time. We're talking years. (If he gets it at all and that is a huge if.)

[frank50]

i agree. He hasnt got a prayer of being granted permission unless he strikes it very lucky with the judge.

I knew it would be October by the way, and not November Mat !!!!

Although this is earlier than expected - there is still more to come. As John said, another couple of weeks.

A mere formality in a couple of weeks. Dennis Nilsen will be happy is boyfriend is never going to leave him!

Yeah, it's over. Bamber won't get a CCRC hearing for a long, long, long time. We're talking years. (If he gets it at all and that is a huge if.)

[Angelo222]

Its telling in my view that a judge refused permission on the papers. Often with a high-profile case like this the judge will at least refer the matter of permission to a hearing in open court. Makes me think he was unimpressed with the application. Shouldnt be surprised if it only goes before one judge. If its thrown out Bamber is going to be waiting a long time to go anywhere.

Can I ask frank if the hearing in court is to allow Bamber's lawyers an opportunity to argue the issues raised in the JR papers?  Does anyone know who will represent Bamber at the High Court as I think McKay is just a lawyer and not a lawyer/advocate?

[John]

is this all crap from the other forum ( I presume that if there was anything in it they would have put it to the CCRC) No doubt John will comment on this

Well, mike has the telephone logs - if they show a tel call made from whf and a call "very shortly" after from JB's house, JB is a free man
by "shortly after" i mean within the time a motor car could be driven between the 2 properties
indeed, when mike publishes those tel logs, JB will be immediately granted bail pending a further appeal to the court of appeal
jim

Even if there existed such logs and can I say I don't believe for a second that there are any, it would only serve to prove that Bamber did have an accomplice.

I wouldn't put it past Tesko fabricating a log just to satisfy his own depraved ego.  Sad old fool!

[frank50]

Yes - the hearing will basically allow Bamber's representative to argue his written case. It wont be a full hearing though and will possibly not last longer then a couple of hours ( its still at the filter stage where the court decides whether there is enough there to take it to a final hearing). Mckay is a solicitor-advocate according to his website, so will argue the case himself ( that's assuming they go for a hearing). I may pop along there myself if Im around the High Court.

Its telling in my view that a judge refused permission on the papers. Often with a high-profile case like this the judge will at least refer the matter of permission to a hearing in open court. Makes me think he was unimpressed with the application. Shouldnt be surprised if it only goes before one judge. If its thrown out Bamber is going to be waiting a long time to go anywhere.

Can I ask frank if the hearing in court is to allow Bamber's lawyers an opportunity to argue the issues raised in the JR papers?  Does anyone know who will represent Bamber at the High Court as I think McKay is just a lawyer and not a lawyer/advocate?

[frank50]

Yeh and those logs would have been at the heart of their case and therefore disclosed by now. The idea that Mike would have kept them up his sleeve is nonsense.

is this all crap from the other forum ( I presume that if there was anything in it they would have put it to the CCRC) No doubt John will comment on this

Well, mike has the telephone logs - if they show a tel call made from whf and a call "very shortly" after from JB's house, JB is a free man
by "shortly after" i mean within the time a motor car could be driven between the 2 properties
indeed, when mike publishes those tel logs, JB will be immediately granted bail pending a further appeal to the court of appeal
jim

Even if there existed such logs and can I say I don't believe for a second that there are any, it would only serve to prove that Bamber did have an accomplice.

I wouldn't put it past Tesko fabricating a log just to satisfy his own depraved ego.  Sad old fool!

[John]

Yes - the hearing will basically allow Bamber's representative to argue his written case. It wont be a full hearing though and will possibly not last longer then a couple of hours ( its still at the filter stage where the court decides whether there is enough there to take it to a final hearing). Mckay is a solicitor-advocate according to his website, so will argue the case himself ( that's assuming they go for a hearing). I may pop along there myself if Im around the High Court.

That would be brill frank.  Having someone inside the court as it happens would be priceless. Wish I could be there too!

Do we know when it is likely to be assuming McKay makes application?

[frank50]

I havent a clue when it will be, that's the problem and I could be away. It may not be listed this side of christmas though.I check the case lists most days so will know the day before at least and Im sure there will be loads of publicity from Bamber ahead of the hearing. If im here and free I will definitely go along ( assuming I can get in the courtroom as it will be mobbed!)

Yes - the hearing will basically allow Bamber's representative to argue his written case. It wont be a full hearing though and will possibly not last longer then a couple of hours ( its still at the filter stage where the court decides whether there is enough there to take it to a final hearing). Mckay is a solicitor-advocate according to his website, so will argue the case himself ( that's assuming they go for a hearing). I may pop along there myself if Im around the High Court.

That would be brill frank.  Having someone inside the court as it happens would be priceless. Wish I could be there too!

Do we know when it is likely to be assuming McKay makes application?

[John]

I havent a clue when it will be, that's the problem and I could be away. It may not be listed this side of christmas though.I check the case lists most days so will know the day before at least and Im sure there will be loads of publicity from Bamber ahead of the hearing. If im here and free I will definitely go along ( assuming I can get in the courtroom as it will be mobbed!)

I wonder if Jeremy Bamber will attend in person?   I suppose it isn't essential but ultimately his choice.

[frank50]

I cant see any way that he will be allowed to attend at all - certainly not at the permission stage, as the case is only arguable at that stage on the papers that have been lodged. It would also be unusual for him to attend the final hearing (in the unlikely event that there is one).

I havent a clue when it will be, that's the problem and I could be away. It may not be listed this side of christmas though.I check the case lists most days so will know the day before at least and Im sure there will be loads of publicity from Bamber ahead of the hearing. If im here and free I will definitely go along ( assuming I can get in the courtroom as it will be mobbed!)

I wonder if Jeremy Bamber will attend in person?   I suppose it isn't essential but ultimately his choice.