For Those That Believe JB Guilty...

[steve_trousers]

Hello lady Holly. Yes, and this backs up my point that that is more accurately what the judge said "not to convict based on her testimony ALONE" and that is very different from implying she was an unreliable witness. Julie Mugford was a very credible witness.

Wasn't the silencer blood evidence destroyed in 1996? In which case Jeremy's hopes of being freed have changed anyway from "somewhere between slim and none" to "I hear slim just left town".

In any case if you believe Jeremy is guilty that same evidence tested with modern techniques would have only confirmed that Sheila couldn't have done it.

[Holly Goodhead]

Hello lady Holly. Yes, and this backs up my point that that is more accurately what the judge said "not to convict based on her testimony ALONE" and that is very different from implying she was an unreliable witness. Julie Mugford was a very credible witness.

Wasn't the silencer blood evidence destroyed in 1996? In which case Jeremy's hopes of being freed have changed anyway from "somewhere between slim and none" to "I hear slim just left town".

In any case if you believe Jeremy is guilty that same evidence tested with modern techniques would have only confirmed that Sheila couldn't have done it.

I can only go on Ewen Smith's comments above as I haven't read anything from the judge about the reliability of JM's testimony.  If the judge advised and directed the jury not to convict on JM's testimony alone as it wasn't good enough it seems in stark contrast to the comments made by the trial judge, Sir Hugh Park, in the case of Stefan Kiszko:

The judge praised the three girls who had made the exposure claims, Buckley in particular, for their "bravery and honesty" in giving evidence in court and their "sharp observations". Pamela Hind's evidence was read out in court. Park said that Buckley's "sharp eyes set this train of inquiry into motion".

Did JB's trial judge, Sir Maurice Drake, praise JM for her bravery and honesty or make similar comments?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed

[Holly Goodhead]

I understand all visible blood inside the silencer was swabbed away pre trial.

I've heard the silencer is displayed in EP's museum but I've no idea whether there's any truth to this.

I believe there are forensic tests capable of undermining the blood/silencer evidence.

[steve_trousers]

well, we can't compare what different judges remark on different cases, but our Judge certainly commended JM's testimony that it had "the ring of truth about it" and for me that is high praise albeit perhaps not the highest possible praise of her brave testimony. But then it never needed to be.

I never presumed Julie mugford was a saint, for example i'm sure she probably did have her sights set on being lady muck of cowshit farm through marriage to Jeremy. All that changed however on the night of 7th August 1985, and her conscience quickly unravelled leading her to go to police and tell the truth. She was a credible witness not as Samson suggested a Liar who lied and lied again.

[Holly Goodhead]

well, we can't compare what different judges remark on different cases, but our Judge certainly commended JM's testimony that it had "the ring of truth about it" and for me that is high praise albeit perhaps not the highest possible praise of her brave testimony. But then it never needed to be.

I never presumed Julie mugford was a saint, for example i'm sure she probably did have her sights set on being lady muck of cowshit farm through marriage to Jeremy. All that changed however on the night of 7th August 1985, and her conscience quickly unravelled leading her to go to police and tell the truth. She was a credible witness not as Samson suggested a Liar who lied and lied again.

Are you able to provide a source for the "ring of truth about it" comment? 

The four 13 year old female prosecution witnesses mentioned above "lied for a laugh" at Stefan Kiszko's trial and yet the trial judge referred to their "bravery" and "honesty". 

Samson and I believe JM was 'groomed' by EP.

[APRIL]

Are you able to provide a source for the "ring of truth about it" comment? 

The four 13 year old female prosecution witnesses mentioned above "lied for a laugh" at Stefan Kiszko's trial and yet the trial judge referred to their "bravery" and "honesty". 

Samson and I believe JM was 'groomed' by EP.

If we're going to allow that, at 20, Julie probably had more between her ears, than Jeremy, it's very possible that she thought that, by getting her own story told first, it would help to negate anything of detriment to her character. If EP groomed her, I can't see they'd have been able to do more than assist her to accomplish this. She couldn't have had a physical hand in what happened because she was miles away -the phone call MAY have been a prearranged 'signal'- but it's highly likely she knew more that she let on.

[steve_trousers]

Again, you can't compare witnesses on 2 different cases. Your comparing Julies testimony with witnesses on a totally unrelated case which turned out to be a miscarriage of Justice. Something we know the Bamber case is not as he implicated himself with his insistence on the 3 am call from Nevill at the farm.

I don't need to provide sources, the judges comments are in the public domain. The jury were asked to weigh up the evidence and believed her, the same conclusion I would have reached had I been a juror. The same Evidence she repeated at the 2002 appeal.

[Holly Goodhead]

Again, you can't compare witnesses on 2 different cases. Your comparing Julies testimony with witnesses on a totally unrelated case which turned out to be a miscarriage of Justice. Something we know the Bamber case is not as he implicated himself with his insistence on the 3 am call from Nevill at the farm.

I don't need to provide sources, the judges comments are in the public domain. The jury were asked to weigh up the evidence and believed her, the same conclusion I would have reached had I been a juror. The same Evidence she repeated at the 2002 appeal.

If we were discussing Stefan Kiszko's case pre acquittal do you think everyone, lay and expert alike, would see it for what it was ie a miscarriage of justice?

Another guilter attributed "the ring of truth" to JB's defence:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6331.msg279608.html#msg279608

The jury had to weigh up all the evidence and we have no idea how they arrived at their verdicts and what weight they attributed to the various aspects.  We know they asked the judge for clarification about the blood in the silencer.

Independent journalist, David Connett, who sat through much of the trial and heard JM provide her testimony found her unreliable:

Personally, I couldn't understand how she could be relied upon as a witness, but others, particularly women, thought the contradictions in her evidence made her more compelling.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/past-crimes-the-bamber-files-2046383.html

JM wasn't called at JB's 2002 appeal.

[Myster]

The truth about the 'ring of truth' from CAL...

[Holly Goodhead]

The truth about the 'ring of truth' from CAL...

Thanks Myster.  Has CAL provided a source?  According to CAL the judge seems to be asking the jury to consider whether JM's testimony had a 'ring of truth' to it.  Whereas Steve seemed to be saying the judge said JM's testimony had a 'ring of truth' to it.  Big difference.

[Myster]

Thanks Myster.  Has CAL provided a source?  According to CAL the judge seems to be asking the jury to consider whether JM's testimony had a 'ring of truth' to it.  Whereas Steve seemed to be saying the judge said JM's testimony had a 'ring of truth' to it.  Big difference.

An interview (possibly) with Martin Delgado of the Mail in 2002.

But the judge did say that as the trial progressed and evidence built up, he thought JM was telling the truth.

[Holly Goodhead]

An interview (possibly) with Martin Delgado of the Mail in 2002.

But the judge did say that as the trial progressed and evidence built up, he thought JM was telling the truth.

Source appreciated.   

How reliable are male judges from the 1970's/1980's era in assessing the testimony of young women?  We know in the case of Stefan Kiszko the trial judge praised the 4 x 13 year old girls for their "bravery" and "honesty" when in fact they told the court a pack of lies "for a laugh". 

[APRIL]

An interview (possibly) with Martin Delgado of the Mail in 2002.

But the judge did say that as the trial progressed and evidence built up, he thought JM was telling the truth.

If he believed that Julie's evidence had "the ring of truth" it could have been said either as a directive OR an invitation.

[adam]

If he believed that Julie's evidence had "the ring of truth" it could have been said either as a directive OR an invitation.

I don't think the judge said Julie's testimony had a 'ring of truth' to it.

It was Bamber's lawyers who privately said all her WS's merged together & there was a 'ring of truth' to them. 

[steve_trousers]

Touche Holly.

Either way, Julie Mugford's testimony certainly had the ring of truth about it and she was a credible and excellent witness and not a liar as Mr Samson asserted.