The Carr Family

[puglove]

Lookout!   

I find it incredibly disturbing that an almost 80 year old blinkered, bigoted woman has such an unhealthy, idealised concept of a child-killer she will never know or meet. She's been slightly more circumspect since her daughter has been aware of her inappropriate passion, but it's far too little, too late. Appalling.   

[John]

I find it incredibly disturbing that an almost 80 year old blinkered, bigoted woman has such an unhealthy, idealised concept of a child-killer she will never know or meet. She's been slightly more circumspect since her daughter has been aware of her inappropriate passion, but it's far too little, too late. Appalling.   

They say it takes all sorts to make a world Puglove.  You also forgot Jackie Preece, shes taking him to the airport and putting him on a plane to New Zealand on his release you know.   Poor dear 

[Holly Goodhead]

They say it takes all sorts to make a world Puglove.  You also forgot Jackie Preece, shes taking him to the airport and putting him on a plane to New Zealand on his release you know.   Poor dear 

May I ask if you took Jackie up on her invitation to ride 1 of her 2 horses followed by lunch at her local gastro pub?

[Holly Goodhead]

I find it incredibly disturbing that an almost 80 year old blinkered, bigoted woman has such an unhealthy, idealised concept of a child-killer she will never know or meet. She's been slightly more circumspect since her daughter has been aware of her inappropriate passion, but it's far too little, too late. Appalling.   

I've certainly detected a change.  Probably a restraining influence.

[Caroline]

James (known as Jim) was the patriarch and a manager at OCP.  It seems he suspected JB of the OCP burglary from the off and made his views known long before JM 'came forward'.

Robert (aka Rob) was Jim's son and at the time of the tragedy a serving officer with the MET.

Louise was Jim's daughter.  As it happened she was in Australia when JB visited and the pair shared some accommodation for a while. 

It seems the Carrs disliked JB and went out of their way to make their views known.  I have no idea whether their views were justified and JB was an unlikeable character or these people were just busy bodies and/or resented JB for whatever reason(s) or had some other reason(s) to talk badly about him.   Regardless like most lay witnesses they could offer nothing of evidential value.

More to follow...

Their suspicions were justified as Jeremy DID burgle the caravan park. The fact that they thought of him (and were right) does really say something about his character. They obviously had reason to suspect him - everyone else can't be wrong and Jeremy right. I don't think it's a case of like or dislike - they just knew what he was like.

[Holly Goodhead]

Their suspicions were justified as Jeremy DID burgle the caravan park. The fact that they thought of him (and were right) does really say something about his character. They obviously had reason to suspect him - everyone else can't be wrong and Jeremy right. I don't think it's a case of like or dislike - they just knew what he was like.

There can be no doubt the burglary was wrong and he paid a high price for it at his trial.  I'm not condoning what he did but imo he was aggrieved that AE was earning more than him for the same role and responsibilities.  When this was highlighted June told him he would be entitled to more when he learned to live properly.  He was a grown man and it wasn't for June as a controlling director to attempt to control JB's lifestyle by determining his income.

If all these people 'just knew what he was like' in terms of honesty or rather dishonesty why did they have him living with them? 

[Caroline]

There can be no doubt the burglary was wrong and he paid a high price for it at his trial.  I'm not condoning what he did but imo he was aggrieved that AE was earning more than him for the same role and responsibilities.  When this was highlighted June told him he would be entitled to more when he learned to live properly.  He was a grown man and it wasn't for June as a controlling director to attempt to control JB's lifestyle by determining his income.

If all these people 'just knew what he was like' in terms of honesty or rather dishonesty why did they have him living with them?

Why did they have him living with them? I think that is pretty obvious - he was their son! I don't think June was trying to control his lifestyle, she was trying to make him take and own some responsibility. He wanted all of the perks without putting in the graft. He seem to me to be someone who has a sense on entitlement and that would rub anyone up the wrong way.

[Holly Goodhead]

Why did they have him living with them? I think that is pretty obvious - he was their son! I don't think June was trying to control his lifestyle, she was trying to make him take and own some responsibility. He wanted all of the perks without putting in the graft. He seem to me to be someone who has a sense on entitlement and that would rub anyone up the wrong way.

I was referring to the Carr family ie if they disliked JB why have him sharing accomm in Oz with Louise Carr?

My interpretation of June's 'when you learn to live properly' was based on the fact JB had JM staying over at his cottage which June didn't agree with hence the offer to buy JM a property. 

[Caroline]

I was referring to the Carr family ie if they disliked JB why have him sharing accomm in Oz with Louise Carr?

My interpretation of June's 'when you learn to live properly' was based on the fact JB had JM staying over at his cottage which June didn't agree with hence the offer to buy JM a property.

I don't think there is any indication that the Carr family didn't necessarily 'like' Bamber, they just knew what he was like. Also, he was in NZ years before the incident at the caravan park - had the robbery occurred 'before' NZ, you might have a point but .....

June may have been a bit puritanical, lots of parents are, they were a bit old-fashioned, but Bamber wasn't chained to a tractor and got to enjoy his free time the way he wanted - he took no notice of June.

[Holly Goodhead]

I don't think there is any indication that the Carr family didn't necessarily 'like' Bamber, they just knew what he was like. Also, he was in NZ years before the incident at the caravan park - had the robbery occurred 'before' NZ, you might have a point but .....

June may have been a bit puritanical, lots of parents are, they were a bit old-fashioned, but Bamber wasn't chained to a tractor and got to enjoy his free time the way he wanted - he took no notice of June.

According to CAL the Carrs disliked playing with JB as children.  Louise Carr said she also disliked sharing her house with him in Oz.  So why invite him to stay in the first place? 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430541#msg430541

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430452#msg430452

It seems JB brushed off June's religiosity but as a controlling director (42%) of OCP June was able to dictate JB's income.  I'm pretty sure if you and I had identical roles and responsibilities and the manager decided I would receive a higher income on the basis I was married and you weren't or vice-versa we wouldn't be best pleased.

[APRIL]

According to CAL the Carrs disliked playing with JB as children.  Louise Carr said she also disliked sharing her house with him in Oz.  So why invite him to stay in the first place? 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430541#msg430541

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430452#msg430452

It seems JB brushed off June's religiosity but as a controlling director (42%) of OCP June was able to dictate JB's income.  I'm pretty sure if you and I had identical roles and responsibilities and the manager decided I would receive a higher income on the basis I was married and you weren't or vice-versa we wouldn't be best pleased.

But supposing one of you showed that they were more diligent/more enthusiastic/more deserving of a higher salary? How would either of you feel if one of you put all the effort in and the other received the same salary for doing little/nothing?

[Holly Goodhead]

But supposing one of you showed that they were more diligent/more enthusiastic/more deserving of a higher salary? How would either of you feel if one of you put all the effort in and the other received the same salary for doing little/nothing?

But I don't believe this was the case here.  AE and JB were minority shareholders (8%).  According to AE's WS's she and JB sang from the same hymn sheet in terms of how OCP should be developed and run.  There's no evidence of anyone saying JB didn't fulfil what was required of him?

[Caroline]

According to CAL the Carrs disliked playing with JB as children.  Louise Carr said she also disliked sharing her house with him in Oz.  So why invite him to stay in the first place? 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430541#msg430541

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8633.msg430452#msg430452

It seems JB brushed off June's religiosity but as a controlling director (42%) of OCP June was able to dictate JB's income.  I'm pretty sure if you and I had identical roles and responsibilities and the manager decided I would receive a higher income on the basis I was married and you weren't or vice-versa we wouldn't be best pleased.

Did they invite him or did he invite himself? Why did they dislike playing with him? It seems that quite a lot of people had an adverse reaction to Jeremy - it says more about him, than them!

I don't for one moment believe that Jeremy's position relied on his just being married.

[Holly Goodhead]

Did they invite him or did he invite himself? Why did they dislike playing with him? It seems that quite a lot of people had an adverse reaction to Jeremy - it says more about him, than them!

I don't for one moment believe that Jeremy's position relied on his just being married.

No idea who invited who but having to endure someone for a few hours during the course of a social is one thing having to share your home is another.  Even if he invited himself they could just say 'sorry, no room in the inn'!

A lot of people seem to have had an adverse reaction to JB after the event and yet were quite happy in his company beforehand including having sex with him, accepting his generosity and living with him eg JM, LR, MD and MW.   

[APRIL]

No idea who invited who but having to endure someone for a few hours during the course of a social is one thing having to share your home is another.  Even if he invited himself they could just say 'sorry, no room in the inn'!

A lot of people seem to have had an adverse reaction to JB after the event and yet were quite happy in his company beforehand including having sex with him, accepting his generosity and living with him eg JM, LR, MD and MW.

There is some suggestion that the shared home was a hostel -although I can't verify it- which could put a rather different interpretation on it. It seems to me that there were more who had a simple gut reaction about Jeremy's character, than who accepted his hospitality/had sex with him...................although, arguably, it's possible they MAY have done both.