Thursday, February 17, 2011

Bamber: I f you do not believe you are a plant...

But how can you find that evidence when there is so much still being witheld. You know it could be just one piece of evidence that could make the difference. What about the photos and the recordings from when the police entered the house they could be invaluable.  The idea of frame ups come from julie mugford giving evidence in a murder she was implicated in if she was telling the truth and walking away Scott free with a pay off from the newspapers (who said crime doesn't pay) and of the rumours I don't know if it's true that one of the police who was on the case then going to work for the family who inherited the money. As I understand it the judge said in the summing up you believe BAMBER or mugford.  From what I read here Julie mugford put on the same Oscar winning performance in the witness box as she did at the funeral breaking down everytime the defence tried to cross examine her. 
Thank god for people like mike and people believe in innocent until proven guilty and no one so far has proved Jeremy guilty

Jackie, a jury did find him guilty. That's what he's fighting. He has to overturn evidence or find new evidence.

In almost all of these or similiar cases, police mis-management plays a part. It's not 'frame-up'. The evidence starts pointing one way, so off they go chasing it's direction. In this case it was worse than most. But the 'mis-management/mis-directed' argument has been put before the courts three times and has not been sufficient to overcome the other evidence.

And yes, thank God for people like Mike, who say hold on, there has to be something, who keep on going. They are unsung heroes. But that something has to be REAL, not theory, not ifs but or maybes.

Can Mike find a case where the 'not-used file' was  released in its entirety, because I don't know of one. It's unhelpful to speculate about what may or may not be in the file. The defence teams job is to ask the right questions 'of the file' and disclosure will be made - that HAS happened in this case. 

I came to this forum because I know things go wrong, but I genuinely began to think there's more evidence for his guilt than his innocence. The only reason I'm still following the forum is the silencer. It bugs the hell out of me.
         i) If the silencer wasn't used, why didn't the boys wake up?
         ii) Sheila can't have killed herself using it.
         iii) But why would the killer put it back in the cupboard?
         iv) Why didn't the police find it - yet were discussing silencers on 09/08?

That's why I've queried the possibility of a third party, of other things happening in the area. If a third party, then the above 'problems' make JB's innocence more likely for me, although they may not disappear in terms of his case.

But Mike and JB appear insistent that Sheila did it. Do you see my problem?

If I was certain he was guilty - or become certain - I would say so and leave the forum permanently as it wouldn't be helpful or fair for me to be here. And I do have a life!

So here I am, talking about a silencer - a slightly strange sentence!


Offline Jackiepreece

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Karma: +1/-9
    • View Profile
Re: Relatives
« Reply #61 on: Today at 01:28 AM »
That does explain certain things and I don't really understand the technical information about the silencer but I really don't understand why the silencer would be put back in the cupboard maybe I prefer to think someone is innocent and a family is dead because of someones very serious illness but as I have sat in that very court at Chelmsford at a murder trial and didn't like the way the case was handled I feel so strongly about the way this was dealt with by the police I will be behind the campaign hoping there is a retrial. It makes a joke of British justice and there are so many questions not answered.  Things like this frighten the life out of you if you have sat in a jury deliberating room with another bunch of people who don't seem to realise the gravity of the decision they are about to make.  If the case doesn't get referred to the appeal court this time what do you do tell Jeremy we think you could be innocent but we are not going to do anything anymore because we don't want to get your hopes up. I think your saying theonly hope Jeremy has is new evidence and if the defence don't know what to ask for out of restricted evidence I think your saying there isn't much hope

Offline Hartley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 121
  • Karma: +8/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Relatives
« Reply #62 on: Today at 01:51 AM »

Whenever Mike Tesko gets a good forum going there always seems to be some avid, highly motivated anti- Bamber member who joins in. Are they plants by the family who inherited everything?

You are so way off base here.

If you bothered to read any of my posts in this forum you would see that I simply don't accept the spoon fed non-evidence based speculation churned out by Mike and others.

I do think JB is guilty based on the evidence available. I concede that files and evidence has not been released and it's contents may well dictate otherwise, but it's just as likely, if not more so that it would either reinforce his guilt or simply contain no more evidence which points one way or the other. Nobody can really comment on the contents of the withheld files and they certainly shouldn't automatically come to the conclusion that it points to his innocence.

The police investigation was a complete mess, do you really think that the same people could then put together evidence to frame an innocent man? Think of the number of people involved, I don't believe it is possible.

I'm not anti-bamber, heck I'm not even highly motivated, or a plant, that's an absurd accusation. I am however anti-multiple murderer, which in my opinion is what the evidence available seems to indicate.

Take a walk out of that box for a second and consider the relatives, they have lost five members of their family, they can't grieve or move on as perhaps other people who lose loved ones do due to the manner in which they were lost. Every appeal, every anniversary of the conviction and any occurrence of a gun crime brings an invasion of reporters and site seeing trespassers to their home invading their privacy. Their home has been broken into, not by burglars, but by sick people wanting to see where the murders took place.

You might say big deal, what about Jeremy, he's lost his family and 26 years. I agree, a raw deal if he's innocent. But what if he's guilty? What if he's guilt?

I came to this forum looking for information and simply found a whole bunch of people crying for JB's release, certain that they have witnessed a travesty, an appalling miscarriage of justice, and it appears that they base their opinion on a YouTube video and an article in the daily mirror.

Now there are a few people participating in this forum who have a more informed and mature interest approach to the discussions, and that's what interests me. I respect Mikes opinion and amount of research and involvement he's had even if I do disagree with a lot of what he says.

Anyway to end, I will simply reiterate that I have seen no evidence to suggest the innocence of JB, yes there's lots of decrepancies in the case, which may well warrant a retrial, but none of it indicates his innocence.

Over and out.

Offline Jackiepreece

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
  • Karma: +1/-9
    • View Profile
Re: Relatives
« Reply #63 on: Today at 03:12 AM »
You are clearly either one of the relatives or a family friend I clearly have my own opinion and I so far have not seen anything proving jb s guilty. Two major factors for me looking at the case 1 Julie mugford I personally do not believe anything she has said and I don't believe the police would not have charged her in relation to the murders as she could have quite clearly have stopped the murders she knew they were taking place. The other problem I have I don't believe the killer would have put the silencer back in the cupboard. Then we are back to the relatives who unbelievably manage to find the silencer by chance and then apparently at some time after the case offered one of the policeman a job of securityon the caravan park the family Had inherited. A further rumour please correct me if I am wrong some of the police involved in the case were disciplined for taking gifts.  Following on from all that everyone these days know the lengths the police go to if they want to solve a crime.  Just jog your memory the Honeytrap the police used to try and pin a murder on Colin stagg.  While the police were trying to fit Colin stagg up (they was no evidence against him) the real murderer went on to murder another women and child.  So yes I am suspicious of the police and the relatives for the reasons I have given.  If you read all these threads the people who want jb to have a retrial outnumber the people who think he is guilty. The majority of people on here are desperate for answers and hope campaigning for a retrial will find definitive answers to what really happened that night at whf

Online Pete0001

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 211
  • Karma: +10/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Relatives
« Reply #64 on: Today at 08:06 AM »
You are clearly either one of the relatives or a family friend ..

Explain Jackiepreece... how do you come to this conclusion? or is it purely an idea someone else has said and you thought it was clever to jump on board too?
Are you saying that anyone that doesn't just accept the evidence without question must be anti JB? I find that shocking from a person that was on a jury.

Just answer the question.