Author Topic: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?  (Read 92097 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #195 on: October 16, 2019, 06:21:PM »
I don't recall her doing that. What exactly did she state that you are referring to?

It's in her statement - if you don't recall it, refresh your memory.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #196 on: October 16, 2019, 07:31:PM »
Men have the same crying function because, they belong to the same species as 'women'. The rest, depends on the individual.  ::)





That's as maybe but they do things differently, such as putting on a brave front----like the rest of the ones who were at the funeral.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 32561
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #197 on: October 16, 2019, 07:44:PM »




That's as maybe but they do things differently, such as putting on a brave front----like the rest of the ones who were at the funeral.


Some do. Some don't. Unless we were there, at the service, all we had were snap shots. I believe, because there wasn't sufficient space, there were more outside the church, than in it. We could not have seen them all.

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #198 on: October 16, 2019, 08:02:PM »
Pc West's evidence at trial indicates that it was less than 8 minutes, probably about 5 minutes. This fits with the other evidence if Jeremy got dressed before making his call to Pc West.

West alone is not a credible source as he has changed his times and contradicted himself.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 37666
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #199 on: October 16, 2019, 08:02:PM »
Ground 4 – timing of telephone call to Julie Mugford 289.

Ground 4 relates to the first telephone call made by the appellant to Julie Mugford on the night of the killing. The prosecution contended at trial that this preceded the telephone call to the police, whilst the appellant asserted that it was made after he had telephoned the police and before he left home to go to the farmhouse.

It has to be said that whichever version is right, it was remarkable that the appellant made such a call. On his own version he had just received a dramatic plea for help from his father, he had rung the police and had been asked to go to meet officers at the farm.

Yet he delayed for long enough to make a telephone call to someone many miles away, who could not possibly help in the situation. However, it clearly was even less likely that he would have telephoned before he rang the police and if the call was shortly after 3 a.m. it was wholly inconsistent with his account and only consistent with the account of Julie Mugford as to the nature of that call.

---------

Jeremy's call to Julie has always been very damaging together with his 'no comments' when interviewed about it. Although unlike Nevill's two phone calls, it did happen.



« Last Edit: October 16, 2019, 08:03:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #200 on: October 16, 2019, 08:24:PM »
West alone is not a credible source as he has changed his times and contradicted himself.




According to Bill he said it was impossible for West to have put JB's call on hold prior to 03.26 and return to speak to JB after having spoken to Saxby at 03.30 if JB was having a different conversation with JM between 03.25 and 03.33. West had said all along that the call by JB to West was at 03.36 with the call prior to 03.26 had to be the call from Nevill.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #201 on: October 16, 2019, 08:26:PM »



According to Bill he said it was impossible for West to have put JB's call on hold prior to 03.26 and return to speak to JB after having spoken to Saxby at 03.30 if JB was having a different conversation with JM between 03.25 and 03.33. West had said all along that the call by JB to West was at 03.36 with the call prior to 03.26 had to be the call from Nevill.




Which makes JB innocent does it not ?

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #202 on: October 16, 2019, 08:36:PM »



Which makes JB innocent does it not ?

No. An Ill thought out narrative based on misconceived data proves nothing.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 32561
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #203 on: October 16, 2019, 08:50:PM »



Which makes JB innocent does it not ?


NO!! It just makes two and two anything you want it to be.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 37666
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #204 on: October 16, 2019, 09:04:PM »

NO!! It just makes two and two anything you want it to be.

Lookout is well aware of the mountain of the incriminating forensic and circumstantial evidence. The gut feeling means it is due to the industrial frame.

The gut feeling will mean Jeremy being the only alive suspect with motives and no alibi is down to bad luck.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Reader

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2456
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #205 on: October 16, 2019, 09:19:PM »
It's in her statement - if you don't recall it, refresh your memory.
In the relevant part of AE's statement, as already discussed, it says that Jeremy told the police that he had timed the police action to his call as 11 minutes by checking his watch. However, timing the police action isn't the same thing as timing the duration of his call. This does, by the way, indicate that Jeremy had dressed and put his watch on prior to making his call to the police rather than after calling the police.

The statement also asserts that one of the police officers told AE that June Bamber and Sheila Bamber were both on the bed shot with Sheila Bamber having a bible on her chest with the gun beside her.

What do you make of that?

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #206 on: October 16, 2019, 09:29:PM »
In the relevant part of AE's statement, as already discussed, it says that Jeremy told the police that he had timed the police action to his call as 11 minutes by checking his watch. However, timing the police action isn't the same thing as timing the duration of his call. This does, by the way, indicate that Jeremy had dressed and put his watch on prior to making his call to the police rather than after calling the police.

The statement also asserts that one of the police officers told AE that June Bamber and Sheila Bamber were both on the bed shot with Sheila Bamber having a bible on her chest with the gun beside her.

What do you make of that?

Ann Eaton is not a credible witness.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #207 on: October 16, 2019, 09:31:PM »
No. An Ill thought out narrative based on misconceived data proves nothing.

I agree, no one has given a definitive and trustworthy version of the timings os they prove or disprove nothing.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #208 on: October 16, 2019, 09:42:PM »
Nothing will prove anything to those who advocate guilt. It's a losing battle.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?
« Reply #209 on: October 16, 2019, 10:01:PM »
Nothing will prove anything to those who advocate guilt. It's a losing battle.

Not really true Lookout given that David doesn't advocate guilt and even he can see there is a problem trying to use the phone calls timings and or a call from Nevill.
Few people have the imagination for reality