Det. Supt. 'Mick' Ainsley - oversight of corrupt practices

[notsure]

The so-called circumstantial evidence was just fluff. The real issues were the silencer and Julie's testimony.

so nothing concrete then. it defies belief really doesn’t it. i think he should have another trial and all evidence should be on the table although i do understand a lot has either been destroyed or degraded but still enough to have a proper trial.

[Steve_uk]

so nothing concrete then. it defies belief really doesn’t it. i think he should have another trial and all evidence should be on the table although i do understand a lot has either been destroyed or degraded but still enough to have a proper trial.

There isn't really. All the Jeremy supporters can do is to keep the case high profile in the hope that the Establishment will tire of the thorn in its flesh.

[lookout]

It rests on the silencer.

[Steve_uk]

It rests on the silencer.

Yes it's probably your best bet, not harrowing Julie.

[JackieD]

Yes it's probably your best bet, not harrowing Julie.

‘Harrowing’

[JackieD]

‘Harrowing’

Well if all the relatives and guilters got together and demanded all the witheld information was released it things might be decided once and for all
But they don’t fight to get this witheld evidence released for obviously won’t

If they are all convinced JB is guilty why not.

[Steve_uk]

‘Harrowing’

harrow

cause distress to.


"Todd could take it, whereas I'm harrowed by it"

[Kaldin]

so nothing concrete then. it defies belief really doesn’t it. i think he should have another trial and all evidence should be on the table although i do understand a lot has either been destroyed or degraded but still enough to have a proper trial.

The silencer evidence was pretty concrete at the time, and it's still pretty compelling. If the silencer really was in the cupboard, the idea that Sheila put it there is not impossible, but it does require a lot of imagination to see her doing that.

Julie's testimony has never changed - she never retracted it, and if it was influencial on the jury, that hasn't changed.

All the other stuff about Jeremy's demeanour, his lifestyle, the bicycle, whether or not he should have phoned 999, etc - it's all interesting but it's not evidence.

[lookout]

 Everyone was looking to try and find something to nail JB, all had their own reasons for doing so and the only one who didn't have a reason/motive was Jeremy himself who hadn't a clue what was being PLANNED behind his back. Not the sharpest, was he ??

[Jane]

Everyone was looking to try and find something to nail JB, all had their own reasons for doing so and the only one who didn't have a reason/motive was Jeremy himself who hadn't a clue what was being PLANNED behind his back. Not the sharpest, was he ??

Or simply had no interest in the people who were forming those opinions?

[lookout]

Or simply had no interest in the people who were forming those opinions?

They had even less interest in him ! Except for his worth.

[Kaldin]

IMO, some people involved in this business had more faces than the town clock.

[Jan]

IMO, some people involved in this business had more faces than the town clock.

I agree . It’s hard to find witnesses who have not a vested interest or changed their minds depending on. Which way the wind blows .

[Jane]

They had even less interest in him ! Except for his worth.

Most of us don't feel unreserved affection for ALL our relatives.

[lookout]

Most of us don't feel unreserved affection for ALL our relatives.

Of course, they weren't/aren't really his are they ?? Makes a difference where money/properties are concerned.