0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Yes, two vacancies. Bit of a poisoned chalice though.
Not sure if NGB believes Bamber is innocent. There has been a lot of guilters on here and a lot of supporters who changed their mind from innocent. Being a defence lawyer is one thing. Being an unpaid director of a campaign where you believe the person is guilty, is another.
This doesn't work for me. It implies that Ainsley, first, went about his job while not committing any deliberate wrongs, then after the fact, he discovered that there were documents potentially helpful to the defence and so he chose to personally destroy them? On Ainsley being at the centre of this conviction, I am absolutely with Bill Robertson. Essex Constabulary have never seemed to want to give him up. However they must now be embarrassed at the very least, by these latest claims made in the press.
Do you really believe Neil would support Jeremy if he thought Jeremy had killed 2 children by shooting them in the head
Lawyers work for clients regardless of views. Posters have also changed stance over the last few yearsNGB does not post much. Hopefully he will confirm if he believes Bamber is guilty, innocent or guilty but a MOJ has occurred. As well as whether he is applying for Trudie's position.
NGBs work for Jeremy is voluntary/pro bono.
Hopefully NGB will give a summary of his work with Jeremy, what his current stance is & whether he wants to take over Trudie's role.
I have never been part of the Campaign Team although I gave some limited assistance to a member of it several years ago. I have not been involved with the legal team since 2012 when Simon McKay ceased to be involved. I have no interest in taking over from Trudie. I am sure someone from within the CT will volunteer.
With people ruling themselves out, Mike, Nugs & Jackie will have more of a chance.
What about Nigel? He publicly expressed his desire to kill Ann Eaton and David Boutflour lol
Mike, Nugs or Jackie will be a safer pair of hands.
Thank you NGB. Do you believe Jeremy is innocent, guilty but there was a MOJ in legal procedures, or not sure?
I have not changed my position on the case since I first posted here. I have in several posts explained my position overall in detail, and in numerous other posts I have given an opinion on specific areas of evidence. Rather than ask me to restate what I have stated before (I really do not have time) I suggest you use the search facility here and read earlier posts.
