Author Topic: Justice for Jeremy  (Read 1335 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline handyman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
Justice for Jeremy
« on: June 05, 2020, 06:56:AM »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2020, 11:08:AM »
This is yet another supporter who saw right through the TV drama earlier in the year---as did many others !
CAL may have done Jeremy a favour yet ? People aren't so stupid afterall.

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1890
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #2 on: June 05, 2020, 11:59:AM »
Who is that? I thought they said Chris Martin
From Colin Caffells
His relationship with Sheila was one of brotherly love. He was very proud of having a beautiful sister who was a photographic model

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8463
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #3 on: June 05, 2020, 01:08:PM »
That was a lot better than I thought it would be.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #4 on: June 05, 2020, 02:56:PM »
Who is that? I thought they said Chris Martin




Wrong " Chris Martin " I'm afraid Jackie. Although some decent guitar sounds in the interval of this one.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12398
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #5 on: June 05, 2020, 10:43:PM »
It's Cris Martin. They'll be rehashing Billy Joel's Innocent Man next.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #6 on: June 05, 2020, 10:50:PM »
That's a great track Steve. I've had the CD for years.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2020, 11:19:AM »
Well there's only the CCRC remaining now and we could ALL be dead and buried by the time they decide anything.  ::)

Offline ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2020, 12:52:PM »
Well there's only the CCRC remaining now and we could ALL be dead and buried by the time they decide anything.  ::)

They will need a very powerful set of submissions before they will even agree to review the case again.  They are starting from a position which is not neutral now in view of all that has gone before. 


Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #9 on: June 06, 2020, 01:13:PM »
They will need a very powerful set of submissions before they will even agree to review the case again.  They are starting from a position which is not neutral now in view of all that has gone before.




Yes, I fully understand that NGB. A particularly hard task to even consider to be honest.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #10 on: June 06, 2020, 01:48:PM »
Jeremy spoke from prison saying, I quote, " The fight will continue and my substantial and compelling submissions will be made to the CCRC as soon as possible. We know that ultimately, disclosure of the material or not, we will win and I will be freed ", unquote.

So going by this he appears up-beat and confident, though we don't know how long all this is going to take, from submissions------------ 

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11145
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #11 on: June 06, 2020, 02:11:PM »
Jeremy spoke from prison saying, I quote, " The fight will continue and my substantial and compelling submissions will be made to the CCRC as soon as possible. We know that ultimately, disclosure of the material or not, we will win and I will be freed ", unquote.

So going by this he appears up-beat and confident, though we don't know how long all this is going to take, from submissions------------

Optimism has been present during a lot of the last 35 years.  They have to break the cycle that the authorities have in place:
 
They rely upon the public, legal and other professionals, to take-for-granted that the sound moderator evidence is both genuine and 'compelling'. 

They portray partial disclosure as being compliant with requests for disclosure. 

They dismiss attempts to obtain further disclosure, by claiming that it would not diminish the original, compelling sound moderator evidence. 

They point towards appeals and enquiries having sustained the safety of the convictions.

This model is working for them very well.  This cycle will continue over and over, until the right voices, coherently explain in the simple terms, why the original sound moderator evidence is not genuine.

Also - why is the crown paying for a good QC to prevent disclosure, for paperwork that the Crown believes cannot impact on the safety of the convictions?  This makes no sense.  This needs to be pointed out to people.

« Last Edit: June 06, 2020, 02:12:PM by Roch »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #12 on: June 06, 2020, 02:23:PM »
You've said it Roch, " the right voices " ! Where are they all ? Where are all the genuine ones who are willing to make a stand ?

It just stinks of dishonesty and corruption right now.

Offline ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5093
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #13 on: June 06, 2020, 02:53:PM »
Jeremy spoke from prison saying, I quote, " The fight will continue and my substantial and compelling submissions will be made to the CCRC as soon as possible. We know that ultimately, disclosure of the material or not, we will win and I will be freed ", unquote.

So going by this he appears up-beat and confident, though we don't know how long all this is going to take, from submissions------------

The really galling aspect of this is that the only reason that it was necessary to go to the High Court in order to try to get disclosure of withheld material is that the CCRC have refused to use their powers to compel disclosure.  They have very wide ranging powers but have refused to exercise them fully.


Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 43606
Re: Justice for Jeremy
« Reply #14 on: June 06, 2020, 03:27:PM »
The really galling aspect of this is that the only reason that it was necessary to go to the High Court in order to try to get disclosure of withheld material is that the CCRC have refused to use their powers to compel disclosure.  They have very wide ranging powers but have refused to exercise them fully.





Why do you think they've refused their powers in the disclosure of materials when this is the CCRC's main objective in the criminal appeal act of 1995 ? What's your own personal view of their refusal ?
Then again, if you don't wish to say then I'll understand.
CCRC themselves said that the biggest causes of MOJ's was failure to disclose vital evidence----it doesn't make sense. The organisation isn't fit for purpose when this is the case with JB.