Author Topic: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?  (Read 1053 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Real Justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #135 on: October 04, 2020, 04:21:PM »
I’ve often said that I’m no fan of Julie, the more I read her witness statement the more I cringe.  She talks in her witness statement about the conversations she had with Bamber pre murder, about him killing his mum and Dad, Sheila and the twins as though it’s a walk in the park.  She knew all along that he had done it and was happy to go along with his MM story.

I’ve looked at why she would say these sort of things in the first place, or ask these sort of things or put up with a boyfriend that threatened these sort of killings?  I CANNOT COME UP WITH AN ANSWER TO DEFEND HER

(1)
I remember now that it was just after Christmas 1984 he expanded on how he could kill the whole family. We came ……??… round the farm and he stated that he would like to kill his parents. He also said that he would have to kill Sheila and the twins as well. I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins.

She could understand him talking about killing his parents like that?  WHAT, get out Woman!  who could understand anyone talking of killing their parents

(2)
At White House Farm when he used to come to collect the twins. I then continued talking to Jeremy and asked him what would Colin feel if the twins were killed.

So now She’s picturing in her head the twins killed and Colin’s feelings


(3)

He said he would like to commit the perfect murder. He told me that he would have to do it when all the family were there,

If he’s told you this before why didn’t you suspect him when it happened, this one sentence says she knew it was him.







Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 22242
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #136 on: October 04, 2020, 05:08:PM »
I’ve often said that I’m no fan of Julie, the more I read her witness statement the more I cringe.  She talks in her witness statement about the conversations she had with Bamber pre murder, about him killing his mum and Dad, Sheila and the twins as though it’s a walk in the park.  She knew all along that he had done it and was happy to go along with his MM story.

I’ve looked at why she would say these sort of things in the first place, or ask these sort of things or put up with a boyfriend that threatened these sort of killings?  I CANNOT COME UP WITH AN ANSWER TO DEFEND HER

(1)
I remember now that it was just after Christmas 1984 he expanded on how he could kill the whole family. We came ……??… round the farm and he stated that he would like to kill his parents. He also said that he would have to kill Sheila and the twins as well. I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins.

She could understand him talking about killing his parents like that?  WHAT, get out Woman!  who could understand anyone talking of killing their parents

(2)
At White House Farm when he used to come to collect the twins. I then continued talking to Jeremy and asked him what would Colin feel if the twins were killed.

So now She’s picturing in her head the twins killed and Colin’s feelings


(3)

He said he would like to commit the perfect murder. He told me that he would have to do it when all the family were there,

If he’s told you this before why didn’t you suspect him when it happened, this one sentence says she knew it was him.

Doubt that Julie believed the MM story. But she had to tell the police what he had told her.

Pre massacre Bamber had always spoken about committing the massacre himself.

She said herself she knew he didn't have £2,000. As well as said to Bamber '£2,000 for 5 lives', suggesting it waa very cheap.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #137 on: October 04, 2020, 05:41:PM »
I’ve often said that I’m no fan of Julie, the more I read her witness statement the more I cringe.  She talks in her witness statement about the conversations she had with Bamber pre murder, about him killing his mum and Dad, Sheila and the twins as though it’s a walk in the park.  She knew all along that he had done it and was happy to go along with his MM story.

I’ve looked at why she would say these sort of things in the first place, or ask these sort of things or put up with a boyfriend that threatened these sort of killings?  I CANNOT COME UP WITH AN ANSWER TO DEFEND HER

(1)
I remember now that it was just after Christmas 1984 he expanded on how he could kill the whole family. We came ……??… round the farm and he stated that he would like to kill his parents. He also said that he would have to kill Sheila and the twins as well. I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins.

She could understand him talking about killing his parents like that?  WHAT, get out Woman!  who could understand anyone talking of killing their parents

(2)
At White House Farm when he used to come to collect the twins. I then continued talking to Jeremy and asked him what would Colin feel if the twins were killed.

So now She’s picturing in her head the twins killed and Colin’s feelings


(3)

He said he would like to commit the perfect murder. He told me that he would have to do it when all the family were there,

If he’s told you this before why didn’t you suspect him when it happened, this one sentence says she knew it was him.



I concur. 100%. There's no point in me repeating the reasons why.

What I find interesting, in how you've said it, is how she seems to be trying to detach herself from it. As if, in her recall of it, she was talking about someone else. Maybe it was her way of offloading a belated sense of responsibility?

Whilst I can't imagine that she wasn't certain, I'm certain enough that she knew it to be a possibility.

BUT!.... whatever we think of Julie's reprehensibly shameful behaviour, whatever lies we believe she may have told, whatever it may be in her testimony which could cause JB's conviction to be unsafe, it has to be remembered that it doesn't make him innocent.

Offline Real Justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #138 on: October 04, 2020, 06:11:PM »


I concur. 100%. There's no point in me repeating the reasons why.

What I find interesting, in how you've said it, is how she seems to be trying to detach herself from it. As if, in her recall of it, she was talking about someone else. Maybe it was her way of offloading a belated sense of responsibility?

Whilst I can't imagine that she wasn't certain, I'm certain enough that she knew it to be a possibility.

BUT!.... whatever we think of Julie's reprehensibly shameful behaviour, whatever lies we believe she may have told, whatever it may be in her testimony which could cause JB's conviction to be unsafe, it has to be remembered that it doesn't make him innocent.
I agree Jane, I’ve looked if there is any control from Bamber, there isn’t, she is in a relationship that would have been easy to walk away from, she stops for her own choosing.  She’s tried to water down her own involvement/Guilt, it doesn’t work though.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #139 on: October 04, 2020, 06:28:PM »
I agree Jane, I’ve looked if there is any control from Bamber, there isn’t, she is in a relationship that would have been easy to walk away from, she stops for her own choosing.  She’s tried to water down her own involvement/Guilt, it doesn’t work though.


Controlling behaviour isn't necessarily overt, so it's possible that he was able to exercise some sort of Svengali/Machiavellian influence over her, but is also possible that there was a Hindley/Brady, or Fred and Rose West thing going on........................on the other hand, MAYBE she didn't truly believe he'd go through with it until the fateful moment she could no longer deny it, by which time he was telling her she was as involved in it as was he, which rather blocked her escape route.

Offline Real Justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5236
    • Trial related photographs
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #140 on: October 04, 2020, 07:21:PM »

Controlling behaviour isn't necessarily overt, so it's possible that he was able to exercise some sort of Svengali/Machiavellian influence over her, but is also possible that there was a Hindley/Brady, or Fred and Rose West thing going on........................on the other hand, MAYBE she didn't truly believe he'd go through with it until the fateful moment she could no longer deny it, by which time he was telling her she was as involved in it as was he, which rather blocked her escape route.
I was thinking more in terms of coercive control Jane,
Some common examples of coercive behaviour are:

Isolating you from friends and family
Depriving you of basic needs, such as food
Monitoring your time
Monitoring you via online communication tools or spyware
Taking control over aspects of your everyday life, such as where you can go, who you can see, what you can wear and when you can sleep
Depriving you access to support services, such as medical services
Repeatedly putting you down, such as saying you’re worthless
Humiliating, degrading or dehumanising you
Controlling your finances
Making threats or intimidating you

These are the main types of control, I can’t match any?  Maybe the last one, but she could walk away or tell someone, she didn’t live with him or depend entirely of him?

This leads me to why I don’t think the police coaxed her statement as much as we think, why would they allow her to put all her involvement into the statement if it was rehearsed, why didn’t they encourage her to just say “He always talked about killing his family” or “He always wished his family dead” ect, instead she goes into great detail of their conversations. They then could have added the phone call the night before “ tonight’s the night” and the phone call the next day “ everything is going well”. I think the police were took aback with her and didn’t know what, or how, or if to use her. 

The Cheque book fraud and NOW deal is another matter though, NGB doesn’t believe the police were aware of a pre signed deal for the NOW?
« Last Edit: October 05, 2020, 07:24:PM by Real Justice »

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 30002
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #141 on: October 04, 2020, 07:52:PM »
I was thinking more in terms of coercive control Jane,
Some common examples of coercive behaviour are:

Isolating you from friends and family
Depriving you of basic needs, such as food
Monitoring your time
Monitoring you via online communication tools or spyware
Taking control over aspects of your everyday life, such as where you can go, who you can see, what you can wear and when you can sleep
Depriving you access to support services, such as medical services
Repeatedly putting you down, such as saying you’re worthless
Humiliating, degrading or dehumanising you
Controlling your finances
Making threats or intimidating you

These are the main types of control, I can’t match any?  Maybe the last one, but she could walk away or tell someone, she didn’t live with him or depend entirely of him?

This leads me to why I don’t think the police coaxed her statement as much as we think, why would they allow her to put all her involvement into the statement if it was rehearsed, why didn’t they encourage her to just say “He always talked about killing his family” or “He always wished his family dead” ect, instead she goes into great detail of their conversations. They then could have added the phone call the night before “ tonight’s the night” and the phone call the next day “ everything is going well”. I think the police were took aback with her and didn’t know what, or how, or if to use her. 

The Cheque book fraud and NOW deal is another matter though, NGB doesn’t believe the police were aware of a pre signed deal?



Mmm. Intimidation is the only possibility that appears likely. He could have used her involvement in his cannabis 'business', the burglary, and the cheque fraud to do it.

Re her statement. It appears she not only gave them the cake, but the icing, too. I think they were probably surprised by how much she gave them. From her perspective, it was backing up basic facts.

I haven't given any thought to who knew what, but as the police were unaware of the cheque-book fraud, it's very likely that they wouldn't have known if the NOW deal was pre signed.

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #142 on: October 04, 2020, 09:35:PM »
JM should supposedly knew months before the murders,and could have prevented them.
In fact she even supplied her own drugs to JB, JB said they didn’t work.


Buddy Mugford clearly made the whole thing up she is known as a pathological liar and experienced at fraud. She spun a story to her mates with not an ounce of proof in case any of them planned to sleep with Jeremy and it all went out of control
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 lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44230
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #143 on: October 05, 2020, 11:48:AM »

Buddy Mugford clearly made the whole thing up she is known as a pathological liar and experienced at fraud. She spun a story to her mates with not an ounce of proof in case any of them planned to sleep with Jeremy and it all went out of control




Yes, she did go out of her way to put people off Jeremy but it backfired on her in a way when she became carried away with it all that she believed it herself which is why she was more than able to stand firm in court for the prosecution. She really must have felt so brave----until it came for her to be questioned by his defence. What a let-down for that team to be taken in by a woman's tears, her knowing that it would be halted.   

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8920
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #144 on: October 05, 2020, 03:48:PM »

Buddy Mugford clearly made the whole thing up she is known as a pathological liar and experienced at fraud. She spun a story to her mates with not an ounce of proof in case any of them planned to sleep with Jeremy and it all went out of control

Yeah. It was all a malicious tale she concocted after they split up.

Offline Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11509
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #145 on: October 05, 2020, 10:29:PM »
She spun a story to her mates with not an ounce of proof in case any of them planned to sleep with Jeremy and it all went out of control

That's an interesting take on things.  I hadn't considered that as a motivation.

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #146 on: October 05, 2020, 11:15:PM »
That's an interesting take on things.  I hadn't considered that as a motivation.

Question your sources, it’s so obvious
There’s always fact in fiction
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 Roch

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11509
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #147 on: October 06, 2020, 10:08:AM »
Question your sources, it’s so obvious
There’s always fact in fiction

I'm not sure what you mean here - is it your theory that Mugford tried to put off friends from sleeping with Jeremy or has somebody else suggested it? I certainly think it's feasible and that in those circs her intentions may have backfired spectacularly. But then, could she not have told police that she only said those things because she was feeling vulnerable about people sleeping with Jeremy in the wake of them having split?  However, I suppose that wouldn't stop the police from applying pressure and telling her that there was no proof of any phone call from Nevill to Jeremy etc.
« Last Edit: October 06, 2020, 10:09:AM by Roch »

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2386
Re: Why did the police choose not to prosecute Julie?
« Reply #148 on: October 06, 2020, 12:05:PM »
I'm not sure what you mean here - is it your theory that Mugford tried to put off friends from sleeping with Jeremy or has somebody else suggested it? I certainly think it's feasible and that in those circs her intentions may have backfired spectacularly. But then, could she not have told police that she only said those things because she was feeling vulnerable about people sleeping with Jeremy in the wake of them having split?  However, I suppose that wouldn't stop the police from applying pressure and telling her that there was no proof of any phone call from Nevill to Jeremy etc.

I have always thought that started the ball rolling. Jeremy was a very good looking young man and I am sure popular with the girls. Small town and that’s what happens. Julie definitely showed the depths of her jealousy with the pillow incident.

Everything was planned in her head when the murders happened, move into the farm and plenty of money (Julie has proved how much she loved money)

Then in a split second everything changed and Jeremy could have the time of his life doing whatever he wanted with whoever he wanted.

By making up stories to her friends she knew nobody would touch him but everything spun out of control

She could have changed her mind when she ended up at the police station but I am pretty sure she still had revenge on her mind

She might have tried to remove some of the blame making up the mm story but the police had Jeremy in there sights by then

Maybe her final get back at Jeremy was the way she was dressed for the NOW photo
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