Author Topic: The Noble Cause Framing Theory  (Read 46236 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Martin

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« on: April 27, 2014, 05:42:AM »
The Noble Cause Framing Theory

This is the view that the police fabricated evidence, but only because they genuinely believed that Bamber was guilty. The most reprehensible version of it is one where the person who holds with this idea affects a neutral attitude, pretending to be unconvinced either way (while from a practical point of view fully supporting his guilter friends, because the position itself is really pro guilt through and through, even if not obviously so to everyone).


If Bamber is innocent some of the police MUST know it.

The view that Jeremy Bamber is innocent is inextricably linked to the view that a number of policeman know that he is innocent. There is no scenario which allows for even the possibility that he is innocent which can be separated from the view that he was framed by certain policeman, who know the truth is that Sheila was the killer.

The people who hold with that theory, assuming they are not quite clueless, realise that the belief that Bamber is innocent is inextricably linked to the belief that the police framed him, with some of them knowing the real truth that Sheila was the killer. 

The sophisticated guilter

That is why some of the more sophisticated guilters try to sound sympathetic to Bamber’s cause, while at the same time rejecting out of hand the theory that the police intentionally framed an innocent man. These kind of people side with the guilters on every issue where the evidence of Bamber’s innocence is also at the same time evidence that they knew he was innocent. And yet they try to put themselves across as “fair” by admitting that the police faked evidence against him.



The point is that if you reject that assumption that the innocence of Bamber implies that the police know it, you might as well say he’s guilty as hell and put it in block capitals and without an apostrophe, since his innocence can’t be a fact without the conjoining fact that a whole bunch of policemen know about it.

The noble cause framing theory is a catch all, in that the person who holds with it, rejects all the evidence which points to innocence-because that evidence also implies that the police know he is innocent.

Some of the evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence which implies the police know he is.

1 The logs indicating that two bodies were found downstairs including one which has “One murder and one suicide”. If the police did find Sheila’s body downstairs and she regained  consciousness and made her way upstairs then, of course, they know that Bamber is innocent.

2 If Sheila died after the police entered the house, then even to a person with no medical training, it would be obvious that her body could not have been dead for seven hours. It would be still warm for a start. If Sheila died after the police broke into the house, then a group of policemen know that Bamber is innocent.

3 If Sheila’s body was on the bed before the police stage managed it on the floor, the mere fact that they were able to do that implies that the body was not stiff like Nevill’s body was and that Sheila’s death must have occurred hours later.

4 If Nevill Bamber called the police, then the policeman who heard that call knows that Bamber is innocent.

5 Ann Eaton’s note that a policeman told her that Sheila’s body was, at one stage, on the bed with a bible on her chest. This is prima facie evidence that it was the police who stage managed Sheila’s body on the bedroom floor to make it look like she had shot herself in that position.


I could go on. The main point is that such evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence also at the same time points to the fact that the policemen at the scene know he is innocent. In many cases you just can’t separate the two.

Pro guilt by implication

The noble cause framing theory gives the superficial impression of being fair and of being willing to concede something. But it really implies a solid commitment to supporting the pro guilt group and this is shown in the way that such a supposedly fair minded person takes the pro guilt position on each crucial issue, right across the board. Like for example speaking dismissively of log entries which clearly point to Bamber’s innocence.

Such a person will typically support the rejection of evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence with expressions like  “I just don’t believe that” being used a lot. They like to put themselves across as "sceptical" and as having an open mind.

1  I just don’t believe that the police found Sheila’s body downstairs,

2 I just don’t believe that it was the police who put Nevill’s head in the coal bucket.

3 I just don’t believe that Sheila’s body was ever on the bed with a bible on her chest.

4 I just don’t believe that the police stage managed Sheila’s body on the floor.


5 I just don’t believe that Nevill Bamber made a phone call.

6 I just don’t believe that there were two calls made to the police.

7 I just don’t believe that West and Bonnett would remain silent, if Nevill Bamber had called the police. The very thought of that is just too appalling.

8 I just don’t believe that all those people would have kept quiet for so long.

9 I just don’t believe that Mike Tesko has seen a photograph of Sheila on the bed.

10 I just don’t believe that the police would knowingly frame an innocent man.

11 I just don’t believe that all those people could be lying.

Number 10 is of special significance because, with respect to this case, it is not really one opinion among the rest, but represents the basic position implied by the others and which a guilter realises he must always defend. 




« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 06:40:AM by Martin »

Offline wilf

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #1 on: April 27, 2014, 08:17:AM »
a very good post. covering their backs, fear of prosicution, loss of pension, we're all in it together, all these thing impede whistleblowing. a system of recourse open to officers should be in place to ensure justice can be the key objective.
as the players in this sorry story get older will their knowledge and feelings prey on their minds or will they fade into their past "it was the job"?

wilf

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #2 on: April 27, 2014, 08:29:AM »
Morning wlf

it is my belief as person gets older they reflect on the wrong doings in previous years but fear any police officer who may have covered up facts still have too much to loose by spilling the beans so will remain silent.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 09:38:AM by susan »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #3 on: April 27, 2014, 09:01:AM »
Excellent post again,Martin,,and I understand how this works too. The police/NHS is a closed shop,which where genuine mistakes are made,,nobody is ever likely to hold their hands up and admit it.

As Wilf explained,,it's the fear of loss of job/pension,,which would inevitably be the case. When something goes on as long as the JB case has,,they're even less likely to come forward even if those concerned have retired,,,and usually,on the rare occasion that someone has opened up about " mistakes made ",,you'll find that that person has had an axe to grind about a certain colleague.

These people will have happily retired on their pensions,,paid off mortgages,etc etc,,,and because they're no longer involved,,can,and will quite easily forget that because of mistakes made,and bad ones at that,,,shrug off the fact that it no longer affects them.
What sort of a person can live with themselves,,knowing, at the back of their minds that they have wronged someone,badly and stolen their lives ?

Answer ? As in last nights programme.Someone in a high position,,who treads on everyones' toes to get where they are-------------Those with psychopathic tendencies ! Surgeons, and Police, at the top of their game. Ruthless individuals,decision-makers who are NOT always right,,but whatever you do,,don't suggest anything's wrong,,or argue with them,,as they're" always" right !

It's going to be a hard road in which to get justice for Jeremy,,faced with individuals who are convincing to many,,but thankfully most will see right through their tactics of covering up. The wording of excuses given, and if you're adept at reading between lines,,you can see for yourself,,,such as the replies from EP and even the e-mail from Theresa May,,to me was BS.  NOBODY wants to know.It's as simple as that. 

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #4 on: April 27, 2014, 09:12:AM »
Morning lookout

sadly you are right the police/NHS/local councils are a closed shop and will defend one another irrespective of any wrong doings.  Jeremy Bambers only hope is that evidence has been released accidently that will win him a new trial and the outcome could be entirely different to the last one.

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #5 on: April 27, 2014, 09:25:AM »
Excellent post Lookout. You are correct cover ups are a common reaction in any large establishment, it has always been so and probably always will. Suddenly, notes are lost, diagnosis changed to accomodate new scenario, have seen it in action concerning a relative.

Hillsborough is often used as confirmation of the possibility to keep a police force quiet but Hillsborough was unique because in this instance a police force kept quiet in the face of hundreds if not thousands of witnesses who experienced and saw what happened. Even then the power of the establishment managed to override accusations and statements of fact by these witnesses. If powerful people repeat the same untruth continually the majority of uninformed people will believe it is the truth imo
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 09:33:AM by maggie »

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13651
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #6 on: April 27, 2014, 09:29:AM »
Morning lookout

sadly you are right the police/NHS/local councils are a closed shop and will defend one another irrespective of any wrong doings.  Jeremy Bambers only hope is that evidence has been released accidently that will win him a new trial and the outcome could be entirely different to the last one.
Hi susie, you are right. I also cannot see how JB can beat the system unless a document, person comes to light with overriding evidence which cannot be denied. Anything less will be dismissed imo.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #7 on: April 27, 2014, 09:34:AM »
The Noble Cause Framing Theory

This is the view that the police fabricated evidence, but only because they genuinely believed that Bamber was guilty. The most reprehensible version of it is one where the person who holds with this idea affects a neutral attitude, pretending to be unconvinced either way (while from a practical point of view fully supporting his guilter friends, because the position itself is really pro guilt through and through, even if not obviously so to everyone).


If Bamber is innocent some of the police MUST know it.

The view that Jeremy Bamber is innocent is inextricably linked to the view that a number of policeman know that he is innocent. There is no scenario which allows for even the possibility that he is innocent which can be separated from the view that he was framed by certain policeman, who know the truth is that Sheila was the killer.

The people who hold with that theory, assuming they are not quite clueless, realise that the belief that Bamber is innocent is inextricably linked to the belief that the police framed him, with some of them knowing the real truth that Sheila was the killer. 

The sophisticated guilter

That is why some of the more sophisticated guilters try to sound sympathetic to Bamber’s cause, while at the same time rejecting out of hand the theory that the police intentionally framed an innocent man. These kind of people side with the guilters on every issue where the evidence of Bamber’s innocence is also at the same time evidence that they knew he was innocent. And yet they try to put themselves across as “fair” by admitting that the police faked evidence against him.



The point is that if you reject that assumption that the innocence of Bamber implies that the police know it, you might as well say he’s guilty as hell and put it in block capitals and without an apostrophe, since his innocence can’t be a fact without the conjoining fact that a whole bunch of policemen know about it.

The noble cause framing theory is a catch all, in that the person who holds with it, rejects all the evidence which points to innocence-because that evidence also implies that the police know he is innocent.

Some of the evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence which implies the police know he is.

1 The logs indicating that two bodies were found downstairs including one which has “One murder and one suicide”. If the police did find Sheila’s body downstairs and she regained  consciousness and made her way upstairs then, of course, they know that Bamber is innocent.

2 If Sheila died after the police entered the house, then even to a person with no medical training, it would be obvious that her body could not have been dead for seven hours. It would be still warm for a start. If Sheila died after the police broke into the house, then a group of policemen know that Bamber is innocent.

3 If Sheila’s body was on the bed before the police stage managed it on the floor, the mere fact that they were able to do that implies that the body was not stiff like Nevill’s body was and that Sheila’s death must have occurred hours later.

4 If Nevill Bamber called the police, then the policeman who heard that call knows that Bamber is innocent.

5 Ann Eaton’s note that a policeman told her that Sheila’s body was, at one stage, on the bed with a bible on her chest. This is prima facie evidence that it was the police who stage managed Sheila’s body on the bedroom floor to make it look like she had shot herself in that position.


I could go on. The main point is that such evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence also at the same time points to the fact that the policemen at the scene know he is innocent. In many cases you just can’t separate the two.

Pro guilt by implication

The noble cause framing theory gives the superficial impression of being fair and of being willing to concede something. But it really implies a solid commitment to supporting the pro guilt group and this is shown in the way that such a supposedly fair minded person takes the pro guilt position on each crucial issue, right across the board. Like for example speaking dismissively of log entries which clearly point to Bamber’s innocence.

Such a person will typically support the rejection of evidence pointing to Bamber’s innocence with expressions like  “I just don’t believe that” being used a lot. They like to put themselves across as "sceptical" and as having an open mind.

1  I just don’t believe that the police found Sheila’s body downstairs,

2 I just don’t believe that it was the police who put Nevill’s head in the coal bucket.

3 I just don’t believe that Sheila’s body was ever on the bed with a bible on her chest.

4 I just don’t believe that the police stage managed Sheila’s body on the floor.


5 I just don’t believe that Nevill Bamber made a phone call.

6 I just don’t believe that there were two calls made to the police.

7 I just don’t believe that West and Bonnett would remain silent, if Nevill Bamber had called the police. The very thought of that is just too appalling.

8 I just don’t believe that all those people would have kept quiet for so long.

9 I just don’t believe that Mike Tesko has seen a photograph of Sheila on the bed.

10 I just don’t believe that the police would knowingly frame an innocent man.

11 I just don’t believe that all those people could be lying.

Number 10 is of special significance because, with respect to this case, it is not really one opinion among the rest, but represents the basic position implied by the others and which a guilter realises he must always defend.

You're setting yourself up as quite the psychologist except that having doubts isn't a personality trait and people who have doubts are 'not ALL the same'. You talk regularly about propaganda and you're more guilty of it than anyone. It seems if you don't believe Jeremy is 100% innocent, you're some kind of conspirator in a venture to change everyone else's mind. However, unless you can say you believe Jeremy to be 100% innocent, you have doubts and belong to the group you just described. I'd say that was nearly everyone on the board. Given that none of us know what happened a 100% belief is just blind faith.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 03:58:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 32641
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #8 on: April 27, 2014, 09:57:AM »
Martin, you've just presented us with the lengthy tenet necessary for us to digest in order to be a TRUE believer. It could apply to ANYTHING from religion to politics. How many attend churches as TRUE believers? How many who vote for a political party are TRUE believers?

My own belief is that TRUE belief is blind faith, which I, NOT destined for Sainthood, am not blessed with. In fact, one of my college tutors urged us NOT to accept what we were being told on the premise that unless we had doubts which prompted us to ask questions, we may learn, but we'd never understand.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2014, 10:04:AM »
Lookout - I think and hope what you said about the reply from Theresa May  will  be proved to be wrong. I have the feeling that in the long term she will be backing up her speech after the Stephen Lawrence case. It will just take a little time.

Martin - interesting post. I think it is ingrained in most of us that we don't want to believe that the police would keep quiet about such an important case for so long - but that is because we want to trust them. However in other cases they have been guilty of falsifying evidence  so why not in this case?


Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #10 on: April 27, 2014, 10:07:AM »
Martin, you've just presented us with the lengthy tenet necessary for us to digest in order to be a TRUE believer. It could apply to ANYTHING from religion to politics. How many attend churches as TRUE believers? How many who vote for a political party are TRUE believers?

My own belief is that TRUE belief is blind faith, which I, NOT destined for Sainthood, am not blessed with. In fact, one of my college tutors urged us NOT to accept what we were being told on the premise that unless we had doubts which prompted us to ask questions, we may learn, but we'd never understand.

Now 'that' is a good post which paints a far more realistic view of how people think!!
« Last Edit: April 27, 2014, 03:53:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #11 on: April 27, 2014, 10:08:AM »
Lookout - I think and hope what you said about the reply from Theresa May  will  be proved to be wrong. I have the feeling that in the long term she will be backing up her speech after the Stephen Lawrence case. It will just take a little time.

Martin - interesting post. I think it is ingrained in most of us that we don't want to believe that the police would keep quiet about such an important case for so long - but that is because we want to trust them. However in other cases they have been guilty of falsifying evidence  so why not in this case?

Oh, I don't trust them - however, I simply can't see why they would knowingly frame an innocent man as opposed to framing someone they thought was guilty.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48611
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #12 on: April 27, 2014, 10:11:AM »
Hi April,,,how strange,,I've just" scrubbed " more or less what you have just written about believing.

It's what your personal belief is,and not that of others who may well be in the majority. Personally,,I've stuck to my beliefs and know I won't flounder,or be swayed in any way.

Most people are looking for reassurance either way and are indecisive,,which you can understand,,but I wouldn't dream of force-feeding my views on anyone. Though if anyone's got any sense,,they won't be swayed in the opposite direction of their own beliefs.

Afterall,,failure either way isn't going to be a punishable offence  ;D

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2014, 10:16:AM »
Thinking about what Martin has said - and the list of things that we have posted on other threads that would PROVE the innocence of JB ( and not just get him out on a technicality ) then he is correct

If the evidence was forthcoming then it would prove a cover up and not just a selective presentation of evidence.

Personally I came on here for interesting discussion and to look at documents etc. Not really to look at scenarios from books. But there are times I have been influenced by posters who obviously have been on here for much longer than me - but over all I don't think I have changed my opinion much .

The most recent thing that I find very annoying is the replies from EP about releasing the evidence held under PII - personally I think that is BS - and that is a big indication of what is behind all of this situation.

Offline Jan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10318
Re: The Noble Cause Framing Theory
« Reply #14 on: April 27, 2014, 10:24:AM »
I would also add that I had explored the "noble theory" in respect of the police and the family . I think mainly that has been "thinking out loud" and then posting those thoughts , because sometimes the replies put you back on track.

I think that is my inherent trait of wanting to see some good in every person. I find it hard to accept that an innocent man would be framed - however I know that it is possible and it has happened before in other cases .

I think it always good to re-visit that list in the OP of what would PROVE innocence. And in every case the police must have known what the truth was.