Author Topic: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?  (Read 59091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 28183
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1635 on: July 15, 2017, 06:38:PM »
To be fair it doesn't actually state that Jeremy had seen the deed of covenant or even got wind of June's future plans for Sheila, but given that Nevill told Barbara they should consider getting a new safe key and Jeremy's concerns that his mother might change her will in favour of the Church as narrated by Julie the finger of suspicion does lie in the direction of Jeremy wanting to claim his inheritance whilst it remained at its zenith.

Oh I agree, Steve. However, as it was suggested that "Jeremy wouldn't have been the only one to see that..............." it sounded as if Jeremy HAD seen it and I was just wondering who, OTHER than Jeremy might have, coincidentally, sneaked in to take a sneaky look to see what could be found which was of interest, and WHY?

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11278
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1636 on: October 21, 2019, 07:27:PM »
Jeremy's legal team have no consideration whatsoever for what Colin must have endured these last few days.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2019, 07:27:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5669
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1637 on: October 21, 2019, 07:44:PM »
Jeremy's legal team have no consideration whatsoever for what Colin must have endured these last few days.

Why would they? Their job is to get Jeremy acquitted.

I hope Colin has found peace though.  I don't think people appreciated what he lost - it was all about the other lot.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11278
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1638 on: October 21, 2019, 07:46:PM »
Why would they? Their job is to get Jeremy acquitted.

I hope Colin has found peace though.  I don't think people appreciated what he lost - it was all about the other lot.
Well they haven't done very well so far. Just dredged up niggling loose ends.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5669
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1639 on: October 21, 2019, 07:53:PM »
Well they haven't done very well so far. Just dredged up niggling loose ends.

Agreed, but that wasn't the point of my post. I don't know why they're encouraging appeals based on such flimsy information.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24783
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1640 on: October 21, 2019, 08:02:PM »
Agreed, but that wasn't the point of my post. I don't know why they're encouraging appeals based on such flimsy information.

That's really the point!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5669
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1641 on: October 21, 2019, 08:04:PM »
Well they're not doing it to piss Colin off. That was my point.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24783
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1642 on: October 21, 2019, 08:05:PM »
Well they're not doing it to piss Colin off. That was my point.

No, but I suspect he's had enough of seeing such headlines.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5669
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1643 on: October 21, 2019, 08:11:PM »
No, but I suspect he's had enough of seeing such headlines.

Maybe, but lawyers don't take into consideration who might be pissed off about headlines. If they did, no case would get to court.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24783
Re: Who has more rights thirty years on: Jeremy or Colin?
« Reply #1644 on: October 21, 2019, 08:18:PM »
Maybe, but lawyers don't take into consideration who might be pissed off about headlines. If they did, no case would get to court.

No, but they really should consider the strength of something they refer to as 'compelling' because if it's not they will piss off the CCRC which is something they should care about.
Few people have the imagination for reality