Author Topic: Re: Introduction  (Read 1897 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
Re: Introduction
« Reply #15 on: November 05, 2015, 11:03:AM »
Welcome Anglolawyer.
I'm the odd one out here as I formed my opinion of his innocence some 30 years ago when the tragedy  first happened,but hey-ho I stand my ground and have not been swayed in any other way.

Experience comes with age you know or vice-versa. ;)

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 19985
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #16 on: November 05, 2015, 11:32:AM »
Well, I am provisionally pro-guilt in the Bamber case but, even if is guilty, that doesn't necessarily mean he got a fair trial.

Well, given that I don't think the silencer was used, I would have to agree but morally, he got what he deserved.
100% GUILTY - No doubts!

Offline Anglolawyer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Introduction
« Reply #17 on: November 05, 2015, 12:27:PM »
Welcome Anglolawyer.
I'm the odd one out here as I formed my opinion of his innocence some 30 years ago when the tragedy  first happened,but hey-ho I stand my ground and have not been swayed in any other way.

Experience comes with age you know or vice-versa. ;)
In my experience of these forums, it's unusual for people to change their minds.   That is a subject in itself.   Thanks for the welcome.   I like civil disagreement.

Offline Anglolawyer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #18 on: November 05, 2015, 12:29:PM »
Well, given that I don't think the silencer was used, I would have to agree but morally, he got what he deserved.
Yes, the silencer is one issue and the strange goings on with Sheila's body is another (was she moved half a foot or have been looking at dodgy photographs?).   The wheeling and dealing with Julie is a third and the PII business may be a cover for a fourth, fifth etc etc

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24116
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #19 on: November 05, 2015, 04:13:PM »
Yes, the silencer is one issue and the strange goings on with Sheila's body is another (was she moved half a foot or have been looking at dodgy photographs?).   The wheeling and dealing with Julie is a third and the PII business may be a cover for a fourth, fifth etc etc


Hey, THAT'S a new one for us. We've heard of her being the subject of porny pics, but up till now have never heard that she may an have an interest in looking at them.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 19985
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #20 on: November 05, 2015, 04:17:PM »
Yes, the silencer is one issue and the strange goings on with Sheila's body is another (was she moved half a foot or have been looking at dodgy photographs?).   The wheeling and dealing with Julie is a third and the PII business may be a cover for a fourth, fifth etc etc

I don't think she was moved, I think it's just that different angles have been used to make those claims - just like admin and communication errors have been used to suggest a grand conspiracy.
100% GUILTY - No doubts!

Offline Anglolawyer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #21 on: November 05, 2015, 05:13:PM »

Hey, THAT'S a new one for us. We've heard of her being the subject of porny pics, but up till now have never heard that she may an have an interest in looking at them.
I garbled my post, sorry.   I meant to ask whether it is I who have been looking at doctored photographs.

Offline Anglolawyer

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 36
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #22 on: November 05, 2015, 05:14:PM »
I don't think she was moved, I think it's just that different angles have been used to make those claims - just like admin and communication errors have been used to suggest a grand conspiracy.
Are you aware of the evidence the crown tried, but failed, to introduce about this moving of the body in the 2002 appeal?   The expert was a guy called Ismail.

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 24116
Re: Re: Introduction
« Reply #23 on: November 05, 2015, 05:22:PM »
I garbled my post, sorry.   I meant to ask whether it is I who have been looking at doctored photographs.

I believe it's just possible you may have...................some of us believe that we, too, have.