Author Topic: intro  (Read 1664 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
intro
« on: November 12, 2015, 10:20:PM »
hi all im new to this foum stuff sorry if i was supposed to post here first .

Been reading a lot on this case recently and it has caught my interest.

This is not because i have any feelings one way or another whether JB is guilty or innocent
but just on the fact the evidence presented leaves so much to circumstantial evidence and little to fact.

i do not understand how any defence of this case would not be successful.

It just concerns me that not only in the case that in others how it is so easy for police to convict on assumption of guilt.

The police took a dislike to JB and this tainted there opinion of the evidence especially the testimony of julie Mugford.

again sorry for not posting here first 

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12976
Re: intro
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2015, 10:22:PM »
hi all im new to this foum stuff sorry if i was supposed to post here first .

Been reading a lot on this case recently and it has caught my interest.

This is not because i have any feelings one way or another whether JB is guilty or innocent
but just on the fact the evidence presented leaves so much to circumstantial evidence and little to fact.

i do not understand how any defence of this case would not be successful.

It just concerns me that not only in the case that in others how it is so easy for police to convict on assumption of guilt.

The police took a dislike to JB and this tainted there opinion of the evidence especially the testimony of julie Mugford.

again sorry for not posting here first
No problem wiggy, thanks for the post.
Welcome to the forum, hope you enjoy your time here. :) :)

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2015, 10:28:PM »
i will try maggie as i said its not something i do much off but sometimes you just feel that
to few poeple have to many powers and MOJs are becoming more prevelent

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: intro
« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2015, 10:37:PM »
i will try maggie as i said its not something i do much off but sometimes you just feel that
to few poeple have to many powers and MOJs are becoming more prevelent

Are you talking about in the UK? If so, what cases are you referring to?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #4 on: November 12, 2015, 10:59:PM »
Stacey Hyde, Donna Anthony,Sally Clark, Mahmood Hussein Mattan, Birmingham Six,Stephen Downing
Barry George

need i go on

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: intro
« Reply #5 on: November 12, 2015, 11:03:PM »
Stacey Hyde, Donna Anthony,Sally Clark, Mahmood Hussein Mattan, Birmingham Six,Stephen Downing
Barry George

need i go on

Please go on...

So far you've listed old cases.

Your post suggested MOJ's are becoming more prevalent?

“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #6 on: November 12, 2015, 11:27:PM »
prevalent as more the info on these cases with social media are easier to find info on.

If you believe that police do not make great mistakes and miscarriages of justice then you must walk about with your eyes closed. Once the police make up there mind that you are guilty no matter what the evidence or logic of the situation is they minds are closed.

Im sue that they try there best and it is a very difficult job but the standard of policing and the attitude of some of the staff are very close minded

Most people these days are tried by social media.

With forensic science being relied on more and more it becomes easier for evidence not being able to be refuted .

We are losing the idea that someone is assumed innocent. It frightens me i suppose im just being paranoid



Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: intro
« Reply #7 on: November 12, 2015, 11:42:PM »
prevalent as more the info on these cases with social media are easier to find info on.

If you believe that police do not make great mistakes and miscarriages of justice then you must walk about with your eyes closed. Once the police make up there mind that you are guilty no matter what the evidence or logic of the situation is they minds are closed.

Im sue that they try there best and it is a very difficult job but the standard of policing and the attitude of some of the staff are very close minded

Most people these days are tried by social media.

With forensic science being relied on more and more it becomes easier for evidence not being able to be refuted .

We are losing the idea that someone is assumed innocent. It frightens me i suppose im just being paranoid

Why does it frighten you? Have you done something wrong? Is that why you are paranoid?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #8 on: November 12, 2015, 11:48:PM »
lol yes i did something wrong i got into a daft conversation with you lol

Dosent it bother you that with little or no evidence people are convicted.

i suppose i need to give u examples again. It just frightens me that poeple are so quick to make judgments especially on socialmedia and forums. People should be convicted on evidence factual evidence not hearsay evidence 

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6461
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Re: intro
« Reply #9 on: November 12, 2015, 11:58:PM »
lol yes i did something wrong i got into a daft conversation with you lol

Dosent it bother you that with little or no evidence people are convicted.

i suppose i need to give u examples again. It just frightens me that poeple are so quick to make judgments especially on socialmedia and forums. People should be convicted on evidence factual evidence not hearsay evidence

You cannot be convicted of a crime on social media and forums, what are you on about?

Welcome to the forum btw ... Is it your first time here  ;D
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #10 on: November 13, 2015, 01:08:AM »
first time on any forum anywhere

You cant be convicted y social media but it has a great influence.

thats why if you are a juror in the past your not allowed any access to newspapers ect during a trial.

there have been cases in the past where trials have not gone ahead for that reason that because stuff in the media would have tainted the impartiality of the outcome.

For example if a suspect is on trial the prosecution are not allowed to bring into evidence ast convidtion as this may taint there perspective of that person. So if the media have released stuffabout a subjects past it would taint the trial

if that makes any sense . be gentle im new to this

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 35033
Re: intro
« Reply #11 on: November 13, 2015, 11:01:AM »
Welcome Wiggy. I enjoyed reading your post on the forum.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 19985
Re: intro
« Reply #12 on: November 13, 2015, 07:53:PM »
hi all im new to this foum stuff sorry if i was supposed to post here first .

Been reading a lot on this case recently and it has caught my interest.

This is not because i have any feelings one way or another whether JB is guilty or innocent
but just on the fact the evidence presented leaves so much to circumstantial evidence and little to fact.

i do not understand how any defence of this case would not be successful.

It just concerns me that not only in the case that in others how it is so easy for police to convict on assumption of guilt.

The police took a dislike to JB and this tainted there opinion of the evidence especially the testimony of julie Mugford.

again sorry for not posting here first

Welcome to the forum Wiggy. Not sure why you don't understand why Jeremy was convicted, lots of cases are brought on a purely circumstantial basis. It's not unusual and this case has an overwhelming amount of circumstantial evidence.
100% GUILTY - No doubts!

Offline wiggy

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
Re: intro
« Reply #13 on: November 13, 2015, 10:22:PM »
i find that a lot of cases that are convicted on only circumstantial evidence are always open to appeals and are always in my opinion(and it is just an opinion) not sound.

Most who are convicted on circumstantial evidence there is usually a few factual pieces of evidence but in this case there are none . JB is judged on others opinion of his character and the fact he came across arrogant and selfish which he did but don't make him a murderer.

personally as i have stated i think he probably did do it but not with evidence presented