Author Topic: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels  (Read 362 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12407
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« on: February 01, 2017, 02:35:PM »
can anyone see a simlarity between these 2 cases. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0amTWSChJqI&t=58s

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2017, 06:58:PM »
Interesting case. The conviction was overturned on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct. A new trial was ordered, but Noura Jackson entered an Alford plea - the same deal that finally freed the West Memphis Three - and was released the following year (2016). Prosecution lawyers faced proceedings over the failure to release evidence to the defence until after Noura Jackson was convicted, and the violation of her right to remain silent by the prosecutor at trial.

Even though her defence counsel decided Noura Jackson did not need to give evidence because the state had failed to provide a strong enough case to prove her guilt, and therefore, she had no case to answer, the prosecutor is on video turning to Noura Jackson in her speech to the jury demanding, "Just tell us where you were. That's all we're asking"

The evidence, a statement from a proven liar who changed his story to police three times, was not handed over, but the lawyer who failed to hand it over said it wasn't a "deliberate" attempt to withhold evidence, he just "forgot."

The judge hearing the misconduct proceedings referred to this as a "tiny little mistake" - for the lawyers maybe, but for Noura Jackson, or for anyone else convicted, in part, because of the failure to hand over evidence which could have cleared them?

I've not read a lot about this case so far, but what I have seen raises some serious doubts - 50+ stab wounds on the victim, but Noura Jones fingernails just hours later are still immaculately manicured. No DNA from Noura Jones at the scene, no blood, injuries or trace DNA on her or her clothes, again just hours later, DNA on the victim's bedsheets that is not Noura's or her mothers but remains "unidentified" - these are all factors I would find concerning, especially in view of the lack of any other evidence connecting Noura Jackson to the murder.

The with-held statement allowed evidence to be given suggesting Noura was "at home" that night, in the run up to the murder  - only one person gave this evidence at trial, there was nothing to back it up - an earlier statement from the same person made no such claim, stating the opposite - that he was on ecstacy that night and did not have his phone with him (so Noura Jackson could not have called him "from her home" or from anywhere else, for that matter).  It was this earlier statement which was not released to the defence. Interestingly, I have read at least one report stating that this person was initially a suspect in the case.

As I said, I've not read a lot about this case but it does have some very interesting aspects.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8878
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2017, 08:06:PM »
Interesting case. The conviction was overturned on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct. A new trial was ordered, but Noura Jackson entered an Alford plea - the same deal that finally freed the West Memphis Three - and was released the following year (2016). Prosecution lawyers faced proceedings over the failure to release evidence to the defence until after Noura Jackson was convicted, and the violation of her right to remain silent by the prosecutor at trial.

Even though her defence counsel decided Noura Jackson did not need to give evidence because the state had failed to provide a strong enough case to prove her guilt, and therefore, she had no case to answer, the prosecutor is on video turning to Noura Jackson in her speech to the jury demanding, "Just tell us where you were. That's all we're asking"

The evidence, a statement from a proven liar who changed his story to police three times, was not handed over, but the lawyer who failed to hand it over said it wasn't a "deliberate" attempt to withhold evidence, he just "forgot."

The judge hearing the misconduct proceedings referred to this as a "tiny little mistake" - for the lawyers maybe, but for Noura Jackson, or for anyone else convicted, in part, because of the failure to hand over evidence which could have cleared them?

I've not read a lot about this case so far, but what I have seen raises some serious doubts - 50+ stab wounds on the victim, but Noura Jones fingernails just hours later are still immaculately manicured. No DNA from Noura Jones at the scene, no blood, injuries or trace DNA on her or her clothes, again just hours later, DNA on the victim's bedsheets that is not Noura's or her mothers but remains "unidentified" - these are all factors I would find concerning, especially in view of the lack of any other evidence connecting Noura Jackson to the murder.

The with-held statement allowed evidence to be given suggesting Noura was "at home" that night, in the run up to the murder  - only one person gave this evidence at trial, there was nothing to back it up - an earlier statement from the same person made no such claim, stating the opposite - that he was on ecstacy that night and did not have his phone with him (so Noura Jackson could not have called him "from her home" or from anywhere else, for that matter).  It was this earlier statement which was not released to the defence. Interestingly, I have read at least one report stating that this person was initially a suspect in the case.

As I said, I've not read a lot about this case but it does have some very interesting aspects.
But there was a cut on her hand which she tried to cover up by wearing long sleeves. If Jeremy Bamber had had the same it would have been very difficult to explain away. She had time to manicure her hands and replace false nails. She was a stupid, ungrateful, child who dabbled in drugs and fell in with the wrong crowd. Both hated their parents, though profess post-murders to have loved them. Jennifer, her mother , was a saint in comparison who set some sensible ground rules for her daughter and paid for it with her life. She got a wicker basket whilst Nevill got the coal scuttle. Taken by surprise in bed she was no match for her physical 18-year-old daughter who struggles to make eye contact with the interviewer because deep down she knows she's guilty through and through.

https://youtu.be/0amTWSChJqI
« Last Edit: February 01, 2017, 08:08:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12407
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2017, 09:00:PM »
theres the rather obvios simlarity of nouras relatives ie the aunt and uncle.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 19985
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2017, 09:32:PM »
theres the rather obvios simlarity of nouras relatives ie the aunt and uncle.

Do you think she is innocent? If so, why?
100% GUILTY - No doubts!

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12407
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2017, 10:41:PM »
yes i certanly lardgely beceose of all the foensic evdence pointing to somone else.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12407
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #6 on: May 22, 2017, 04:42:PM »
this id good documentry about the case if you can put up with nancy grace.

https://youtu.be/4-lhQzwNKDY
« Last Edit: May 22, 2017, 07:52:PM by nugnug »

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12407
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: noura jackson jeremy bamber parrels
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2017, 01:23:PM »
Interesting case. The conviction was overturned on the basis of prosecutorial misconduct. A new trial was ordered, but Noura Jackson entered an Alford plea - the same deal that finally freed the West Memphis Three - and was released the following year (2016). Prosecution lawyers faced proceedings over the failure to release evidence to the defence until after Noura Jackson was convicted, and the violation of her right to remain silent by the prosecutor at trial.

Even though her defence counsel decided Noura Jackson did not need to give evidence because the state had failed to provide a strong enough case to prove her guilt, and therefore, she had no case to answer, the prosecutor is on video turning to Noura Jackson in her speech to the jury demanding, "Just tell us where you were. That's all we're asking"

The evidence, a statement from a proven liar who changed his story to police three times, was not handed over, but the lawyer who failed to hand it over said it wasn't a "deliberate" attempt to withhold evidence, he just "forgot."

The judge hearing the misconduct proceedings referred to this as a "tiny little mistake" - for the lawyers maybe, but for Noura Jackson, or for anyone else convicted, in part, because of the failure to hand over evidence which could have cleared them?

I've not read a lot about this case so far, but what I have seen raises some serious doubts - 50+ stab wounds on the victim, but Noura Jones fingernails just hours later are still immaculately manicured. No DNA from Noura Jones at the scene, no blood, injuries or trace DNA on her or her clothes, again just hours later, DNA on the victim's bedsheets that is not Noura's or her mothers but remains "unidentified" - these are all factors I would find concerning, especially in view of the lack of any other evidence connecting Noura Jackson to the murder.

The with-held statement allowed evidence to be given suggesting Noura was "at home" that night, in the run up to the murder  - only one person gave this evidence at trial, there was nothing to back it up - an earlier statement from the same person made no such claim, stating the opposite - that he was on ecstacy that night and did not have his phone with him (so Noura Jackson could not have called him "from her home" or from anywhere else, for that matter).  It was this earlier statement which was not released to the defence. Interestingly, I have read at least one report stating that this person was initially a suspect in the case.

As I said, I've not read a lot about this case but it does have some very interesting aspects.


misconduct that any prosuter should of know was misconduct and should have known that it would likely be overturned on appeal shows a certan desperation to convict.