Author Topic: The relatives greatly influencing Julie between 7th - 27th August 1985.  (Read 103 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17125
There is no dispute that Julie badly betrayed Bamber at least five times  while they were still together.

The betrayal started on the 27th August 1985 & put him at great risk of being arrested and charged if other informed people went to the police.

It has been suggested that Julie started talking to other people while still with Bamber,  because the relatives spent 20 days filling her head with suggestions of his guilt.


There are several reasons why the relatives could not greatly influence Julie in these 20 days -

The relatives did not know Julie very well.

The relatives were intially grieving & supportive.

The relatives at first focused on engaging with several police.

Julie was Bamber's girlfriend so unlikely to be receptive to the relatives suggestions.

Bamber had 24/7 access to Julie so able fo constantly influence her.

Julie may have been in on the crime. So again would not respond.

Julie was with Bamber virtually all the time in these 20 days so not contactable.

Bamber & Julie spent most of the 20 days outside of Essex so again not contactable.

The relatives did not want to alert Bamber that they were suspicious of him by contacting Julie.

Julie may not know anything so only disadvantages in contacting her. 

If Julie was influenced by the relatives, there was nothing she could do anyway.

Any possible face to face contact with Julie, such as at the funeral, Bamber would also be present.

There were no mobile phones in 1985. The relatives would not know Bamber's & Julie's locations when out of Essex.

It would be a massive undertaking to convince Julie. Perhaps taking up hours or days.

Secretly trying to start up communications with Julie puts her at risk if Bamber found out.

Engaging with Julie would suggest the relatives were plotting against Bamber.

           
                                               -----------------------

Hopefully everyone will agree the only person who influenced Julie in those 20 days was the man who rang her 3 times either side of the massacre.



« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 09:42:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4410
The evidence that Julie was fed information from the relatives is rather simple.

Like with most criminal acts, there is no direct evidence of collusion. But it can be proven through circumstancial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.

For example. If I am on the London Underground. Passengers begin to enter the train I am currently seated in. I notice those passengers are rather wet and some are holding umbrellas. From this fact I can then infer another fact that it's raining outside. Despite me being in a train tunnel and being unable to see the weather outside.

Make sense?

Now. The relatives believed that Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest. This becomes part of Jeremy's alleged confession to Julie verbatim. From these facts i can then infer another fact - Julie got this information from the relatives and not from Jeremy.

"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is."

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17125
The evidence that Julie was fed information from the relatives is rather simple.

Like with most criminal acts, there is no direct evidence of collusion. But it can be proven through circumstancial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.

For example. If I am on the London Underground. Passengers begin to enter the train I am currently seated in. I notice those passengers are rather wet and some are holding umbrellas. From this fact I can then infer another fact that it's raining outside. Despite me being in a train tunnel and being unable to see the weather outside.

Make sense?

Now. The relatives believed that Sheila was found on the bed with the bible on her chest. This becomes part of Jeremy's alleged confession to Julie verbatim. From these facts i can then infer another fact - Julie got this information from the relatives and not from Jeremy.

Yes but when did the relatives do this in 20 days. And why bother with Julie when the reasons above show it wasn't practical & would not have worked ?

The bible was found by Sheila's chest.   Sheila was found next to the bed.

Maybe she was told or believed she heard the word 'on' rather than 'by'. Either from Bamber, other police or AE. Doesn't mean she was telepathically brainwashed while in Amsterdam, Eastbourne, Pevensey & London.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2017, 10:21:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34058
 The Bible WASN'T found near her chest,it was by her elbow of her right arm,which originally was bent with her hand on her neck.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17125
The Bible WASN'T found near her chest,it was by her elbow of her right arm,which originally was bent with her hand on her neck.

Oh yes it was miles away.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34058
Oh yes it was miles away.





Sarcastic blighter !

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17125
My last two threads have again ruled out Julie.

Everyone agreed Julie fatally betrayed Bamber five times while still with him. So much so that an excuse was made - the relatives had influenced her.

My thread post gave 16 reasons why the relatives didn't influence Julie. None have been disputed.

The only explanation is Julie started betraying Bamber while still with him because of what he told her. Both pre & post massacre.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 01:15:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.