Author Topic: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary  (Read 855 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34520
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2017, 11:48:AM »
There are already threads on this. JackieD recently creating one addessed to me. Suggesting Julie identfying the bodies outweighs the 200+ pieces of forensic & circumstantial evidence.

This thread is about a second visit by Julie to see the body. Hopefully JackieD will provide the source to her thread post later today.





I'm just repeating myself like you do.

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23318
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2017, 12:16:PM »




In Colin's book he states that Heather had offered to go on his behalf,but for reasons unknown,her offer was disallowed. Heather probably knew the twins better than anyone !

On whose behalf did JM go,besides her own ??

I believe it was considered that her time would be better employed being with Colin. Her offer, therefore was refused -and I suggest the reasons for it WERE known- as opposed to "disallowed" and what that insinuates.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17554
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #17 on: July 10, 2017, 12:18:PM »
It seems that Bamber may be innocent based on evidence not seen on the forum -

Roch's seen evidence he saw in March 2017 which he can't disclose.

Bill's 28 abrasion photographs on Sheila which he can't disclose.

JackieD's new information which she won't disclose on the forum.

David's 'forensic evidence breakthrough'.

Mike's picture of Sheila on the bed.

Julie's second visit to the mortuary which no one has a source for (which according to some shows guilt).
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 12:29:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34520
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #18 on: July 10, 2017, 12:24:PM »
I believe it was considered that her time would be better employed being with Colin. Her offer, therefore was refused -and I suggest the reasons for it WERE known- as opposed to "disallowed" and what that insinuates.




SJ hadn't wanted Heather to go. Colin didn't like the man,it was clear.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #19 on: July 10, 2017, 12:38:PM »
It seems that Bamber may be innocent based on evidence not seen on the forum -

Roch's seen evidence he saw in March 2017 which he can't disclose.

Bill's 28 abrasion photographs on Sheila which he can't disclose.

JackieD's new information which she won't disclose on the forum.

David's 'forensic evidence breakthrough'.

Mike's picture of Sheila on the bed.

Julie's second visit to the mortuary which no one has a source for (which according to some shows guilt).


As you obviously believe none of the above what was the point of your post?


Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23318
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #20 on: July 10, 2017, 01:02:PM »



SJ hadn't wanted Heather to go. Colin didn't like the man,it was clear.

Those two statements are only your opinion. HAD the identification been a problem, Colin COULD have insisted that he wanted Heather to do it, had that been the case. As he had no problem with Julie, he may not have seen the need to change things.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17554
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #21 on: July 10, 2017, 01:14:PM »

As you obviously believe none of the above what was the point of your post?


What is the point of you're 'rifle in the window' post ?  It has acheived nothing.

At least when a supporter makes up evidence they can't post, it gets other supporters excited & they try to turn it into accepted evidence on the forum.

Obviously evidence needs to be supplied on the forum by supporters for guilters to accept it. The latest this month from Bill & JackieD.

I don't recall any guilters saying they have new evidence they can't post. There is enough published incriminating evidence already for them already.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2017, 01:37:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17554
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2017, 09:30:AM »
No source has been supplied on Julie making a second visit to the mortuary. Therefore the claim that this is a fact has been dismissed.

I know posters are passionate about their reasons for innocence or guilt support. I focus on the published evidence, while JackieD & Susan focus on Julie identifying the twins & Nugs on the relatives fabricating the silencer.

However it's best that both sides only say something is a fact when there are sources that show this.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2017, 09:39:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2017, 12:41:PM »

What is the point of you're 'rifle in the window' post ?  It has acheived nothing.

At least when a supporter makes up evidence they can't post, it gets other supporters excited & they try to turn it into accepted evidence on the forum.

Obviously evidence needs to be supplied on the forum by supporters for guilters to accept it. The latest this month from Bill & JackieD.

I don't recall any guilters saying they have new evidence they can't post. There is enough published incriminate

ing evidence already for them already.



my thread was instigated by curiosity and scuppered by the fact that I think there are documentary pictures mixed up with crime scene photos in the archive .

But there are two big differences - 1 ) I can admit when I am wrong
2) It was a valid question - was there a picture of the room where the experienced fire arms officer saw what could have been a rifle.  It appears there is no picture so her observation can not be verified .

If she did see a rifle and it was no longer there when the raid team went in it would mean that Sheila was moving about the house whilst they were outside .

So hardly pointless .


Offline Jan

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2017, 12:45:PM »

I don't recall any guilters saying they have new evidence they can't post. There is enough published incriminating evidence already for them already.


why would anyone try and post evidence to keep a man in jail who is already there?


That would implicate you feel the current evidence is not proof?

Offline maggie

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12801
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #25 on: July 11, 2017, 12:54:PM »

why would anyone try and post evidence to keep a man in jail who is already there?


That would implicate you feel the current evidence is not proof?
;D ;D ;D

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 15654
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #26 on: July 11, 2017, 01:16:PM »

why would anyone try and post evidence to keep a man in jail who is already there?


That would implicate you feel the current evidence is not proof?

 :)) :)) :)) :))

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17554
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #27 on: July 11, 2017, 01:22:PM »

why would anyone try and post evidence to keep a man in jail who is already there?


That would implicate you feel the current evidence is not proof?

It's a discussion forum. I like to discuss the published evidence which as a fact shows Bamber is guilty. Other people do as well.

But appreciate you like to discuss things in other rooms & JackieD & Susan on Julie identifying the bodies. JackieD getting carried away with this & stating something with no source was a fact.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34520
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #28 on: July 11, 2017, 01:27:PM »
How can it show Bamber guilty ? Just because of a visit to a mortuary ?
Julie went of her own volition,Jeremy didn't hold her at gunpoint to go  ::)

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17554
Re: Julie Mugfords Second Visit To The Mortuary
« Reply #29 on: July 11, 2017, 01:31:PM »
How can it show Bamber guilty ? Just because of a visit to a mortuary ?
Julie went of her own volition,Jeremy didn't hold her at gunpoint to go  ::)

I never said Julie identifying the bodies showed anything. JackieD & Susan believe it shows Bamber is innocent.

As I said I focus on the published evidence which convicted Bamber.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2017, 01:32:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.