Author Topic: Why Did JB Have His Category Status Downgraded So Quickly By Prison Authoritys  (Read 2025 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aunt Agatha

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 511
"What if's" are hypothetical, though, aren't they?





They are - you're right!

Then I'll change that to:   Can I suggest you look at it from another point of view.

Does that make it any clearer?

Online lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 34959
I think Lookout, she was frightened because the police could have built a case against her, it was a way out for her and they would have put pressure on her to cooperate, look how the police are using known sex offenders even now as snitches, favours will have to be given back in return for these despicable people.





Strange how the thought of £25,000 suddenly makes things look a lot more bearable,isn't it ? Money,or someones life ? That tells me the character of a person.

As for the £10,000 dropsy to a sex offender-------I'm with Nazir here. It was despicable.

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23970
I think you may have forgotten Jane.  Steve has been extremely offensive in the past to several members, not just to me, and has been rightly challenged on it by others, including by you.  Have a look at this thread - it is quite long I am afraid but it is worth reading to the end.  There are also some good points raised in it about the case which newer members might find interesting: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4226.510.html

Thank-you for the link, Neil. Am presently ploughing my way through Ann's WS. My opinion of her hasn't changed anymore than has my opinion of Julie.

I have certainly had my spats with Steve -probably more than he has had with me- however, reflecting on a 1 to 10 scale of offensiveness, I would never rate him as achieving more than 4..................although I MAY have, at the time.

Offline justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2646
Thank you for your kind words justice.

You make good points about what goes on in the criminal justice system.  I agree that just because Julie Mugford was coached (and pressured) by the police, and had other incentives, does not prove that her evidence was false, but my own view is that if the jury had known the full facts they would have been very wary about relying upon the evidence.
Thanks NGB, I have to agree, he might have got off if Julie had been exposed more, I think the prosecution used the tactic well with Julie, making her tearful and not an accommodating witness to the defence, they would not have liked her past that's for sure.  It is ultimately important that the prosecution are honest and fully disclose relivent information, the defence rely on this information, the sad part about any trial and one thing that cannot be avoided, the prosecution and police will always have first hand knowledge of any evidence to be used at trial.
Envy kills,” the Pope said. “It does not tolerate others having something that I do not have. And it always suffers, because the heart of an envious or jealous person suffers. It is a suffering heart!” It is a suffering that desires “the death of others

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
Great post Jane, I do agree being such a young age who knows, the defence have a lot to answer for, they could have asked Julie lots of searching questions. The prosecution were on catch up and I would have thought that they realised Julie wasn't the star witness they thought hence the coaching, it happens all the time and will continue to happen.  At the end of the day I don't think Julie was good for them and would have been relieved how she survived the defence, the prosecution had the luxury in not only showing Bamber did it, i think the most damming was showing Sheila didn't do it.

What the young girl who got her kicks by offering to view the children's bodies with bullet holes in them and the young evil girl who stood next to Colin Caffell at the funeral when she 'knew' her boyfriend was responsible

Julie will go Dow in history as just like Maxine Carr there are both evil to the core

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23970
Dear Julie,

You obviously have a spiteful jealous wicked nature to set someone up who you claim to have loved
You have had 30 years to put the record straight but you decided you would keep Jeremy in prison for the rest of his life.
There is no punishment harsh enough for you to be given unless it's 30 years like Jeremy has done.  May you rot in prison for taking away the chance for Jeremy never being able to have children and when you sit in your cell maybe then you will realise what you have done to an innocent man and the shame you have bought on your own family

I think that says much more of your character and the depths to which you're prepared to stoop for your "gorgeous, fit boy".

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
I think Lookout, she was frightened because the police could have built a case against her, it was a way out for her and they would have put pressure on her to cooperate, look how the police are using known sex offenders even now as snitches, favours will have to be given back in return for these despicable people.

Don't make excuses for her, she needs a lifetime in prison to set an example

Offline justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2646





But, what if the police and family 'needed' her to play ball?

Imagine she received no phone call from Jeremy, she slept with him after the murders.... he dumped her!

She had stood by him through the funeral etc, he's about to inherit a huge sum and power... with her support, and he dumps her?   She'd be so upset.

Both the police and family knew she was vulnerable, emotionally and financially.

What if Jeremy had to be convicted at any cost?

Both the Police and the family had Julie.  Pay to play.  It's a common practice especially in government and practised so often amongst the higher echelons in life.   It's a cover up from start to finish.
Have to agree A A, I cannot defend Julie in what actions she took, I think she was very vulnerable and an easy target because of her past, I thought the defence did a poor job of such a witness.  Have you seen Jeremy's trial statements and cross examining AA, they are not up here, any reason why not?
Envy kills,” the Pope said. “It does not tolerate others having something that I do not have. And it always suffers, because the heart of an envious or jealous person suffers. It is a suffering heart!” It is a suffering that desires “the death of others

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23970
What the young girl who got her kicks by offering to view the children's bodies with bullet holes in them and the young evil girl who stood next to Colin Caffell at the funeral when she 'knew' her boyfriend was responsible

Julie will go Dow in history as just like Maxine Carr there are both evil to the core

Go on then, give us a list of everyone who was available, convenient, offered, and was deemed suitable to do the identification.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8873
Thank you for your kind words justice.

You make good points about what goes on in the criminal justice system.  I agree that just because Julie Mugford was coached (and pressured) by the police, and had other incentives, does not prove that her evidence was false, but my own view is that if the jury had known the full facts they would have been very wary about relying upon the evidence.
The jury were directed by Mr. Justice Drake to be wary so this does rather nullify your point.
« Last Edit: August 13, 2017, 05:29:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline justice

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2646
Don't make excuses for her, she needs a lifetime in prison to set an example
She needed prison I have to agree, but not the same punishment as Bamber, he pulled the trigger and did the deed.
Envy kills,” the Pope said. “It does not tolerate others having something that I do not have. And it always suffers, because the heart of an envious or jealous person suffers. It is a suffering heart!” It is a suffering that desires “the death of others

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8873






They certainly could not afford for her to be on Jeremy's side and tell the truth.   They were left with no choice but to use her.... so the coaching began and upon his conviction was paid by all three.
Whether her statement was deemed convincing enough, I don't think was an issue so much as whether or not she told the truth and was supported by Jeremy.  He had not offered her money or a new life as the others had.   If he had some foresight, or was guilty, I do believe he would have paid anything to get her on his side.  But he didn't! Because he didn't need to buy her - he trusted she would just tell the truth.
You've got the chronology so completely wrong this is beginning to hurt..

Offline JackieD

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 611
Hmm,but I only have your word for that and your reputation as a reinventor of truth precedes you.

Your trying to cause trouble as per usual every single day
Check with Ngb
But you won't will you because you will look a total idiot again

Offline Jane J

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23970




They are - you're right!

Then I'll change that to:   Can I suggest you look at it from another point of view.

Does that make it any clearer?

Well, if you can give me a clear, logical and feasible reason WHY they needed to frame Jeremy when they had Sheila, maybe it will be possible for me to look at it from another point of view.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8873




Totally agree.   Looking for a paper trail to the Police agreement. 🙂

I've got a copy of Mrs Speakmans Will and I along with Jeremy questioned the families inheritance and value.
I recall the selling of shares... the family took everything they could (as you know).

Both Julie and his family had motive.... which was withheld from the Jury and possibly the Judge. (But that's another story).
Everything was bequeathed to her two blood daughters: Pamela Boutflour and June Bamber.