Is Julie Mugford relevant?

[nugnug]

well it doesn't really matter how many times here evidence is discredited I found it that credible to begin with unless she retracts it or evidence of her admitting she made it up is found it still stands.

[ngb1066]

I know you said that it would be in conjunction with other points.  My other post points to that as a basis for saying that your own post is just a way of admitting that it ISN'T a ground for appeal.  And it isn't.  Her evidence proved nothing.  But I don't care about Julie Mugford, go ahead.

I think I'm done here. I've learned what I want to learn about this case.

Julie Mugford's evidence was very important and alongside the evidence relating to the sound moderator was one of the two central planks of the prosecution case.  Her evidence in essence was that JB admitted to her his guilt.  If her evidence can be undermined to a significant extent, particularly in conjunction with other new evidence casting doubt on the sound moderator evidence and in relation to other evidence, the convictions might be overturned.  That is what I have been saying, no more and no less.
If you want to learn more about these points you could use the search facility here to review some of the old threads.  Early 2012 would be a very good place to start.  A lot of this was covered in far greater detail then. 

[Nigel]

Julie Mugford's evidence was very important and alongside the evidence relating to the sound moderator was one of the two central planks of the prosecution case.  Her evidence in essence was that JB admitted to her his guilt.  If her evidence can be undermined to a significant extent, particularly in conjunction with other new evidence casting doubt on the sound moderator evidence and in relation to other evidence, the convictions might be overturned.  That is what I have been saying, no more and no less.
If you want to learn more about these points you could use the search facility here to review some of the old threads.  Early 2012 would be a very good place to start.  A lot of this was covered in far greater detail then.

It ain't working Mike...we are on the route to The Light....see other threads.

[buddy]

I agree with ngb on this. The conviction was secured on the testimony of JM and the dodgy evidence of the moderator.
As I have already mentioned in the past why were there so few fingerprints found on the rifle?
From memory there was one print from Sheila and one from JB. It is clear that the rifle had been wiped clean by EP.
Why would JB wipe the rifle clean as he already said he handled the rifle on the night of the murders and why would Sheila?
The police investigation was botched from the beginning, and JBs conviction is unsafe imo.

[Steve_uk]

well it doesn't really matter how many times here evidence is discredited I found it that credible to begin with unless she retracts it or evidence of her admitting she made it up is found it still stands.

Yes I agree that if Julie were to admit that she lied the Establishment (who must be sick of this case by now) would find some grounds to release him, probably before the August holiday or Christmas when people's attention is distracted.

[Adam]

I don't believe Bamber will ever make a third CCRC application. Espescially based on when Julie signed a contract with the NOTW. Even though NGB said yesterday he has information he won't disclose.

It would be disappointing if this did happen. Julie's & the NOTW lawyers getting Julie to sign a contract at the wrong time is hardly 'fresh evidence' showing Bamber is innocent,  or that Julie's WS completed a year earlier is wrong.

[Steve_uk]

I don't believe Bamber will ever make a third CCRC application. Espescially based on when Julie signed a contract with the NOTW. Even though NGB said yesterday he has information he won't disclose.

It would be disappointing if this did happen. Julie's & the NOTW lawyers getting Julie to sign a contract at the wrong time is hardly 'fresh evidence' showing Bamber is innocent,  or that Julie's WS completed a year earlier is wrong.

Yes I despair, and not for the first time.

[maggie]

Yes I despair, and not for the first time.

I don't understand why you despair Steve, is it because of the secrecy?  Surely if something is told to you in confidence I am sure you would not post it up on a public forum for all the world to see? There are obviously reasons why such information needs to remain private at the moment. 

[maggie]

Yes I agree that if Julie were to admit that she lied the Establishment (who must be sick of this case by now) would find some grounds to release him, probably before the August holiday or Christmas when people's attention is distracted.

Whether the proof JMugford lied has any effect on JB's sentence or not it is still unacceptable. I find it strange how some think anything goes in the criminal justice system as long as it supports their own fixed beliefs.

[David1819]

I did not say on its own it would overturn the conviction.  It would be a valid ground of appeal, taken with others.  I do know what I am talking about.  I have conducted many cases in the Court of Appeal in the past.

NGB. David Boutflour told David James Smith in 2010 that he showed Sheila how to fire a shotgun and that she fired it while in Scotland. Back in 1986 at trial DB denied this.

Should this not be ground for appeal also, considering DB was a prosecution witness and also handled the sound moderator? It brings everything he told the jury into question.

[ngb1066]

NGB. David Boutflour told David James Smith in 2010 that he showed Sheila how to fire a shotgun and that she fired it while in Scotland. Back in 1986 at trial DB denied this.

Should this not be ground for appeal also, considering DB was a prosecution witness and also handled the sound moderator? It brings everything he told the jurt into question.

In itself this would not be sufficient to overturn the conviction because it does not directly undermine the key tenets of the prosecution case at trial.  However it is a matter which could be raised in an appeal, alongside other grounds.

[David1819]

In itself this would not be sufficient to overturn the conviction because it does not directly undermine the key tenets of the prosecution case at trial.  However it is a matter which could be raised in an appeal, alongside other grounds.

But it was DB that discovered and handled the linchpin of the prosecution case. The essence of the case rests on his integrity.

[ngb1066]

But it was DB that discovered and handled the linchpin of the prosecution case. The essence of the case rests on his integrity.

His evidence was important and undermining his credibility would assist the defence but this discrepancy on its own would not result in the convictions being overturned.

[David1819]

His evidence was important and undermining his credibility would assist the defence but this discrepancy on its own would not result in the convictions being overturned.

On its own no. But there is so much more that has come to light since the verdict. Combined it changes the whole picture.

[guest154]

NGB. David Boutflour told David James Smith in 2010 that he showed Sheila how to fire a shotgun and that she fired it while in Scotland. Back in 1986 at trial DB denied this.

Should this not be ground for appeal also, considering DB was a prosecution witness and also handled the sound moderator? It brings everything he told the jury into question.

Where?
Let's look at what David Smith said in 2010.


Sheila
had been treated for depression and recently
diagnosed with schizophrenia. Her mother had
been treated for depression, too. At different
times they had been patients at the same private
psychiatric hospital.

The blood evidence was inconclusive, but the
paint matched the underside of the shelf above
the Aga in the kitchen. There were fresh scratches
on the shelf, so it seemed likely the silencer had
been on the gun during the struggle between
Nevill and his killer. If the silencer was on the gun
at the time of the shootings, the gun became too
long for Sheila to put the nozzle at her throat and
still reach the trigger. It was not credible to
imagine her killing everyone else before removing
the silencer, going downstairs, putting the silencer
back in the cupboard, going back up to the
bedroom and then shooting herself. If the silencer
was genuine evidence, the killer could not have
been Sheila, Bamber’s story of the phone call was
a lie, and he must have been the killer

It was found
lying across Sheila’s
body, the silencer was
elsewhere. Bamber has
built up thousands of
pieces of ‘evidence’,
including this original
note from the forensic
study of the silencer

When David Boutflour,
Ann Eaton and Anthony Pargeter went to
raise their suspicions of Bamber with him, he
was having none of it. Eaton was dubbed an
interfering Miss Marple. Boutflour recalled
the meeting for me and how Pargeter had said
they really weren’t pointing the finger at anybody, but they didn’t think it was Sheila,
and Jones had stood up and said, I’m not
listening to this rubbish, out you go! Eaton had
persisted and he had again stood up, I’m going
to have to ask you to leave. He wasn’t going to
listen to a lot of old nonsense.
Some junior detectives doubted it was Sheila,
but they couldn’t speak to Jones either. Eventually
he was effectively overruled and other senior
officers took charge. Jones went home and was
up a ladder doing house repairs when he fell and
suffered injuries that eventually led to his death, on
May 11, 1986. It’s more than a little coincidental
that the only officer who always believed Bamber’s
account of events should have died in a freak
accident, but there is nothing obviously untoward
in the incident, which I investigated thoroughly.
It was without doubt a genuine accident, as the
inquest into Jones’s death confirmed

Jeremy believes Sheila was the other “body”,
still alive downstairs and that she then roused
herself and went upstairs to shoot herself. Then,
too, there is that open telephone line and,
according to the police log, a sound recording was
made. The recordings have never been disclosed
and cannot be traced by Bamber and his legal
team.

I had said on the way in that I feared I would
find him repulsive, but in the event, I found him
all too human and understandable. Except for
the part of him that I felt was hidden. The corner
of his soul that carried the knowledge of what
had really happened that night 25 years ago,
and who really had killed his family.
He knows the truth. And he is the only person
in the world who does.
Was it Sheila? Was it Jeremy?
Reader, I have no idea