Author Topic: Monster  (Read 470 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #15 on: June 23, 2018, 12:32:PM »
Will this production be before or after JB's solicitors etc have finished their work on the case/submission ?

As the two things are unrelated, who knows BUT it could be years before the CCRC get around to reviewing any submissions by either the CT or solicitors.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #16 on: June 23, 2018, 12:38:PM »
As the two things are unrelated, who knows BUT it could be years before the CCRC get around to reviewing any submissions by either the CT or solicitors.






Maybe months and not years as I think CCRC will be on the ball this time given the publicity between them and the DPP lately plus people's awareness of the Bamber case and the length of time he's been holed-up.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #17 on: June 23, 2018, 01:01:PM »





Maybe months and not years as I think CCRC will be on the ball this time given the publicity between them and the DPP lately plus people's awareness of the Bamber case and the length of time he's been holed-up.

Sorry Lookout, that's wishful thinking. They have a back-log and Bamber won't be jumping any queues. Might as well get yourself ready for the long haul.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 20462
Re: Monster
« Reply #18 on: June 23, 2018, 01:03:PM »
Viewpoint as in 'through his eyes'. We can revisit this once the documentary has aired and we'll see who is right. Why would they be interested in 'debate'? They are simply telling a story of what happened, why would they care about the OS? They are bothered about ratings not forums and websites.

Debate equals viewers. People will talk about it, tempting other people to watch. 'Who shot JR' was a debate which got record viewers.

It's a 6 part drama so they will use artistic licence to make it more sensational & entertaining for the viewer. The best way to do that is to create doubt.

The makers don't care whether viewers go onto the OS. However with millions watching, even if the drama leaves a 1% doubt about Bambers guilt, thousands of viewers may investigate more. If it leaves a 20% doubt....
« Last Edit: June 23, 2018, 01:04:PM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #19 on: June 23, 2018, 01:09:PM »
Debate equals viewers. People will talk about it, tempting other people to watch. 'Who shot JR' was a debate which got record viewers.

It's a 6 part drama so they will use artistic licence to make it more sensational & entertaining for the viewer. The best way to do that is to create doubt.

The makers don't care whether viewers go onto the OS. However with millions watching, even if the drama leaves a 1% doubt about Bambers guilt, thousands of viewers may investigate more. If it leaves a 20% doubt....

Just wait and see Adam, it's clear from the article that there will be no whodunit scenario's but we'll see.

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 10634
Re: Monster
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2018, 01:12:PM »
Debate equals viewers. People will talk about it, tempting other people to watch. 'Who shot JR' was a debate which got record viewers.

It's a 6 part drama so they will use artistic licence to make it more sensational & entertaining for the viewer. The best way to do that is to create doubt.

The makers don't care whether viewers go onto the OS. However with millions watching, even if the drama leaves a 1% doubt about Bambers guilt, thousands of viewers may investigate more. If it leaves a 20% doubt....
That's my fear too. The whole thing is premature in my opinion and can only rake up painful memories for those most closely involved.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2018, 01:13:PM by Steve_uk »

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #21 on: June 23, 2018, 01:19:PM »
If he throws any of his supernatural gobble-de-gook into the mix,people will be turning off ! The man's obsessed. Then again most authors/producers are affected or they couldn't do what they do !

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6080
Re: Monster
« Reply #22 on: June 23, 2018, 07:39:PM »
Maybe months and not years as I think CCRC will be on the ball this time given the publicity between them and the DPP lately plus people's awareness of the Bamber case and the length of time he's been holed-up.


We will probably be looking at the same amount of time between the 2nd appeal and the last CCRC submission. So around year 2021 is my guess.
"Truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is."

"The idea that he could invent a tale of a killing spree by a mentally disturbed woman to be lent credibility by further violent episodes over the following decades is hard to credit."

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #23 on: June 29, 2018, 12:15:PM »
Don't the relatives have a say in this series ? They could block it for all we know as they'd be within their rights to do so-------unless they've been contacted for permission for it to be commissioned ?

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #24 on: June 29, 2018, 12:35:PM »
Don't the relatives have a say in this series ? They could block it for all we know as they'd be within their rights to do so-------unless they've been contacted for permission for it to be commissioned ?

Why would they? Anything promoting a guilty verdict would be favourable for them.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2018, 12:54:PM »
Why would they? Anything promoting a guilty verdict would be favourable for them.







I thought it was usual for a producer to get permission from living relatives before making such a series as it involves them and also their home where the murders took place. It's got nothing to do with " promoting guilt " it's an invasion of privacy and unless permission has been granted then the surviving relatives can have a say in the matter.

Remember when AE chased police officers in the 90's when they'd wanted to carry out some kind of an experiment ? They hadn't wanted to be reminded of how the tragedy had happened as it would bring it all back to them. I know the situation then was different to this one but the sentiments remain the same.


There are supposedly 6 " episodes " so what is going to be different to what's already been said by them ?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #26 on: June 29, 2018, 01:10:PM »
Say for instance about the blood match of Sheila's found in a silencer being the same as RWB's ? How would that be viewed-----------if at all mentioned  ::) the relatives could sue because it's like an accusation ?

They must have read lots from the CT and in view of the latest forensic evidence who say that they now " have an airtight case in a multitude of areas " how will anyone be made to feel ?

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40034
Re: Monster
« Reply #27 on: June 29, 2018, 01:11:PM »
I have a feeling that permission has to be granted but this is NGB's department.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #28 on: June 29, 2018, 01:41:PM »
I thought it was usual for a producer to get permission from living relatives before making such a series as it involves them and also their home where the murders took place. It's got nothing to do with " promoting guilt " it's an invasion of privacy and unless permission has been granted then the surviving relatives can have a say in the matter.

Remember when AE chased police officers in the 90's when they'd wanted to carry out some kind of an experiment ? They hadn't wanted to be reminded of how the tragedy had happened as it would bring it all back to them. I know the situation then was different to this one but the sentiments remain the same.

There are supposedly 6 " episodes " so what is going to be different to what's already been said by them ?

I doubt they would need the relatives permission - it was over 30 years ago. They may have asked for cooperation but I doubt permission would be required. Look at the stuff said about them on the internet?

They won't be using the real WHF so won't need to ask AE anything.

It's different because it's from each persons perspective.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2018, 01:43:PM by Caroline »

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23086
Re: Monster
« Reply #29 on: June 29, 2018, 01:45:PM »
Say for instance about the blood match of Sheila's found in a silencer being the same as RWB's ? How would that be viewed-----------if at all mentioned  ::) the relatives could sue because it's like an accusation ?

They must have read lots from the CT and in view of the latest forensic evidence who say that they now " have an airtight case in a multitude of areas " how will anyone be made to feel ?

How could they sue for saying the blood was the same as RBW's? If it's a fact they can sue unless accusations are laid against them but I very much doubt that will be the angle. They aren't arguing the case from an innocent perspective.

Jeremy says he has an airtight case in every letter I have - it's a mantra - nothing more.