Jeremy Bamber Forum
JEREMY BAMBER CASE => Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion => Topic started by: Luminous Wanderer on April 13, 2018, 11:26:PM
-
I may need to reach for my tin foil hat, and I hesitate to say this as I’m not naturally one for conspiracy theories, but is it completely inconceivable that Essex Police, or perhaps the Metropolitan Police, might have recruited a civilian or even assigned one of their own officers to post on boards like this and promote an anti-Bamber perspective, the aim being to divert and discourage discussion? You can imagine that such an operator would be obnoxious and repetitive, and would lie about the case and flame other posters. Another intriguing thought is that some of the screen handles on here might not be just one individual, but might be several perhaps working to an organised agenda.
It’s not as far-fetched as it sounds. The Israeli Defence Force have a very large social media operation: their operators are known as hasbara.
I know quite a lot about the police and the way they work internally, and they do have covert media operations and, if there is a significant cover-up of wrong-doing, then it wouldn’t surprise me if they have individuals on the payroll to ‘manage perceptions’ and alert them to case developments.
Probably not, I’m probably allowing my imagination to run away with me. It’s just a thought.
What does prompt me to think along those lines is that, I have to say this, some anti-Bamber posters seem like very queer people. I’m neutral about Jeremy Bamber, but I can well understand somebody like Mike becoming committed to overturning the conviction. It’s the sort of thing that people do campaign about, and I’m willing to give people like Mike and Nigel considerable leeway because I can comprehend why somebody would become impassioned in such a cause.
What’s baffling me is the other side of it. It’s not as usual for people to become obsessed with wanting to keep somebody in prison and suppress or divert discussion of the case and lie about it – unless you’re a member of the family or working for the police, then it would make sense.
-
Do Anti-Bamber Posters Have Secret Motives?
Yes that's plainly obvious.
What’s baffling me is the other side of it. It’s not as usual for people to become obsessed with wanting to keep somebody in prison and suppress or divert discussion of the case and lie about it – unless you’re a member of the family or working for the police, then it would make sense.
Some members on here have contact with Jeremys extended family to some extent or another.
One member here has met Julie Mugford in person.
-
Do Anti-Bamber Posters Have Secret Motives?
Yes that's plainly obvious.
Some members on here have contact with Jeremys extended family to some extent or another.
One member here has met Julie Mugford in person.
Thanks. I thought that would be the case! Otherwise, it's pretty queer behaviour in some quarters.
-
Pity the same weren't behind the release next month of Colin Pitchfork whose murders had been PROVEN and whose home town is within a short distance to where the relatives of the victims live. Where are the " gangs " who are stopping/blocking his release. ? Are there stark differences between murderers, or isn't it financially viable regarding support in Pitchforks case ?? This is a man/monster who will commit murder again !!
-
I may need to reach for my tin foil hat, and I hesitate to say this as I’m not naturally one for conspiracy theories, but is it completely inconceivable that Essex Police, or perhaps the Metropolitan Police, might have recruited a civilian or even assigned one of their own officers to post on boards like this and promote an anti-Bamber perspective, the aim being to divert and discourage discussion? You can imagine that such an operator would be obnoxious and repetitive, and would lie about the case and flame other posters. Another intriguing thought is that some of the screen handles on here might not be just one individual, but might be several perhaps working to an organised agenda.
It’s not as far-fetched as it sounds. The Israeli Defence Force have a very large social media operation: their operators are known as hasbara.
I know quite a lot about the police and the way they work internally, and they do have covert media operations and, if there is a significant cover-up of wrong-doing, then it wouldn’t surprise me if they have individuals on the payroll to ‘manage perceptions’ and alert them to case developments.
Probably not, I’m probably allowing my imagination to run away with me. It’s just a thought.
What does prompt me to think along those lines is that, I have to say this, some anti-Bamber posters seem like very queer people. I’m neutral about Jeremy Bamber, but I can well understand somebody like Mike becoming committed to overturning the conviction. It’s the sort of thing that people do campaign about, and I’m willing to give people like Mike and Nigel considerable leeway because I can comprehend why somebody would become impassioned in such a cause.
What’s baffling me is the other side of it. It’s not as usual for people to become obsessed with wanting to keep somebody in prison and suppress or divert discussion of the case and lie about it – unless you’re a member of the family or working for the police, then it would make sense.
Maybe you are the obsessive here and not people who as you say have been posting for years, seeing people come and go, encouraging debate but most importantly making friends whom we would never disparage in a way you always seem to intimate in your writings.
Your latest disparagement comes as no surprise. Since you are a Johnny-come-lately (as you only too readily admit) let me explain my rationale behind posting on this site for years.
I'm from a neighbourhood very close to where Julie went to grammar school, we ended up choosing the same career in the mid-1980s and even working for the same employer in London when opportunities were limited in the North, when the savage cuts imposed by the Conservative government of the time began to bite.
I have never met her (which clears up one point made by david 1819, a member who is on the opposite side of the fence to myself but with whom I have had very few problems). I have been Julie's harshest critic over the years, to which my various threads attest, but there is one aspect of the Bamber case I may be able to shed light on from a personal perspective.
The education system of the 1980s was a victim of the prevailing selfishness of the time, mainly emanating from the top, and the result was a sharp deterioration in the behaviour of pupils at all levels. This has, to some extent, been rectified today, but if I take you back to a classroom of the 1980s you would find a small handful of wilful, unruly pupils who spoilt it for the rest, and which Senior Management had very little strategies in place for dealing with, let alone the teacher based in the classroom.
I am labouring this background information because it has a direct relevance to the Bamber case. It's actually ngb1066's pet topic (along with the News of the World deal) and if the case wasn't so intrinsically serious I would manage a wry smile every time it's mentioned to malign Julie, though nowadays all it brings forth is a grimace on my world-weary face.
I am alluding, of course, to the prescription Julie requested from the doctor at Lewisham in October 1984 to relieve what I believed to be tension type headaches. Of course the insinuation always is by the pro-Bamber supporters that she procured these tablets with the express intention of colluding with Jeremy's plan to drug his parents, simultaneously burning down the Farm. It was the plot Jeremy indirectly alluded to to Charles Marsden in The Frog and Beans shortly before Christmas 1984, but once again this evidence is dismissed by the Jeremy lovers.
I am here to tell you now that I knew personally several members of staff who were on medication of such a description. I could go into further detail but will desist, except to say it was not uncommon for female members of staff to put on weight, or male menbers to binge drink at weekends. Several members took early retirement after corporal punishment was abolished in 1986.
There is therefore in my opinion no sinister motive for Julie requesting sleeping tablets, and anyway credit her with enough sense to know that such mild tranquillizers dissolved in a gin and tonic would as likely as not be ineffectual. June had her own medication anyway and would be unlikely to drink anything her son proffered her.
I don't mind your imagination running away with you (as you put it) as long as there are not snide accompanying remarks. The double entendre of "queer" may or may not be a case in point. It is to members' credit here that never in the whole history of my time here has anyone made any snide remark about Jeremy's alleged liaison with Brett Collins even though they may have been tempted so to do.
There are parameters on this website which you are perpetually bordering on and may well yet again have crossed. A tin hat? You need a Faraday cage.
-
Some do have an agenda, in the sense that they deliberately and actively support the surviving relatives, by way of denial and avoidance of certain case evidence. In doing so, they disrespect the relatives who were killed. The surviving relatives do not want the true circs of the killings to come to light - as this would undermine the conviction of Jeremy and expose their own wrongdoing in the process. You can support the surviving relatives or you respect the slain relatives - but you cannot do both.
-
I may need to reach for my tin foil hat, and I hesitate to say this as I’m not naturally one for conspiracy theories, but is it completely inconceivable that Essex Police, or perhaps the Metropolitan Police, might have recruited a civilian or even assigned one of their own officers to post on boards like this and promote an anti-Bamber perspective, the aim being to divert and discourage discussion? You can imagine that such an operator would be obnoxious and repetitive, and would lie about the case and flame other posters. Another intriguing thought is that some of the screen handles on here might not be just one individual, but might be several perhaps working to an organised agenda.
It’s not as far-fetched as it sounds. The Israeli Defence Force have a very large social media operation: their operators are known as hasbara.
I know quite a lot about the police and the way they work internally, and they do have covert media operations and, if there is a significant cover-up of wrong-doing, then it wouldn’t surprise me if they have individuals on the payroll to ‘manage perceptions’ and alert them to case developments.
Probably not, I’m probably allowing my imagination to run away with me. It’s just a thought.
What does prompt me to think along those lines is that, I have to say this, some anti-Bamber posters seem like very queer people. I’m neutral about Jeremy Bamber, but I can well understand somebody like Mike becoming committed to overturning the conviction. It’s the sort of thing that people do campaign about, and I’m willing to give people like Mike and Nigel considerable leeway because I can comprehend why somebody would become impassioned in such a cause.
What’s baffling me is the other side of it. It’s not as usual for people to become obsessed with wanting to keep somebody in prison and suppress or divert discussion of the case and lie about it – unless you’re a member of the family or working for the police, then it would make sense.
We don't know who is posting on here LW, many people use an avatars and conceal their true identity. It is however against forum rules to speculate on another poster's identity or to expose them on the open forum in some way. Anyone with real reservations is welcome to pm Ngb or myself with details. We are all aware that anyone can post on the forum a s long as Admin accepts their application to join.
-
Maybe you are the obsessive here and not people who as you say have been posting for years, seeing people come and go, encouraging debate but most importantly making friends whom we would never disparage in a way you always seem to intimate in your writings.
Your latest disparagement comes as no surprise. Since you are a Johnny-come-lately (as you only too readily admit) let me explain my rationale behind posting on this site for years.
I'm from a neighbourhood very close to where Julie went to grammar school, we ended up choosing the same career in the mid-1980s and even working for the same employer in London when opportunities were limited in the North, when the savage cuts imposed by the Conservative government of the time began to bite.
I have never met her (which clears up one point made by david 1819, a member who is on the opposite side of the fence to myself but with whom I have had very few problems). I have been Julie's harshest critic over the years, to which my various threads attest, but there is one aspect of the Bamber case I may be able to shed light on from a personal perspective.
The education system of the 1980s was a victim of the prevailing selfishness of the time, mainly emanating from the top, and the result was a sharp deterioration in the behaviour of pupils at all levels. This has, to some extent, been rectified today, but if I take you back to a classroom of the 1980s you would find a small handful of wilful, unruly pupils who spoilt it for the rest, and which Senior Management had very little strategies in place for dealing with, let alone the teacher based in the classroom.
I am labouring this background information because it has a direct relevance to the Bamber case. It's actually ngb1066's pet topic (along with the News of the World deal) and if the case wasn't so intrinsically serious I would manage a wry smile every time it's mentioned to malign Julie, though nowadays all it brings forth is a grimace on my world-weary face.
I am alluding, of course, to the prescription Julie requested from the doctor at Lewisham in October 1984 to relieve what I believed to be tension type headaches. Of course the insinuation always is by the pro-Bamber supporters that she procured these tablets with the express intention of colluding with Jeremy's plan to drug his parents, simultaneously burning down the Farm. It was the plot Jeremy indirectly alluded to to Charles Marsden in The Frog and Beans shortly before Christmas 1984, but once again this evidence is dismissed by the Jeremy lovers.
I am here to tell you now that I knew personally several members of staff who were on medication of such a description. I could go into further detail but will desist, except to say it was not uncommon for female members of staff to put on weight, or male menbers to binge drink at weekends. Several members took early retirement after corporal punishment was abolished in 1986.
There is therefore in my opinion no sinister motive for Julie requesting sleeping tablets, and anyway credit her with enough sense to know that such mild tranquillizers dissolved in a gin and tonic would as likely as not be ineffectual. June had her own medication anyway and would be unlikely to drink anything her son proffered her.
I don't mind your imagination running away with you (as you put it) as long as there are not snide accompanying remarks. The double entendre of "queer" may or may not be a case in point. It is to members' credit here that never in the whole history of my time here has anyone made any snide remark about Jeremy's alleged liaison with Brett Collins even though they may have been tempted so to do.
There are parameters on this website which you are perpetually bordering on and may well yet again have crossed. A tin hat? You need a Faraday cage.
It's always funny how some posters, in an attempt to rebut what I say, actually reinforce it. This lengthy, rambling post from Steve is a perfect example.
-
I enjoy reading Steve's posts because they're written without malice for starters. Secondly he is his " own person " and doesn't have to follow anyone in particular which causes friction in those whose aim it is to " get them on side ". Steve is a harmless character who also isn't afraid to give vent on his own views of the case------which is fine.
-
I enjoy reading Steve's posts because they're written without malice for starters.
I don't and they're not written without malice. His posts are full of assumptions.
-
I enjoy reading Steve's posts because they're written without malice for starters. Secondly he is his " own person " and doesn't have to follow anyone in particular which causes friction in those whose aim it is to " get them on side ". Steve is a harmless character who also isn't afraid to give vent on his own views of the case------which is fine.
And lookout is the same-an independent poster who doesn't constantly need to tap other people's brains for inspiration.
-
And lookout is the same-an independent poster who doesn't constantly need to tap other people's brains for inspiration.
No, you plagiarise cheap true-crime writers instead. You treat as fact what you read in a popular book that a biased author has written about the case. For you, this forum is a sort of gossip shop. You're a lightweight. I also don't accept that your posts are without malice, and I don't believe you contribute anything here. I think your posts are full of assumptions and I don't believe you have given any serious thought to this case beyond that you don't like Jeremy Bamber.
Of course, that's your right - I just wish you'd get off my case.
What causes these tensions is different people have different ideas about what these forums are for. To an extent, we're at cross-purposes. To me, a forum such as this is about honest discussion of the case and that involves collaboration, but collaboration isn't possible among people who are dishonest in the first place or who don't understand evidence. I can't have a sensible discussion with Adam, for instance, because he's a one-trick pony, entrenched in his views and inherently dishonest.
To give you credit, at least you don't put on any pretence that you're serious. Adam does, even thought he isn't.
-
No, you plagiarise cheap true-crime writers instead. You treat as fact what you read in a popular book that a biased author has written about the case. For you, this forum is a sort of gossip shop. You're a lightweight. I also don't accept that your posts are without malice, and I don't believe you contribute anything here. I think your posts are full of assumptions and I don't believe you have given any serious thought to this case beyond that you don't like Jeremy Bamber.
Of course, that's your right - I just wish you'd get off my case.
What causes these tensions is different people have different ideas about what these forums are for. To an extent, we're at cross-purposes. To me, a forum such as this is about honest discussion of the case and that involves collaboration, but collaboration isn't possible among people who are dishonest in the first place or who don't understand evidence. I can't have a sensible discussion with Adam, for instance, because he's a one-trick pony, entrenched in his views and inherently dishonest.
To give you credit, at least you don't put on any pretence that you're serious. Adam does, even thought he isn't.
And you look at the mote in others but don't see the beam in your own eye. Only one other poster has ever accused me of plagiarism and he left pretty sharpish years ago.
-
Some do have an agenda, in the sense that they deliberately and actively support the surviving relatives, by way of denial and avoidance of certain case evidence. In doing so, they disrespect the relatives who were killed. The surviving relatives do not want the true circs of the killings to come to light - as this would undermine the conviction of Jeremy and expose their own wrongdoing in the process. You can support the surviving relatives or you respect the slain relatives - but you cannot do both.
You see another major reason I'm here and why you and Luminous Wanderer won't get rid of me is that I'm also Colin's unofficial advocate, as well as attempting to reassure Julie that she's entitled to get on with the rest of her life without undue harrassment.
Not to make this personal but have members here considered what Colin has endured for 33 years simply because Bamber refuses to confess, quite apart from the trauma of losing his boys? All credit to him for picking up the shards of his shattered life and carrying on, giving help to other victims of this type of nightmare in workshops all around the world, as well as constructing the most moving pieces of art, in contrast to the destructive urge Jeremy has mainly manifested ever since incarceration.
-
You see another major reason I'm here and why you and Luminous Wanderer won't get rid of me is that I'm also Colin's unofficial advocate, as well as attempting to reassure Julie that she's entitled to get on with the rest of her life without undue harrassment.
Not to make this personal but have members here considered what Colin has endured for 33 years simply because Bamber refuses to confess, quite apart from the trauma of losing his boys? All credit to him for picking up the shards of his shattered life and carrying on, giving help to other victims of this type of nightmare in workshops all around the world, as well as constructing the most moving pieces of art, in contrast to the destructive urge Jeremy has mainly manifested ever since incarceration.
Imo it makes no difference whether it is believed JB is innocent or guilty. Colin Caffell deserves deep respect whoever killed his boys. I doubt in the end who killed them is the issue for Colin, should think it will always be the loss of his beloved boys and the loss of their lives which is so hard to bear. I have enormous respect for the way he dealt with it as I'm sure every other decent person has. There can be no question about that.
As for JM she behaved rather less well in many respects, JB innocent or guilty her behavour was and is questionable
Again if JB is innocent then her behavour is unforgiveable. I believe in the benefit of the doubt and the fact anyone can make a mistake particularly when young. I also believe in having an open mind wicj is the reason some of us question those who have closed minds when there are still so many unanswered questions.
-
Imo it makes no difference whether it is believed JB is innocent or guilty. Colin Caffell deserves deep respect whoever killed his boys. I doubt in the end who killed them is the issue for Colin, should think it will always be the loss of his beloved boys and the loss of their lives which is so hard to bear. I have enormous respect for the way he dealt with it as I'm sure every other decent person has. There can be no question about that.
As for JM she behaved rather less well in many respects, JB innocent or guilty her behavour was and is questionable
Again if JB is innocent then her behavour is unforgiveable. I believe in the benefit of the doubt and the fact anyone can make a mistake particularly when young. I also believe in having an open mind wicj is the reason some of us question those who have closed minds when there are still so many unanswered questions.
Well we all agree on something.
-
Well we all agree on something.
Of course we do. Colin was a victim as much as anyone. He showed tremendous courage and fortitude. One reason why I am so shocked that JM stayed a weekend in his flat with JB supposedly supporting him when she later claimed she had known Jenemy was the killer.
-
you expect freinds of the relatives to post here thats perfetly normal but i dont think thats what luminous wanderer is implying ithink or she is talking about paid trolls.
-
you expect freinds of the relatives to post here thats perfetly normal but i dont think thats what luminous wanderer is implying ithink or she is talking about paid trolls.
Paid Trolls? That’s a new one on me.
-
Paid Trolls? That’s a new one on me.
read the first post of the thread.
-
read the first post of the thread.
I have, it’s a new one to me, Paid Trolls?
-
I know what it means as it happened during the Madeleine McCann case when a retired ex solicitor brought together a band of people to denigrate the McCanns by blaming them for being involved with the child's disappearance. The man then had a massive collection of funds with the intention of handing these funds to Amaral who'd been leading the case and who'd been proven to have been underhanded in his investigation.
When it came to light that this ex-solicitor had been up to no good he was given a 3 month suspended sentence.
This guy even had leaflets printed to tie on every post in Leicester where the McCanns lived and "hired "his followers to spread them around the area.
I think the amount which had been collected was £50,000, but I never knew what happened to it.
-
Inappropriate collections.
-
I have, it’s a new one to me, Paid Trolls?
It's BS! I could understand if the forum had thousands of posters, but there are just a handful of us. It's ridiculous!
-
It's BS! I could understand if the forum had thousands of posters, but there are just a handful of us. It's ridiculous!
Ha Ha it’s either you me or Jane on the families bankroll 😂😂😂🙈. Mind I have had seven holidays this year wink wink. I would say very very desperate talk.
-
Let's face it, that family must be millionaires twice over now----at least. ;D
-
Sadly, money will be the last thing on JB's mind.
-
Let's face it, that family must be millionaires twice over now----at least. ;D
I think in assets, yes Lookout, they plough a lot of money back into Osea Leisure, I would imagine they pay themselves a wage then have a dividend share out about this time of the year. Money is then set aside for future investments. The park itself has had a lot of investment and transformed a lot since it was just the Caravan Park Jeremy knew.
-
Ha Ha it’s either you me or Jane on the families bankroll 😂😂😂🙈. Mind I have had seven holidays this year wink wink. I would say very very desperate talk.
I've been accused of this before - mind you, someone has to pay for the Porsche and the private jet ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Sadly, money will be the last thing on JB's mind.
At the moment - yes.
-
I've been accused of this before - mind you, someone has to pay for the Porsche and the private jet ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Keep talking, I’ve just earned another £100 😂😂😂
-
Keep talking, I’ve just earned another £100 😂😂😂
Kerching! ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
There'd be no need for rogue funding/bribery if the truth was being told. I always think of this with the NOTW sweetener which was handed to JM.
-
The only posters who had an obvious agenda were Hartley and Vidvic. But they don't post anymore.
Ann Eaton does have an account on the forum but has never posted.
Apart from the above three, any other anti-bamber posters would only have personal motives not tied directly to the case.
-
The only posters who had an obvious agenda were Hartley and Vidvic. But they don't post anymore.
Ann Eaton does have an account on the forum but has never posted.
Apart from the above three, any other anti-bamber posters would only have personal motives not tied directly to the case.
Hartley was one of the best posters on here, toss up between him and Caroline who was the best.
-
The only posters who had an obvious agenda were Hartley and Vidvic. But they don't post anymore.
Ann Eaton does have an account on the forum but has never posted.
Apart from the above three, any other anti-bamber posters would only have personal motives not tied directly to the case.
Neither had/has an agenda. Hartley was here just the other day. As for Vidvic, I know him personally and he doesn't have an agenda. Just because he knows the family doesn't mean he has ulterior motives. In fact, he has helped to dispel a few myths. If he had an agenda, he's still be here but he's lost interest.
-
Neither had/has an agenda. Hartley was here just the other day. As for Vidvic, I know him personally and he doesn't have an agenda. Just because he knows the family doesn't mean he has ulterior motives. In fact, he has helped to dispel a few myths. If he had an agenda, he's still be here but he's lost interest.
Im only here for the money 😂😂😂
-
Im only here for the money 😂😂😂
;D ;D
-
Pity the same weren't behind the release next month of Colin Pitchfork . . .
He admitted his crimes in court. He still hasn't been paroled, though he's been out briefly.
-
Ha Ha it’s either you me or Jane on the families bankroll 😂😂😂🙈. Mind I have had seven holidays this year wink wink. I would say very very desperate talk.
she didn't say the family she said the police
and she dident name anybody.
-
I've been accused of this before - mind you, someone has to pay for the Porsche and the private jet ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
nobody's accusing you
-
Pity the same weren't behind the release next month of Colin Pitchfork whose murders had been PROVEN and whose home town is within a short distance to where the relatives of the victims live. Where are the " gangs " who are stopping/blocking his release. ? Are there stark differences between murderers, or isn't it financially viable regarding support in Pitchforks case ?? This is a man/monster who will commit murder again !!
No one is stopping Bamber's release but he'd only be released if he can come up with proper evidence.
-
nobody's accusing you
You aren't but I have been accused before - think it was the shot lived member Nigel. I'm not concerned if they do - it would be madness.
-
she didn't say the family she said the police
and she dident name anybody.
Oh right, it’s the police that bung the trolls? Makes sense, so the trolls pay the police in taxes and the police then pay the trolls to troll about Bamber. So in effect the trolls are working for nothing. Do they have a set wage or is it minimum wage or is it based on the audience does anyone know?
-
It's a con-trolled amount.
-
It's a con-trolled amount.
Ha Ha seriously though Lookout, I just can’t see the police paying anyone to troll about Bamber.
-
ive ot to ustion why some people are so obsesiveabout it seeing as jeremy ha very chance f being relsead anyway.
understanble in cases f people who knew some of the relatives personaly
its understanble that somepeoplemight remain unconvinced by the arguments of jeremys supporters.
but there a tiny few people who seem obsessed with fighting a battle thats allready been won.
-
It's always baffled me nugs.
-
It's always baffled me nugs.
It has me as well? 😂😂😂
-
ive ot to ustion why some people are so obsesiveabout it seeing as jeremy ha very chance f being relsead anyway.
understanble in cases f people who knew some of the relatives personaly
its understanble that somepeoplemight remain unconvinced by the arguments of jeremys supporters.
but there a tiny few people who seem obsessed with fighting a battle thats allready been won.
Im the only one who should be here then according to you?
-
It's always baffled me nugs.
This was my explanation Lookout and I was invited back.
Hi everyone, formally Justice thought I’d make a comeback after nearly 2 years away, been trying to catch up with posts so might be a little rusty, seems the right time to comeback with a documentary coming out and a possible CCRC application by Jeremy?
If it’s a lost cause like Nugnug said, why do you both still post?
-
This was my explanation Lookout and I was invited back.
Hi everyone, formally Justice thought I’d make a comeback after nearly 2 years away, been trying to catch up with posts so might be a little rusty, seems the right time to comeback with a documentary coming out and a possible CCRC application by Jeremy?
If it’s a lost cause like Nugnug said, why do you both still post?
People post because they are interested in the case and the crazy things that the CT come up with to try and spring him. It also becomes a bit of a habit but no one is getting paid by the cops - that's just silly!
-
This was my explanation Lookout and I was invited back.
Hi everyone, formally Justice thought I’d make a comeback after nearly 2 years away, been trying to catch up with posts so might be a little rusty, seems the right time to comeback with a documentary coming out and a possible CCRC application by Jeremy?
If it’s a lost cause like Nugnug said, why do you both still post?
I post because I've never believed it's a lost cause. Besides the fact that JB has argued his innocence all along and has never stopped fighting for justice has to be admired from anyone after 34 years of imprisonment.
Then you have the more professional people coming along who must think that there's a chance somewhere, or these people wouldn't waste their time because admittedly they have done quite a lot of background work which amounts to far more than a technicality if/when it comes to fruition as finances dictate.
Finally I've always believed him innocent.
-
Despite my presence on there being few and far between. I have been accused of being Ken Kratz over on a forum about Steven Avery. 😂
-
Despite my presence on there being few and far between. I have been accused of being Ken Kratz over on a forum about Steven Avery. 😂
Ha Ha your nothing like him, you look like Tom Cruise to me 🙈🙈🙈
-
I post because I've never believed it's a lost cause. Besides the fact that JB has argued his innocence all along and has never stopped fighting for justice has to be admired from anyone after 34 years of imprisonment.
Then you have the more professional people coming along who must think that there's a chance somewhere, or these people wouldn't waste their time because admittedly they have done quite a lot of background work which amounts to far more than a technicality if/when it comes to fruition as finances dictate.
Finally I've always believed him innocent.
If you mean the CT - they aren't professionals. Like you, they think he's innocent but have organised themselves into a group. His solicitor is obviously a professional but he doesn't have to believe that Jeremy is innocent - he just needs to do his job.
It's not unusual for killers never to admit guilt, especially if there is nothing in it for them. With a whole life tariff, there would be no reason or benefit to admit guilt.
-
If you mean the CT - they aren't professionals. Like you, they think he's innocent but have organised themselves into a group. His solicitor is obviously a professional but he doesn't have to believe that Jeremy is innocent - he just needs to do his job.
It's not unusual for killers never to admit guilt, especially if there is nothing in it for them. With a whole life tariff, there would be no reason or benefit to admit guilt.
Do you mean to tell me that a solicitor would have wasted precious time on the likes of Sutcliffe ? " Doing his job ?"
-
Despite my presence on there being few and far between. I have been accused of being Ken Kratz over on a forum about Steven Avery. 😂
I think when other posters start questioning why your there, it’s a sign they’ve been beat. What I find weird how some posters attach themselves to every killer that’s available or pleads miscarriage of justice.
-
I think when other posters start questioning why your there, it’s a sign they’ve been beat. What I find weird how some posters attach themselves to every killer that’s available or pleads miscarriage of justice.
Those kind of people arrive at their conclusions before studying the evidence. And probably have some kind of mental illness.
This is what Ken Kratz has to put up with - https://streamable.com/wgjpy (https://streamable.com/wgjpy)
-
Those kind of people arrive at their conclusions before studying the evidence. And probably have some kind of mental illness.
This is what Ken Kratz has to put up with - https://streamable.com/wgjpy (https://streamable.com/wgjpy)
Quite shocking really, like you said poor research and some kind of mental illness.
-
Do you mean to tell me that a solicitor would have wasted precious time on the likes of Sutcliffe ? " Doing his job ?"
Sutcliffe isn't claiming he's innocent but if he did, he would be entitled to a solicitor and yes, they would act on his behalf because that's their job!
-
Those kind of people arrive at their conclusions before studying the evidence. And probably have some kind of mental illness.
This is what Ken Kratz has to put up with - https://streamable.com/wgjpy (https://streamable.com/wgjpy)
David, you do realise KK is a diagnosed narcicist. He needs to get a life and stop it. Whilst I don’t agree with what some people say about him and to him, he simply deserves no respect or time imo. He constantly antagonises people, christ the man is a loony imo. He’s just pissed because he lost his job because of his abusing women he was representing and MAM made it so public. He doesn’t believe he did anything wrong!
I know I know I only post rarely but I’m here every day looking and listening, But to support this man is wrong on every level.
-
David, you do realise KK is a diagnosed narcicist. He needs to get a life and stop it. Whilst I don’t agree with what some people say about him and to him, he simply deserves no respect or time imo. He constantly antagonises people, christ the man is a loony imo. He’s just pissed because he lost his job because of his abusing women he was representing and MAM made it so public. He doesn’t believe he did anything wrong!
I know I know I only post rarely but I’m here every day looking and listening, But to support this man is wrong on every level.
Says the person who supports a man who rapes his underage relatives, who lures women to his trailer and cremates them on his bonfire after killing and raping them.
-
Best form of defence that david is to attack, but I don’t believe SA is guilty of murder. Also he hasn’t been convicted of rape or anything else against his family. Kratz should have been prosecuted for what he did, instead he lost his job and money he had to pay. Not enough as what he did to SA is disgusting imo.
-
Best form of defence that david is to attack, but I don’t believe SA is guilty of murder. Also he hasn’t been convicted of rape or anything else against his family. Kratz should have been prosecuted for what he did, instead he lost his job and money he had to pay. Not enough as what he did to SA is disgusting imo.
Steven Avery was put in suicide watch after he heard news Brendan telling the police what happened. When he got out of suicide watch he phoned his lawyer saying "I guess they got it all on film or tape or whatever what we did that night"
As if the bones hidden behind his garage and the murder weapon hanging up on his wall was not enough all ready.
::)
-
Steven Avery was put in suicide watch after he heard news Brendan telling the police what happened. When he got out of suicide watch he phoned his lawyer saying "I guess they got it all on film or tape or whatever what we did that night"
As if the bones hidden behind his garage and the murder weapon hanging up on his wall was not enough all ready.
::)
Must say, I was gone with the series, it’s only when you go outside the box you get the true story, thanks for that David. Might help if we take the discussion back to the original thread.
-
Sutcliffe isn't claiming he's innocent but if he did, he would be entitled to a solicitor and yes, they would act on his behalf because that's their job!
Like it's the job of the existing lawyers/solicitors who are presently proving JB's innocence ?
-
You see another major reason I'm here and why you and Luminous Wanderer won't get rid of me is that I'm also Colin's unofficial advocate, as well as attempting to reassure Julie that she's entitled to get on with the rest of her life without undue harrassment.
Not to make this personal but have members here considered what Colin has endured for 33 years simply because Bamber refuses to confess, quite apart from the trauma of losing his boys? All credit to him for picking up the shards of his shattered life and carrying on, giving help to other victims of this type of nightmare in workshops all around the world, as well as constructing the most moving pieces of art, in contrast to the destructive urge Jeremy has mainly manifested ever since incarceration.
A psychopath will never confess Steve, they never ever say sorry. You don’t hear Bamber talking about the poor boys and Colin much? They rely on power and control, he hated his parents by Brett’s admission when questioned about Bamber.
-
A psychopath will never confess Steve, they never ever say sorry. You don’t hear Bamber talking about the poor boys and Colin much? They rely on power and control, he hated his parents by Brett’s admission when questioned about Bamber.
No diagnosis for psychopathy!
Theoretically would you say sorry if you were innocent
-
No diagnosis for psychopathy!
Theoretically would you say sorry if you were innocent
How do you know? Have you talked with a psychiatrist who has worked with him?
-
No diagnosis for psychopathy!
Theoretically would you say sorry if you were innocent
while a psychiatrist engaged by his DEFENCE declared that he displayed several classic psychopathic symptoms. The psychiatrist believed that Jeremy DID kill his family but had suppressed the memory until it was no longer real,
-
Like it's the job of the existing lawyers/solicitors who are presently proving JB's innocence ?
But they aren't.
-
No diagnosis for psychopathy!
Theoretically would you say sorry if you were innocent
There are much better methods now Notsure, it would be interesting to see if Bamber would agree to a brain scan. There is no incentive for Bamber to confess because it won't lead to his freedom.
-
A psychopath will never confess Steve, they never ever say sorry. You don’t hear Bamber talking about the poor boys and Colin much? They rely on power and control, he hated his parents by Brett’s admission when questioned about Bamber.
Oh he's spoken to me about Colin - VERY scathing!
-
while a psychiatrist engaged by his DEFENCE declared that he displayed several classic psychopathic symptoms. The psychiatrist believed that Jeremy DID kill his family but had suppressed the memory until it was no longer real,
I think the suppression thing is bollocks ;D ;D ;D
-
There are much better methods now Notsure, it would be interesting to see if Bamber would agree to a brain scan. There is no incentive for Bamber to confess because it won't lead to his freedom.
From his own defence Psychiatrist, If ever there was a psychopath, it’s Jeremy Bamber.’
-
From his own defence Psychiatrist, If ever there was a psychopath, it’s Jeremy Bamber.’
Believe you me there are more psychopaths outside prisons.
-
Believe you me there are more psychopaths outside prisons.
I agree Lookout
-
Believe you me there are more psychopaths outside prisons.
Totally! BJ is certainly on the scale! ;D ;D
-
Totally! BJ is certainly on the scale! ;D ;D
🙈🙈🙈🙈
-
while a psychiatrist engaged by his DEFENCE declared that he displayed several classic psychopathic symptoms. The psychiatrist believed that Jeremy DID kill his family but had suppressed the memory until it was no longer real,
We all display psychopathic symptoms ! Fact
No diagnosis!
-
There are much better methods now Notsure, it would be interesting to see if Bamber would agree to a brain scan. There is no incentive for Bamber to confess because it won't lead to his freedom.
I agree Caroline and I understand you are convinced of his guilt. I wouldn’t think just diagnosing someone as a psychopath makes him a murderer.
However it would be interesting to know what is made of him now.
-
Believe you me there are more psychopaths outside prisons.
[/quot
Haha lookout your not wrong!
-
We all display psychopathic symptoms ! Fact
No diagnosis!
We all don’t kill though FACT! If ever there was a psychopath, it’s Jeremy Bamber.’ From his OWN defence. You can believe what ever you want, I will address him as a psychopath on very good authority.
-
I agree Caroline and I understand you are convinced of his guilt. I wouldn’t think just diagnosing someone as a psychopath makes him a murderer.
However it would be interesting to know what is made of him now.
Probably make the same of him as they did when they diagnosed him a psycho in the first place, a psychopath never changes 😂😂😂
-
A psychopath will never confess Steve, they never ever say sorry. You don’t hear Bamber talking about the poor boys and Colin much? They rely on power and control, he hated his parents by Brett’s admission when questioned about Bamber.
No there were the nasty letters of course, which are available on another thread. He did reminisce about seeing the boys and Sheila making Christmas decorations at White House Farm. I assume he'd been advised to do so by whoever was representing him legally at the time.
-
No there were the nasty letters of course, which are available on another thread. He did reminisce about seeing the boys and Sheila making Christmas decorations at White House Farm. I assume he'd been advised to do so by whoever was representing him legally at the time.
Caroline mentions he’s spoke to her about Colin, very Scathing, typical traits of a psychopath, no empathy even though he knows what Colin went through and still is.
-
I agree Caroline and I understand you are convinced of his guilt. I wouldn’t think just diagnosing someone as a psychopath makes him a murderer.
However it would be interesting to know what is made of him now.
Given the circumstances of what happened, the coincidence would be too great. If you put all the coincidences together, the word coincidence is pretty much a joke.
-
Caroline mentions he’s spoke to her about Colin, very Scathing, typical traits of a psychopath, no empathy even though he knows what Colin went through and still is.
Yes, I wa quite shocked at the letter, it wasn't expected, but it was one of the things that added to me chaning my mind about him. Sometimes the mask just slips.
-
Yes, I wa quite shocked at the letter, it wasn't expected, but it was one of the things that added to me chaning my mind about him. Sometimes the mask just slips.
Horrible when you think about it, that’s the problem with Psychopaths, they have no empathy, it’s impossible for him to feel any sadness, just like his cruelty to animals from the age of ten years old onwards. Like CAL she corresponded for three years with him, often once a week, sometimes 15 pages, when asked difficult questions he becomes very evasive. One explanation for Jeremy’s behaviour is that he is a psychopath – without empathy.
And indeed about the age of 10 he had a reputation for being cruel to animals. Reputation, even at that young age
Pre trial , he refused police access to his medical records and refused to be assessed, so they employed their own Psychiatrist, GUESS WHAT HE FOUND, his Words, “if ever their was a psychopath it’s Jeremy Bamber”
-
Horrible when you think about it, that’s the problem with Psychopaths, they have no empathy, it’s impossible for him to feel any sadness, just like his cruelty to animals from the age of ten years old onwards. Like CAL she corresponded for three years with him, often once a week, sometimes 15 pages, when asked difficult questions he becomes very evasive. One explanation for Jeremy’s behaviour is that he is a psychopath – without empathy.
And indeed about the age of 10 he had a reputation for being cruel to animals. Reputation, even at that young age
Pre trial , he refused police access to his medical records and refused to be assessed, so they employed their own Psychiatrist, GUESS WHAT HE FOUND, his Words, “if ever their was a psychopath it’s Jeremy Bamber”
And how many times have I said the same?
-
Totally! BJ is certainly on the scale! ;D ;D
-
Ooops.
JB isn't on the outside.
He's inside and for 34 years has been scrutinised for any " change " but because there was nothing in the first place--------------
What better than a 24hr day check on mental health for all those years ? Could anyone, hand on heart say that they haven't had some kind of a meltdown in all that time ? Or some sort of a maladjustment in their mental health ?
-
Totally! BJ is certainly on the scale! ;D ;D
When I said BJ, I didn't get the letters mixed up - I wasn't talking about Bamber on THIS occasion - more our lying toe rag of a PM.
-
When I said BJ, I didn't get the letters mixed up - I wasn't talking about Bamber on THIS occasion - more our lying toe rag of a PM.
Ha Ha you had me puzzled
-
Ha Ha you had me puzzled
I didn't pat attention to the letters being the same ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
We all don’t kill though FACT! If ever there was a psychopath, it’s Jeremy Bamber.’ From his OWN defence. You can believe what ever you want, I will address him as a psychopath on very good authority.
Who was this psychiatrist that allegedly said this? I have looked into this before and can not actually find the primary source.
Dr Eagen has assessed Jeremy for pychopathy and concluded that he wasn’t one. That’s on record and that’s what I rely on.
-
Who was this physiatrist that allegedly said this? I have looked into this before and can not actually find the primary source.
Dr Eagen has assessed Jeremy for pychopathy and concluded that he wasn’t one. That’s on record and that’s what I rely on.
They are professional people akin to doctors who don't divulge their names.
From Chapter 26 of Roger Wilkes' book:
The defence lawyers were bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private there were moments of deep gloom. The worst came the week before the trial opened, when the defence team held a case conference in Geoffrey Rivlin's chambers in the Temple. An eminent psychiatrist expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of the psychopath: chief among these was the genuine belief that he was completely innocent of any crime. With the passage of time, he said, memory drifts to the back of the mind and eventually falls off, so that the original image-and the memory of it-is forgotten. The doctor believed that Jeremy Bamber had killed his family, and that the awfulness of what he had done had been pushed to the back of his mind and now it had dropped off. In short, the psychiatrist concluded, if ever there was a psychopath, it was Jeremy Bamber.
-
It was a depressing moment. Lights flared in the late September dusk. The lawyers stared glumly at each other. The psychiatrist gathered up his papers, wished everyone a pleasant weekend, and left to catch his train. Edmund Lawson disappeared for a few moments and returned with a bottle of gin and some glasses. Drinks were dispensed. Rivlin sat at his desk and regarded the others through his glinting gold spectacles. He acknowledged their raised glasses and their good wishes for a successful outcome in court. "One thing I have to say to all of you," he murmured, his deadpan Yorkshire vowels hanging on the smoky air. "Let's not get depressed."
The spell was broken. Rivlin's words shattered the mood like hot coals thrown on to ice. "The way he said it just cracked us all up," one of those present recalled, "and we all just burst out laughing."
-
They are professional people akin to doctors who don't divulge their names.
From Chapter 26 of Roger Wilkes' book:
The defence lawyers were bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private there were moments of deep gloom. The worst came the week before the trial opened, when the defence team held a case conference in Geoffrey Rivlin's chambers in the Temple. An eminent psychiatrist expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of the psychopath: chief among these was the genuine belief that he was completely innocent of any crime. With the passage of time, he said, memory drifts to the back of the mind and eventually falls off, so that the original image-and the memory of it-is forgotten. The doctor believed that Jeremy Bamber had killed his family, and that the awfulness of what he had done had been pushed to the back of his mind and now it had dropped off. In short, the psychiatrist concluded, if ever there was a psychopath, it was Jeremy Bamber.
If Jeremy is a psychopath, he wouldn't care what he'd done, and he wouldn't think it was awful.
He may well be one, but not all psychopaths kill people.
-
If JB was a psychopath he wouldn't have flinched at going to the mortuary like he did. Psychopaths can't resist looking at their " work " after a crime.
-
If Jeremy is a psychopath, he wouldn't care what he'd done, and he wouldn't think it was awful.
He may well be one, but not all psychopaths kill people.
It's not clear whether the psychiatrist meant that Jeremy knew how awful the act was or whether the former was looking at the case objectively.
-
They are professional people akin to doctors who don't divulge their names.
From Chapter 26 of Roger Wilkes' book:
The defence lawyers were bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private there were moments of deep gloom. The worst came the week before the trial opened, when the defence team held a case conference in Geoffrey Rivlin's chambers in the Temple. An eminent psychiatrist expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of the psychopath: chief among these was the genuine belief that he was completely innocent of any crime. With the passage of time, he said, memory drifts to the back of the mind and eventually falls off, so that the original image-and the memory of it-is forgotten. The doctor believed that Jeremy Bamber had killed his family, and that the awfulness of what he had done had been pushed to the back of his mind and now it had dropped off. In short, the psychiatrist concluded, if ever there was a psychopath, it was Jeremy Bamber.
Roger Wilkes does not cite his sources. Furthermore this alleged eminent psychiatrist is describing a view that has no basis in psychiatric literature. Psychopaths don not show lack of remorse because the memories of their actions "drifts to the back of their minds and eventually falls off".
I would wager that this alleged "eminent psychiatrist" didn't divulge his name because he doesn't exist.
-
Yes, where did Roger Wilkes get that from?
-
" genuine belief that he was completely innocent of any crime "------that's because he was innocent, d'oh !
-
If JB was a psychopath he wouldn't have flinched at going to the mortuary like he did. Psychopaths can't resist looking at their " work " after a crime.
Oh Lookout!
-
Yes, where did Roger Wilkes get that from?
The whole thing is an insult to the readers intelligence. For these events to be true, Roger Wilkes would literally have to have been in the room as it all transpired and yet he mentions no crucial details on the subject matter.
Do you really believe that Wilkes interviewed Lawson and Rivlin and they told him things along the lines of "we had moments of deep gloom" and "We stared glumly at each other." then "I disappeared for a few moments and returned with a bottle of gin". then "Our expert told us that Jeremy was a psychopath who's memory had dropped out his head"
(https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/apple/232/face-with-tears-of-joy_1f602.png)
Needless to say the Barristers code of conduct only permits them to disclose information to a third party if its in the clients best interest.
-
Poetic licence. :))
-
Who was this psychiatrist that allegedly said this? I have looked into this before and can not actually find the primary source.
Dr Eagen has assessed Jeremy for pychopathy and concluded that he wasn’t one. That’s on record and that’s what I rely on.
I suppose we will never know, it’s something the defence will keep as much hush hush as possible, it’s in CALs book and Wilkes book, sometimes we have to go on their extensive research.
-
The whole thing is an insult to the readers intelligence. For these events to be true, Roger Wilkes would literally have to have been in the room as it all transpired and yet he mentions no crucial details on the subject matter.
Do you really believe that Wilkes interviewed Lawson and Rivlin and they told him things along the lines of "we had moments of deep gloom" and "We stared glumly at each other." then "I disappeared for a few moments and returned with a bottle of gin". then "Our expert told us that Jeremy was a psychopath who's memory had dropped out his head"
(https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/apple/232/face-with-tears-of-joy_1f602.png)
Needless to say the Barristers code of conduct only permits them to disclose information to a third party if its in the clients best interest.
They weren't representing Bamber when Wilkes wrote the book, it was written in 1994. Plus, if he was exaggerated and lied about the psychiatrist, he'd have been picked up on it. The people involved weren't dead in 1994 and Rivlin is still alive today (79 years old).
-
The whole thing is an insult to the readers intelligence. For these events to be true, Roger Wilkes would literally have to have been in the room as it all transpired and yet he mentions no crucial details on the subject matter.
Do you really believe that Wilkes interviewed Lawson and Rivlin and they told him things along the lines of "we had moments of deep gloom" and "We stared glumly at each other." then "I disappeared for a few moments and returned with a bottle of gin". then "Our expert told us that Jeremy was a psychopath who's memory had dropped out his head"
(https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/apple/232/face-with-tears-of-joy_1f602.png)
Needless to say the Barristers code of conduct only permits them to disclose information to a third party if its in the clients best interest.
The defence lawyers remained bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private they were mostly gloomy. A week before the trial opened the defence team held a case conference at Rivlin’s chambers and the meeting ended with Edmund Lawson hurrying away in search of some gin and three glasses. An eminent psychiatrist had just expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of a murdering psychopath.
DAVID SHAW'S "AN INNOCENT MAN"
-
The defence lawyers remained bullish in Jeremy's presence, but in private they were mostly gloomy. A week before the trial opened the defence team held a case conference at Rivlin’s chambers and the meeting ended with Edmund Lawson hurrying away in search of some gin and three glasses. An eminent psychiatrist had just expressed his opinion that Jeremy exhibited several classic symptoms of a murdering psychopath.
DAVID SHAW'S "AN INNOCENT MAN"
Bit of plagiarism? ;D
-
Bit of plagiarism? ;D
Yes indeed:
The defence lawyers remained bullish in Jeremy's presence but upon his egression from the chamber they became melancholic and morose. The most senior of the coterie in years looked particularly dejected as he mopped his brow with a white mouchoir, rubbing agitatedly his tortoise-shell glasses with the same material between thumb and forefinger. Presently he exclaimed:
"Whether this murderer is banged up for life in Wormwood Scrubs or is liberated we at least have our lavish emoluments and our gilt-edged pension plans!"
And with that the trio laughed, Edmund Lawson set three glasses on the antique mahogany table, uncorked the Bollinger and serene harmony descended upon the gathering as they all reclined in their sumptuous Chesterfield leather armchairs in a state of complete repose.
-
It's not clear whether the psychiatrist meant that Jeremy knew how awful the act was or whether the former was looking at the case objectively.
A big clue lies within his inability to show remorse, no empathy, he knew he had this problem after the murder, that’s why he mentions to Julie, “I should have been an Actor”, Brett also recognised he had this same problem when they discussed putting white powder on his face and black under his eyes to make him look sadder. Honestly is that the sort of thing you would joke about at your families funeral, only a person as callous as Bamber could be involved in that!
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1144.0;attach=5792
-
Oh Lookout!
It's true, Caroline, they've got no nerves/emotion or anything of that nature except to boast about what they did.
-
It's true, Caroline, they've got no nerves/emotion or anything of that nature except to boast about what they did.
But they don't live their lives appearing to be devoid of nerves or emotion, NOR do they boast about committing murder, which is probably only ever done as a means to an end.
-
But they don't live their lives appearing to be devoid of nerves or emotion, NOR do they boast about committing murder, which is probably only ever done as a means to an end.
Those psychopaths who commit murder quite openly tell of their quests. There are psychopaths and psychopaths. Haven't you ever watched the series with Piers Morgan about a prison in Texas where the monsters go into great detail about how they committed their horrendous murders ? It doesn't affect them one iota.
-
Those psychopaths who commit murder quite openly tell of their quests. There are psychopaths and psychopaths. Haven't you ever watched the series with Piers Morgan about a prison in Texas where the monsters go into great detail about how they committed their horrendous murders ? It doesn't affect them one iota.
The American system is rather different from ours, though, isn't it? They hand out ludicrous sentences amounting to hundreds of years without hope of parole. Such prisoners are perfectly free to brag about their heinous crimes. It probably elevates them in prison society, not to mention giving them the chance to 'star' in productions like Piers Morgan's.
-
It's true, Caroline, they've got no nerves/emotion or anything of that nature except to boast about what they did.
I think you can generalise about the check list;
• glib and superficial charm
• grandiose (exaggeratedly high) estimation of self
• need for stimulation
• pathological lying
• cunning and manipulativeness
• lack of remorse or guilt
• shallow affect (superficial emotional responsiveness)
• callousness and lack of empathy
• parasitic lifestyle
• poor behavioral controls
• sexual promiscuity
• early behavior problems
• lack of realistic long-term goals
• impulsivity
• irresponsibility
• failure to accept responsibility for own actions
• many short-term marital relationships
• juvenile delinquency
• revocation of conditional release
• criminal versatility
But not all psychopaths have ALL of the traits, I can't remember how many they need to match before being classified as a psychopath but certainly not all of them. Just like the rest of us, the trait vary from person to person. People can be a psychopath without being a killer, usually they have either some childhood trauma and brain impairment that makes them more liable to perform violent acts such as murder. However, even then, not all killers are the same - it depends on motivation. The likes of Ted Bundy was a sadist and got pleasure from inflicting pain and death and he did revisit many of the bodies he discarded. The likes of Bamber was motivated by financial gain and not the murder itself so would have no want or need to see the bodies.
-
The American system is rather different from ours, though, isn't it? They hand out ludicrous sentences amounting to hundreds of years without hope of parole. Such prisoners are perfectly free to brag about their heinous crimes. It probably elevates them in prison society, not to mention giving them the chance to 'star' in productions like Piers Morgan's.
That's as maybe but one murdering psychopath is the same as any other wherever they're from. All have a brain malfunction.
Wouldn't you class JB as the same ?? All murdering psychopaths are the same.
-
That's as maybe but one murdering psychopath is the same as any other wherever they're from. All have a brain malfunction.
Wouldn't you class JB as the same ?? All murdering psychopaths are the same.
Only in that they all murder. Their motivations will be different. Some will be motivated by sex, some by money, some by power -which can be broken down into sub sections. Their only commonality is murder.
-
Only in that they all murder. Their motivations will be different. Some will be motivated by sex, some by money, some by power -which can be broken down into sub sections. Their only commonality is murder.
Some murder for no reason other than a victim is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
-
Some murder for no reason other than a victim is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
They would be the very people to murder successfully. Callous with no empathy to start with and no guilt or remorse afterwards.
-
That's as maybe but one murdering psychopath is the same as any other wherever they're from. All have a brain malfunction.
Wouldn't you class JB as the same ?? All murdering psychopaths are the same.
No, they aren’t all the same at all.
-
No, they aren’t all the same at all.
They all have bad tempers ! Fact.
-
They all have bad tempers ! Fact.
Only the passionate display temper. A psychopath can only pretend passion, thus they can kill with amazing cool. They feel nothing.
-
They all have bad tempers ! Fact.
Not so.
-
Only the passionate display temper. A psychopath can only pretend passion, thus they can kill with amazing cool. They feel nothing.
They still have bad tempers passionate or not because they like their own way.
-
They still have bad tempers passionate or not because they like their own way.
Well Lookout, as no one, but NO one, likes their own way more than you................... :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
-
Jeremy is not and has never been a violent person
-
Well Lookout, as no one, but NO one, likes their own way more than you................... :)) :)) :)) :)) :))
Nothing wrong standing firm in what you believe in. ;)
-
Jeremy is not and has never been a violent person
You clearly misunderstand psychopathy. He didn't need to be "a violent person". All he needed to do was pick up a gun and aim it at those who had the temerity to stand in his way depriving him of what he believed was his. No different from shooting rabbits, really, was it?
-
Colin was more violent when he planted Sheila and gave her a black eye.
-
You clearly misunderstand psychopathy. He didn't need to be "a violent person". All he needed to do was pick up a gun and aim it at those who had the temerity to stand in his way depriving him of what he believed was his. No different from shooting rabbits, really, was it?
I would say it was very different. It wasn't one shot to each person, it was multiple shots, and at least two of the victims were active after they'd been shot, resulting in the necessity for further shots. In the case of Nevill, it required more than gunshots.
-
I would say it was very different. It wasn't one shot to each person, it was multiple shots, and at least two of the victims were active after they'd been shot, resulting in the necessity for further shots. In the case of Nevill, it required more than gunshots.
How silly! Of COURSE it was different! He didn't want it to look cool. He wanted it to look as if his crazed sister had let bullets fly hitting their mark randomly.
-
How silly! Of COURSE it was different! He didn't want it to look cool. He wanted it to look as if his crazed sister had let bullets fly hitting their mark randomly.
Sure, because she would have needed to use 25 bullets. If that was his aim, he would have been firing at the walls as well.
-
Sure, because she would have needed to use 25 bullets. If that was his aim, he would have been firing at the walls as well.
That might have been his plan but he was waylaid by Nevill and as Julie said he lost control.
-
Sure, because she would have needed to use 25 bullets. If that was his aim, he would have been firing at the walls as well.
Perhaps you would, but I'm talking about suggestion so maybe less was more?