Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
42
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: Scott Forbes and Sandra Lean
« Last post by WakeyWakey on February 28, 2021, 01:35:PM »
rightly or wrongly the fronline programme is now on youtube in full

https://youtu.be/-m-zHEUOFR0

25m in for scott forbes section
43
Off Topic / Re: the man who shouldent be king.
« Last post by QCChevalier on February 28, 2021, 12:44:PM »
If a law is passed by the House of Commons it's classified as legitimate. As far as the monarch of the day is concerned he or she is supposed to be above politics, above getting their hands dirty if you will. That's the main justification for having them.

I think what you say above reflects a very common misunderstanding, which even educated people repeat as if it's gospel.  I believe you are mistaken.  In fact, the Queen is supposed to be impartial, but that does not mean she is supposed to be neutral.  Her role is political and she can, if she wishes, intervene in politics. There is even an argument that it is her duty to do so, and one of the popular criticisms of her is her failure to do so.  In any event, it's fundamental to her role to do so, though I would completely accept that she should be extremely circumspect and cautious in doing so, and it probably should be rare.

Ironically, Elizabeth II is perhaps the most political of all the late modern monarchs.  Consider for instance the Queen's Annual Christmas Message.  What she says is extremely political and ideological.  That brings us to what disappoints me about Her Majesty and why I believe she is one of the worst monarchs in this country's history.  It is not the fact she intervenes that bothers me, it is what she says.  If you search on YouTube or through some other source one of her early televised Xmas addresses from the 1950s, you will notice that she is a happy young woman, and her message is traditional and positive, and she has a certain warmth and charm about her.  Now, in her old age, her messages have become patronising, preachy and ideological, in tune with the toxic orthodoxy of the time.  I think part of her problem is her brand of Christianity: Calvinism.  It can be easily twisted into a self-abnegating mindset.

She did not stand against the times.  She should have been steadfast in 1997, instead she relented and then gave away more and more, thinking this would save the Windsor dynasty and/or the Monarchy.  I think this was wrong.  She should have got her hands dirty, but for the opposite side.  Better still, she could have simply maintained a studied silence in the face of it all - that would have sent a powerful message too.

I don't personally believe in mass democracy.  I think people voting on things is dumb.  Liberty is the system I prefer, though that is a misnomer because it is not really a 'system'.  It is more of a philosophy that depends on each person practicing the same broad value of leaving other people alone, with interference only to the extent needed.  I think in that way of life, most problems would sort out themselves, mainly through voluntary decisions and choices.

Law should be for the courts, not Parliament.  Parliament should only intervene in society in very extreme circumstances, such as national territorial defence or a genuinely lethal pandemic that has scores of healthy people dropping dead in the streets, etc.
44
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Last post by WakeyWakey on February 28, 2021, 12:31:PM »
i think it's time for legal action and libel cases. ridiculous.
45
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: New article:
« Last post by QCChevalier on February 28, 2021, 12:27:PM »
DCI Jones was deputy head of CID. I believe he also had commendations for bravery in his career. He must have been aware that Sheila had received two gunshot wounds. There must be reasons why he held his position against the relatives and there must be reasons why Keneally presented a report to top brass confirming that the evidence implicated Sheila. There must be reasons why his report is not available. Neither is the original Coroner's report available. Mike Tesko used to claim the raid team refused to testify at court and that they didn't sign their statements (their may be one or two exceptions).

He held his position against relatives because he thought Sheila had shot herself, and to be fair, he had a reasonable basis for this conclusion.  The alternatives are that Jeremy is guilty or the police did shoot Sheila and don't want to admit it, or perhaps both those things. 

Again, we're going round in circles. 

First, there is no reason for the police to cover up shooting Sheila during the raid operation itself.  In my view, to suppose they would engage in a cover-up on that basis is close to irrational.

Second, the only circumstance in which they may cover up the fact of shooting Sheila is if she was conscious when they found her and they accidentally shot her while moving the rifle.  But even if this had occurred, the cover-up wouldn't last long because, generally-speaking, the police would not knowingly allow an entirely innocent man to be condemned.  They would have to come clean or their conduct would be discovered forensically.

We are getting into sensitive territory now because this is a hobby horse for some people on here and one or two members of this Forum start becoming very nasty and aggressive, and very disingenuous, about this sub-topic; and some members here don't listen and don't read what I actually say when I suggest that it must be very rare for a police officer to [note my careful choice of words] knowingly condemn an innocent man.  It will happen, but it must be very rare indeed.  I asked for an example, and only one poster could come forward with one, and even then, it was an officer who was thought to be mentally-ill.

But let's say the raid officers did shoot Sheila accidentally.  Let's consider this.  In that scenario, you would be dealing with a mistake in which perhaps only one, or at most two, raid officers know the truth and, fearing a prosecution for manslaughter and the end of their police careers, decided to say nothing.  This will not have started out as malicious because the investigation dovetailed with the actual scenario anyway; it only became malicious when the investigation shifted gear.

One problem with this is that the raid officers themselves were calling attention to Jeremy.  Why would they do that if they knew that Taff Jones suspected nothing and wanted it all wrapped up neatly?  That doesn't make sense, unless as I say only one or two raid officers were in the know.

Regarding Keneally, I'm not sure there was a 'report' as such.  He carried out a review and may have sent a simple memorandum to the relevant senior officer.

I can't explain why the coroner's report is not available, but again, it could be that there was no 'coroner's report', as such.  The coroner just accepted what he was told, and that was that, and there is nothing of value to disclose.
46
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Last post by Real Justice on February 28, 2021, 06:06:AM »
I'm pretty sure you have been on these threads before, asking similar type questions. Anyway, I'm done for the night, off to watch a movie, non-crime. I fancy a bit of a laugh, so comedy related. I may or may not be on tomorrow, so you can integrate me at your pleasure. Other than that, you can scroll back though these threads and find the answers you are looking for.
Nope I can’t remember joining in before, if I have I apologise,  like I’ve said I only joined in because of the new interest, but thanks for your help anyway.
47
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Last post by Real Justice on February 28, 2021, 05:58:AM »
From what I remember he found the body was taken right to the police station there and then, stripped and put in ones of those white forensic suit. He was wearing same clothes he had on to school that day. Looks like he was a suspect right from the start, not a witness as nobody else in the search party had to give over clothes, or were interviewed like was right after Jodi was found. I think it was days later, when they had been cleaned, they were asked for their clothes.
Thanks Bullseye, we always help Newbie’s who join the Bamber forum to bring them up to speed, I only took interest because of the latest Documentary, Anyway it’s not a case I will be following anymore.
48
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: New article:
« Last post by handyman on February 28, 2021, 04:06:AM »
How different could Sheila's life have been had she not been coerced by her mother into having an abortion when she was 17, but instead encouraged to marry Colin Caffell and have a family of her own.
49
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Last post by Bullseye on February 27, 2021, 10:45:PM »
At first After his discovery of the body, Mitchell was initially questioned as a witness; So when did they do a thorough examination of him or his clothing Davie?  He wasn’t arrested till 10 months after the murder..so when everyone is saying there was no forensic evidence on him after the murders, was this just a visual examination or a thorough examination?

From what I remember he found the body was taken right to the police station there and then, stripped and put in ones of those white forensic suit. He was wearing same clothes he had on to school that day. Looks like he was a suspect right from the start, not a witness as nobody else in the search party had to give over clothes, or were interviewed like was right after Jodi was found. I think it was days later, when they had been cleaned, they were asked for their clothes.
50
Luke Mitchell and the murder of Jodi Jones / Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Last post by Davie2 on February 27, 2021, 10:28:PM »
At first After his discovery of the body, Mitchell was initially questioned as a witness; So when did they do a thorough examination of him or his clothing Davie?  He wasn’t arrested till 10 months after the murder..so when everyone is saying there was no forensic evidence on him after the murders, was this just a visual examination or a thorough examination?

I'm pretty sure you have been on these threads before, asking similar type questions. Anyway, I'm done for the night, off to watch a movie, non-crime. I fancy a bit of a laugh, so comedy related. I may or may not be on tomorrow, so you can integrate me at your pleasure. Other than that, you can scroll back though these threads and find the answers you are looking for.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10