Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?

[Jane]

Why did Jeremy want her to come over on the morning of the killings?

I'll hazard a guess that it's what he thought was the done thing under the circumstances and would therefore look good on his 'cv'. I'm remembering what Colin said about Jeremy emulating him at the funeral. If we feel something what follows is spontaneous. When we don't feel, we have to learn how to do.

[Kaldin]

If he's guilty, it's possible he saw Julie as a partner in crime, so of course he wanted to discuss it with her. Later on, he realised that she didn't approve of what he'd done and saw no future with her.

If he's innocent, he merely wanted his girlfriend there to comfort him.

[Jane]

If he's guilty, it's possible he saw Julie as a partner in crime, so of course he wanted to discuss it with her. Later on, he realised that she didn't approve of what he'd done and saw no future with her.

If he's innocent, he merely wanted his girlfriend there to comfort him.

 


Certainly, IF he was innocent, it would be the most natural thing in the world for him to want his girlfriend with him. However, mindful of the tone he'd taken earlier during a phone call, allegedly made to hear a friendly voice, when it appeared to be 90% Jeremy -excited that his plan was working, perhaps, and needing to share it?- and 10% Julie, it starts to feel like it was more for show.

[Kaldin]

It was a bit risky getting Julie over though. She could have said anything by accident and blown the whole thing.

[Jane]

It was a bit risky getting Julie over though. She could have said anything by accident and blown the whole thing.

She could have, but it's quite likely that she was more concerned with protecting him. If there'd been the slightest chance that he'd been innocent, I think she'd have wanted to allow him that chance.

[Kaldin]

The point is what Jeremy thought. He must have had a great deal of faith in her, and her ability to stay calm in that situation. He took a big chance. She could have got hysterical or something.

[Jane]

The point is what Jeremy thought. He must have had a great deal of faith in her, and her ability to stay calm in that situation. He took a big chance. She could have got hysterical or something.

He'd groomed her well. It's very possible that it wasn't the first time in her life that such had occurred -she claims to have been abused- patterns repeat.

[guest7363]

The point is what Jeremy thought. He must have had a great deal of faith in her, and her ability to stay calm in that situation. He took a big chance. She could have got hysterical or something.

Imagine if he had got rid of her 6 months prior, then carried out the murders, he knows Julie would have gone straight to police regarding his constant threat to do it.  So I presume, he kept her on board with the pretence that she was the one, knowing full well he would rid her when he thought he was in the clear?

[Kaldin]

He'd groomed her well. It's very possible that it wasn't the first time in her life that such had occurred -she claims to have been abused- patterns repeat.

I don't believe that. She wasn't groomed, and she wasn't abused by Jeremy IMO.

[Kaldin]

If he's guilty I think that her responses to his talk about killing his family made him think that she was on board. She pretty much said that she understood about his parents but that Sheila and the boys had done nothing to him. She made a joke about burning the house down. She didn't attempt to talk him out of it. She expressed little concern, other than to say that she didn't like him talking about it.

[lookout]

I wonder what questions that JM was asked by the defence before she started blubbering and wasn't able to answer ? I note that she stood firm on the prosecution side of things ! Thoughts of a big pay-out as well as spite mixed with it, how damned easy that must have been.

[Jane]

I don't believe that. She wasn't groomed, and she wasn't abused by Jeremy IMO.

In YOUR opinion. I'm just keeping an open mind. If she'd been in a previous controlling relationship during her childhood -and these are often carried out under the guise of the perpetrator being concerned and caring- it wouldn't be beyond belief for her to find herself in another such as an adult because it's what she'd have come to see as being loving.

[Kaldin]

In YOUR opinion. I'm just keeping an open mind. If she'd been in a previous controlling relationship during her childhood -and these are often carried out under the guise of the perpetrator being concerned and caring- it wouldn't be beyond belief for her to find herself in another such as an adult because it's what she'd have come to see as being loving.

You're not keeping an open mind at all. Look at what you said.

He'd groomed her well.

You're very fond of telling people that their posts are their opinion, but you don't say it about your own. I did say it was my opinion.

There is nothing to suggest that Jeremy groomed Julie or was abusive to her. What was this controlling relationship when she was a child? Is that a fact?

[Jane]

You're not keeping an open mind at all. Look at what you said.

You're very fond of telling people that their posts are their opinion, but you don't say it about your own. I did say it was my opinion.

There is nothing to suggest that Jeremy groomed Julie or was abusive to her. What was this controlling relationship when she was a child? Is that a fact?

Controllers DO groom those well who stay in relationships with them. Those who won't be controlled DON'T stay in relationships with them.

As for my NOT? being open minded. My posts are peppered with questioning words, ie possibly/perhaps/maybe/may have. I think. I RARELY know. I hazard guesses. My world is about grey area, NOT either black or white. During the time I believed Jeremy was innocent, I allowed for all the grey area it was possible to give him. I made allowances until there were none left to make.

I can't tell you any more than what I've already said regarding any childhood abuse/control, but I DO know that she said it and I've been made aware of some of the fallout it incurred.

[Kaldin]

Controllers DO groom those well who stay in relationships with them. Those who won't be controlled DON'T stay in relationships with them.

As for my NOT? being open minded. My posts are peppered with questioning words, ie possibly/perhaps/maybe/may have. I think. I RARELY know. I hazard guesses. My world is about grey area, NOT either black or white. During the time I believed Jeremy was innocent, I allowed for all the grey area it was possible to give him. I made allowances until there were none left to make.

I can't tell you any more than what I've already said regarding any childhood abuse/control, but I DO know that she said it and I've been made aware of some of the fallout it incurred.

Look, if you're going to have a go at me for posting my opinion, look at your own posts and admit that they're just your opinion. If you have no evidence that Julie was "groomed", then don't present it as a fact. Has it occurred to you that Julie liked being involved in crime, and that she actually had a mind of her own?