Jeremy Bamber proven innocent?

[Kaldin]

There's a lot of the rhetoric in many of the questions being asked. I really don't know quite where you think the answers will come from.

They're just questions which I'm asking myself I suppose, but someone else might come up with an interesting answer.

[Kaldin]

They were family and his Mother and June were close. He had no reason to lie about what Nevill did before going to bed - it's not like he used it to strengthen his case against Jeremy.

I'm not saying he's lying. I hadn't considered the possibility that Nevill had been out with the dogs. I'm just wondering if having this gin and tonic was a regular habit or an occasional one. I'm sure I wouldn't know what a relative does every night.

[ILB]

Thank you Kaldin!

but by her own admission she believed that Jeremy had been at the farmhouse. And waited for nevill to go out with the dogs.

[Jane]

I'm not saying he's lying. I hadn't considered the possibility that Nevill had been out with the dogs. I'm just wondering if having this gin and tonic was a regular habit or an occasional one. I'm sure I wouldn't know what a relative does every night.

Mmm. I hear what you're saying. I get a bee in my bonnet about sweeping statements being made, ie "he/she ALWAYS does/says................" (though I suspect there may be times when I'm guilty of it). We're left with, then, he had a G&T on occasions, OR, there were occasions when he DIDN'T have a G&T. Personally, based on what his friends have told me about him, I'd go for the former. I certainly wouldn't know what a relative does every night but relatives often say. It can simply come up in conversation, so if Nevill has said that he always has a snifter before retiring/turning in for the night, his words were only being repeated...........................which leaves you no clearer about "always" than you were when you posted!

[Jane]

but by her own admission she believed that Jeremy had been at the farmhouse. And waited for nevill to go out with the dogs.

Why, in your opinion, is such not possible? It's a large house. He could have hidden anywhere. I imagine he knew Nevill's habits.

[Caroline]

but by her own admission she believed that Jeremy had been at the farmhouse. And waited for nevill to go out with the dogs.

I think for the sake of harmony on the forum, I going to put you on ignore. You are clearly here to cause problems but you won't be using me to do so. I written a scenario, which is on the forum if you have the capacity to search for it. Other than that, I won't be answering any more of your posts.

[Caroline]

I'm not saying he's lying. I hadn't considered the possibility that Nevill had been out with the dogs. I'm just wondering if having this gin and tonic was a regular habit or an occasional one. I'm sure I wouldn't know what a relative does every night.

Well, me either, but I don't live that close to any of my relatives. However, Nevill finished work late that night so his routine may have altered. I think he would still have walked the dogs and obviously had the shower (given the nature of his work).

[Caroline]

Why, in your opinion, is such not possible? It's a large house. He could have hidden anywhere. I imagine he knew Nevill's habits.

No, Jane, I don't think Jeremy hid anywhere - I think he came back to WHF and he waited for an opportunity for Nevill to be out of the way but at no time have I suggested he hid anywhere. I think the shower was the best opportunity.

[ILB]

I think for the sake of harmony on the forum, I going to put you on ignore. You are clearly here to cause problems but you won't be using me to do so. I written a scenario, which is on the forum if you have the capacity to search for it. Other than that, I won't be answering any more of your posts.

how by disputing your scenarios am I here to cause problems? It's a forum where other people have opinions. You have disputed mine. I haven't caused a scene.

[Caroline]

how by disputing your scenarios am I here to cause problems? It's a forum where other people have opinions. You have disputed mine. I haven't caused a scene.

You don't just 'dispute' - disputing is fair enough. I really don't care if people agree or disagree. When you initially asked the question, I clearly stated that I wasn't going to write a scenario, which you said you weren't asking for. I wrote down a brief post, you asked about PJ's, I answered you. But that wasn't good enough out came the 'love's' and 'darlings' then rubbish about how you had caught me out, although others had understood perfectly well and read between the lines of my brief post.

I just can't be bothered to deal with yet another 'one of you'. I like posting here and although I have my spats from time to time, it is with people who have at least earned their place as part of the community and have added something to the discussion. Of course new people make a welcome change but in the short time you have been posting, you have already been pulled up about your attitude and I certainly see no improvement - not just to me either. I just have no interest in the kind of argument you presented last night - it goes no where, it doesn't advance anything and quite frankly, it didn't make the slightest bit of sense from the off. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah -should be kept in the playground!

There are plenty of other people for you to debate with - if they can be bothered but you seem more concerned with digging at the poster rather than having a serious discussion and like I said, I just can't be bothered - it's time wasted.

[ILB]

You don't just 'dispute' - disputing is fair enough. I really don't care if people agree or disagree. When you initially asked the question, I clearly stated that I wasn't going to write a scenario, which you said you weren't asking for. I wrote down a brief post, you asked about PJ's, I answered you. But that wasn't good enough out came the 'love's' and 'darlings' then rubbish about how you had caught me out, although others had understood perfectly well and read between the lines of my brief post.

I just can't be bothered to deal with yet another 'one of you'. I like posting here and although I have my spats from time to time, it is with people who have at least earned their place as part of the community and have added something to the discussion. Of course new people make a welcome change but in the short time you have been posting, you have already been pulled up about your attitude and I certainly see no improvement - not just to me either. I just have no interest in the kind of argument you presented last night - it goes no where, it doesn't advance anything and quite frankly, it didn't make the slightest bit of sense from the off. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah -should be kept in the playground!

There are plenty of other people for you to debate with - if they can be bothered but you seem more concerned with digging at the poster rather than having a serious discussion and like I said, I just can't be bothered - it's time wasted.

i am from south Yorkshire. It's how we speak around here. I am not trying to demean you , and certainly not in a patronizing way. If I have offended you in anyway then I apologise. It's just my natural person coming out in me. I did get a bit over the top last night and I apologise for it. But I do feel you are making a mountain of a mole Hill. It's pure banter. Balls in your court. And I'm perfectly capable of having a sensible debate

[ILB]

The shooter scampered up and downstairs, the shooter aimed twenty-five times and never missed, the shooter reloaded..

I am speaking from " if Jeremy Bamber is gulity perspective. I haven't ruled nothing out

[Caroline]

i am from south Yorkshire. It's how we speak around here. I am not trying to demean you , and certainly not in a patronizing way. If I have offended you in anyway then I apologise. It's just my natural person coming out in me. I did get a bit over the top last night and I apologise for it. But I do feel you are making a mountain of a mole Hill. It's pure banter. Balls in your court. And I'm perfectly capable of having a sensible debate

Just read this, I'm quite a bit further north than you and I am used to plain speaking - yours though, came over as patronising. I'm not offended but have had to defend my position on here more times than I care to remember and that's fine when the 'banter' is about the case, what pisses me off is when people get personal and that's how you seemed to come over. However, perhaps I'm paranoid because of past experiences here. I accept your apology - lets starts again!

[ILB]

Just read this, I'm quite a bit further north than you and I am used to plain speaking - yours though, came over as patronising. I'm not offended but have had to defend my position on here more times than I care to remember and that's fine when the 'banter' is about the case, what pisses me off is when people get personal and that's how you seemed to come over. However, perhaps I'm paranoid because of past experiences here. I accept your apology - lets starts again!

no problem darling

[lookout]

I'm sure that if JB had been the shooter he'd have gone for his fathers legs to immobilise him first and foremost as any quick-thinking person would have done with a tall hefty-built man. As it was the shots were very haphazard but at the same time were " meaningful " when it came to the overkill of the children. Only a very sick person would have carried out these killings-----not even one pretending to be sick.