The ITV Drama

[David1819]

I think it would have been 'relatively' eased through (did you see what I did there?) from commissioning to production to airing.  And 'they' are going to make the best use of it, with tag along articles espousing the official line.  Average Joe will say 'guilty as sin'. What's not to like about that, if you're an EP old hand or one of the relatives?

Nobody is shown pulling the trigger. The shows leaves it for "Average Joe" to make his own mind up.

This show is only going to result in more public scrutiny in the long run.

[gringo]

As I explained above, I think it won't happen now because they have their act together.  The portion given to the police and relatives in MWT docu - where is the equivalent portion given to defence in drama? It was forced on MWT. But CAL's program can just completely shut out the defence?

You and others should look up the term conspiracy. There's nothing wacky about it. Call it media manipulation of you like.

  It is understood by all that there are two competing sides. Does anybody believe that those who have a vested interest in JB remaining behind bars just sit on their hands whilst those campaigning are busy uncovering anomalies? Of course they don't.
   There have always been campaigners against JB's campaign. To ignore this glaring fact is to be wilfully blind and naive. They would be remiss if they were not working to counter those campaigning on Bamber's behalf.
   Choosing to label those who recognise this obvious fact as "Conspiracy theorists" is to be blind to reality.

[David1819]

  It is understood by all that there are two competing sides. Does anybody believe that those who have a vested interest in JB remaining behind bars just sit on their hands whilst those campaigning are busy uncovering anomalies? Of course they don't.
   There have always been campaigners against JB's campaign. To ignore this glaring fact is to be wilfully blind and naive. They would be remiss if they were not working to counter those campaigning on Bamber's behalf.
   Choosing to label those who recognise this obvious fact as "Conspiracy theorists" is to be blind to reality.

These campaigners against JB are mostly just emotionally invested imbeciles. Who think what they are doing is good.

I have spent a lot of time refuting and debunking claims made by those who think Steven Avery is innocent. In doing so I have been accused of being a paid shill, accused of being Ken Kratz (the prosecutor) Accused of making up the letters that Steven Avery wrote, you name it.

As you well know, I am not any of the above. I got involved because I know Steven Avery is guilty of murder and Netflix was spreading the most appauling disinformation about a total piece of sh*t.

Campaigners against JB feel the same way about JB as I do about Steven Avery. Only difference is I have my facts right about who I accuse, they do not.

[Jane]

i’ll put money on he did let his mum feed him. a) he was working there so was convenient and
b) men at that age aren’t that great at cooking so if it’s being offered by someone else they jump at the chance. nothing wrong with that imo

Mmm? Supper with Mummy or a get together with the lads at the local? I'm suggesting, given the -alleged- strained relationship between Jeremy and his parents, that The Chequers, yards from his door, would have been his restaurant of choice.

[lookout]

Mmm? Supper with Mummy or a get together with the lads at the local? I'm suggesting, given the -alleged- strained relationship between Jeremy and his parents, that The Chequers, yards from his door, would have been his restaurant of choice.

Why pay out when you can get a free meal cooked by mother ? Also too knackered to be bothered going anywhere after a day of harvesting.

[Jan]

Nobody is shown pulling the trigger. The shows leaves it for "Average Joe" to make his own mind up.

This show is only going to result in more public scrutiny in the long run.

I have seen a lot of people on social media taking interest in the case and I totally understand it is a drama but by saying it’s based on real life and factual scenes mixed with drama is confusing for the viewer . They are watching and not knowing which bits are true and which bits are based on dramatic interpretation.  Apparently Essex police who by the authors account co-operated with her fully are NOT happy about how Taff jones has been portrayed. I said before I find it interesting on how jeremy is portrayed and we know he is a different character depending on whose statements you read , but again the viewer does not know that . Some things that may seem small or insignificant that are being missed actually might be quite important in the bigger picture. To be honest I would be happier if the question of guilt was just more open , nothing more than that . Just leaving the viewer questioning things more . But so far we have a bungling police force and a pantomime Jeremy and a shrinking violet Julie , and I think it has been going more that way as things have progressed.

[Kaldin]

I think the drama is being fair. They could have done it differently and actually shown Jeremy telling Julie he was going to kill his family, and then virtually admitting to it afterwards, but they didn't.

[Jan]

I think the drama is being fair. They could have done it differently and actually shown Jeremy telling Julie he was going to kill his family, and then virtually admitting to it afterwards, but they didn't.

Not yet , but they are surely going to have to tackle the fact that she allegedly knew for 12 months ? Next week will be interesting . If they go way off the mark of her statements it will be unfair .

[Jane]

Why pay out when you can get a free meal cooked by mother ? Also too knackered to be bothered going anywhere after a day of harvesting.

Actually, Lookout, he had to go past The Chequers on his way home. He could park right outside the door. I believe he used to provide them with potatoes so there was probably an 'arrangement'.

[Kaldin]

Not yet , but they are surely going to have to tackle the fact that she allegedly knew for 12 months ? Next week will be interesting . If they go way off the mark of her statements it will be unfair .

Yes, but it will still be Julie's word against his word in the drama.

[lookout]

Actually, Lookout, he had to go past The Chequers on his way home. He could park right outside the door. I believe he used to provide them with potatoes so there was probably an 'arrangement'.

Why bother when supper was put right under your nose ?

[sami]

Why bother when supper was put right under your nose ?

supper yes but not the few pints that go after the meal.theres nothing like a few pints after a long days work

[Jane]

Why bother when supper was put right under your nose ?

 Because he was a 24 year old man who hadn't lived with Mummy for around 5 years and it would have been less bother to get in his car and drive off to be with the locals and have a laugh than to trek up to the farm house to waste valuable drinking time with June.

[lookout]

supper yes but not the few pints that go after the meal.theres nothing like a few pints after a long days work

I do believe he had a beer or two in his house when he got in.

[Jane]

supper yes but not the few pints that go after the meal.theres nothing like a few pints after a long days work

Absolutely, Sami. Mummy or 'mates'? At 24, no contest.