Guardian re Boyce findings

[Jane]

That's my point.  I don't really see a problem with him changing timings to fit in a call from Nevill, if that's what he genuinely interpreted must have occurred from any subsequently released documents.
 
I'm not so sure police interviewing did not have an impact on him or bamboozle him.

The whole phoning Julie thing before or after is bollocks for me.  We are supposed to feel that if he phoned Julie before phoning the police, then this because he was not really arsed about phoning the police otherwise he would have phoned them first blah blah.  What a load of tosh.

If I was woken by a strange call telling me I had to help etc. i couldn't guarantee for certain that I wouldn't phone my partner instinctively out of a need for some kind of reassurance, especially if I was disorientated.

I might have felt more inclined to concur with that had he once voiced any concern about what his next step should be.

[Reader]

Jeremy stated in his police interviews that he didn't remember the details, and he couldn't even remember what he'd put in his formal statements. He thought that his first statement would have been accurate, but it wasn't. Clearly, Jeremy hadn't called the police before calling Julie, as he made no mentioned of having done so to Julie. After calling the police, he drove to WHF.

[Caroline]

Jeremy stated in his police interviews that he didn't remember the details, and he couldn't even remember what he'd put in his formal statements. He thought that his first statement would have been accurate, but it wasn't. Clearly, Jeremy hadn't called the police before calling Julie, as he made no mentioned of having done so to Julie. After calling the police, he drove to WHF.

Then if he was saying that now, fair enough! However, he adamantly used two OPPOSING scenario's (giving reason for each) to try and bolster his chances with the CCRC. Even trying to bring perjury charges against West. I guess there is nothing that some people won't make excuses for. There is no way he wouldn't remember wh he called first!

[lookout]

It's only when people are in such a situation/position that JB was in can they say, hand on heart what they'd first said.
It's alright that others accuse them after the event, especially by those who'll never understand or don't want to understand how an individual would have felt at the time. It's a heartless accusation and one which requires empathy and understanding of how the mind of someone was at the time.

[Caroline]

It's only when people are in such a situation/position that JB was in can they say, hand on heart what they'd first said.
It's alright that others accuse them after the event, especially by those who'll never understand or don't want to understand how an individual would have felt at the time. It's a heartless accusation and one which requires empathy and understanding of how the mind of someone was at the time.

WE're talking AFTER the vent, we're talking about NOW! If he didn't remember who he called first, why has he made excuses to explain each scenario? If he didn't remember who he called first, why did he try and have West done for perjury on the back of it? Two polar excuses and not one of them even hits at he being uncertain. Carry on with the excuses - they won't wash with the CPS or the CCRC!

[lookout]

WE're talking AFTER the vent, we're talking about NOW! If he didn't remember who he called first, why has he made excuses to explain each scenario? If he didn't remember who he called first, why did he try and have West done for perjury on the back of it? Two polar excuses and not one of them even hits at he being uncertain. Carry on with the excuses - they won't wash with the CPS or the CCRC!

It's not excuses. We can't all have alert memories particularly after going through a trauma such as he had without the pampering and counselling etc which goes on today. I think he's done well going through all the documentation over the years and trying to get them into some semblance of order without the thought of the ugliness of the crime itself.
My daughter who's the same age as him is hopeless at thinking back over the years, I have a much better memory than she has yet her life is idyllic and trouble/worry free in every way so people's memories vary from person to person.

Although I say it myself, for all JB's education and thousands spent on a public school I'm a lot cleverer than him and was told by a head teacher last year that I was " as bright as a button ". !!  Because nothing as grim as a murder has ever happened in my family or any other such dramas.

[guest7363]

It's only when people are in such a situation/position that JB was in can they say, hand on heart what they'd first said.
It's alright that others accuse them after the event, especially by those who'll never understand or don't want to understand how an individual would have felt at the time. It's a heartless accusation and one which requires empathy and understanding of how the mind of someone was at the time.

It doesn’t matter what we say or think Lookout, changing your story damages your credibility,  it’s what every defence or prosecution lawyer aim for.  It reinforces his behaviour because, it’s number 1 in the Hare check list.

[lookout]

It doesn’t matter what we say or think Lookout, changing your story damages your credibility,  it’s what every defence or prosecution lawyer aim for.  It reinforces his behaviour because, it’s number 1 in the Hare check list.

This hasn't even entered the latest equation-------it's all about the silencer/s which got him charged, not his poor memory.

[lookout]

JB wasn't the only one to " lose his memory " was he ?

[Roch]

JB wasn't the only one to " lose his memory " was he ?

Yes Lookout. On the calls... Julie Mugford seemed unsure and Ann Eaton's capacity for convenient memory loss reared its head.  Wonder what Hare's psychopathy test might say?

[lookout]

Yes Lookout. On the calls... Julie Mugford seemed unsure and Ann Eaton's capacity for convenient memory loss reared its head.  Wonder what Hare's psychopathy test might say?

Indeed,quite a few hiccups/splutters came from that quarter.

[lookout]

How many " can't/don't remembers " were in other statements ?

[lookout]

You can't imprison someone because they can't remember.
This is what this bit of nonsense amounts to isn't it ?

[Roch]

WE're talking AFTER the vent, we're talking about NOW! If he didn't remember who he called first, why has he made excuses to explain each scenario? If he didn't remember who he called first, why did he try and have West done for perjury on the back of it? Two polar excuses and not one of them even hits at he being uncertain. Carry on with the excuses - they won't wash with the CPS or the CCRC!

In a scenario where Jeremy is culpable, his changing views on calls has limited relevance.

In a scenario where Jeremy is not culpable, he would effectively be an innocent person being questioned, then snared and harrassed by 1980's police interviewing techniques. He would be trying piece together events from his cell. In such circs, it is perfectly acceptable for Jeremy to question and change his approach re the calls, in accordance with subsequently disclosed evidence or in accordance with the persuasive opinions snd interpretations of those around him.

There's a bunch of people on here who seem so emotionally attached to him bring genuinely guilty, that they are unable to view the case in a detached way.  Even to the point where the re-writing of logs is summarily dismissed because there were apparently no change in facts.

If JB is the guilty  psychopath that changes his tune re calls out of necessity, then why would police need to re-write an incident log? 

[guest7363]

In a scenario where Jeremy is culpable, his changing views on calls has limited relevance.

In a scenario where Jeremy is not culpable, he would effectively be an innocent person being questioned, then snared and harrassed by 1980's police interviewing techniques. He would be trying piece together events from his cell. In such circs, it is perfectly acceptable for Jeremy to question and change his approach re the calls, in accordance with subsequently disclosed evidence or in accordance with the persuasive opinions snd interpretations of those around him.

There's a bunch of people on here who seem so emotionally attached to him bring genuinely guilty, that they are unable to view the case in a detached way.  Even to the point where the re-writing of logs is summarily dismissed because there were apparently no change in facts.

If JB is the guilty  psychopath that changes his tune re calls out of necessity, then why would police need to re-write an incident log?

You forget one big thing, we all three came on here with a view he might be innocent, it’s a game you play too often.