PEN PAL FROM HELL Jeremy Bamber sent me hundreds of twisted letters from prison

[JackieD]

Where

We want to see proof of one of these twisted letters

It it’s another false claim

[Caroline]

Where

We want to see proof of one of these twisted letters

It it’s another false claim

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KsQYeGo1cE

[JackieD]

Another fake person shown up

[Parky41]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KsQYeGo1cE

[gringo]

Where

We want to see proof of one of these twisted letters

It it’s another false claim

   Hi Jackie,
     I think you will be interested in this

 
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/analysis/bamber-murders-the-definitive-account-1-7368685

    The most relevant passage is when CAL describes the " hundreds of twisted letters" that Bamber sent from prison;

    "Carol Ann Lee is showing me a pile of letters from the pen friend with whom she has been in correspondence for the best part of three years.
     Written in black inked capitals, for the most part they contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news. Yet jostling for space in the neatly addressed envelopes are crime scene photographs, court papers and grisly forensic reports ... "

   How twisted. Sending letters that, "for the most part contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news". Must have been a really big, "pile of letters" containing hundreds of twisted ones with their, "friendly bulletins".
   The Yorkshire Post journalist has also spelt PEN PAL FROM HELL incorrectly. Mistakenly referring to "pen friend" and "friendly bulletins"
    Is it possible that CAL is full of shit?
   
     

     

[guest7363]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KsQYeGo1cE

😂😂😂😂😂

[Kaldin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KsQYeGo1cE

Trolling this thread already?

[Kaldin]

Where

We want to see proof of one of these twisted letters

It it’s another false claim

I suspect that Carol Lee didn't actually use the word "twisted".

[David1819]

   Hi Jackie,
     I think you will be interested in this

 
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/analysis/bamber-murders-the-definitive-account-1-7368685

    The most relevant passage is when CAL describes the " hundreds of twisted letters" that Bamber sent from prison;

    "Carol Ann Lee is showing me a pile of letters from the pen friend with whom she has been in correspondence for the best part of three years.
     Written in black inked capitals, for the most part they contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news. Yet jostling for space in the neatly addressed envelopes are crime scene photographs, court papers and grisly forensic reports ... "

   How twisted. Sending letters that, "for the most part contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news". Must have been a really big, "pile of letters" containing hundreds of twisted ones with their, "friendly bulletins".
   The Yorkshire Post journalist has also spelt PEN PAL FROM HELL incorrectly. Mistakenly referring to "pen friend" and "friendly bulletins"
    Is it possible that CAL is full of shit?
   
   

It’s possible but I doubt it. However she does seem to lack in critical thinking skills. Making no secret of the fact she “feels” he is guilty.
 
For example -

She writes near the end of her book the the marks on Nevils back have never been completely explained despite writing about being told by Vanezis the obvious (and only) explanation for them earlier in the book.

She interviews someone who claims Sheila could hardly get off a sofa prior to the killings. Giving no thought to the major discrepancies in this account and most importantly, the absence of any appearance for the prosecution (like Fielder).

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. It’s all well and good going over material and researching the subject but what good is it if you can’t process the info you accumulate?

If you think it’s far-fetched that someone can thoroughly research a subject with an obvious conclusion yet arrive at the wrong conclusion. Look at David Irving, the dude goes through every German and Soviet archive on Hitler and the Third Reich. What did he discover? the Holocaust never happened 😂

[Caroline]

Trolling this thread already?

Thought you didn't like to jump in? The whole thread is trolling CAL - of course you wouldn't be able to work that one out would you? You carry on playing holier than thou - you're not fooling anyone.

[Caroline]

I suspect that Carol Lee didn't actually use the word "twisted".

BINGO! I could have told you that but it would have ended up with a whole host of post telling me that I was wrong. Finally, someone worked it out. I thought it would have been Gringo!

[Caroline]

   Hi Jackie,
     I think you will be interested in this

 
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/analysis/bamber-murders-the-definitive-account-1-7368685

    The most relevant passage is when CAL describes the " hundreds of twisted letters" that Bamber sent from prison;

    "Carol Ann Lee is showing me a pile of letters from the pen friend with whom she has been in correspondence for the best part of three years.
     Written in black inked capitals, for the most part they contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news. Yet jostling for space in the neatly addressed envelopes are crime scene photographs, court papers and grisly forensic reports ... "

   How twisted. Sending letters that, "for the most part contain friendly bulletins filling her in on his latest news". Must have been a really big, "pile of letters" containing hundreds of twisted ones with their, "friendly bulletins".
   The Yorkshire Post journalist has also spelt PEN PAL FROM HELL incorrectly. Mistakenly referring to "pen friend" and "friendly bulletins"
    Is it possible that CAL is full of shit?
   
     

   

Bit slow on the uptake on this one Gringo! It's certainly NOT CAL who is full of shit

[Caroline]

It’s possible but I doubt it. However she does seem to lack in critical thinking skills. Making no secret of the fact she “feels” he is guilty.
 
For example -

She writes near the end of her book the the marks on Nevils back have never been completely explained despite writing about being told by Vanezis the obvious (and only) explanation for them earlier in the book.

She interviews someone who claims Sheila could hardly get off a sofa prior to the killings. Giving no thought to the major discrepancies in this account and most importantly, the absence of any appearance for the prosecution (like Fielder).

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. It’s all well and good going over material and researching the subject but what good is it if you can’t process the info you accumulate?

If you think it’s far-fetched that someone can thoroughly research a subject with an obvious conclusion yet arrive at the wrong conclusion. Look at David Irving, the dude goes through every German and Soviet archive on Hitler and the Third Reich. What did he discover? the Holocaust never happened 😂

Or someone like who, who one week knows the case inside and out, then the next - total novice - depending who you are talking to and what point your're tying to make.

[Kaldin]

Thought you didn't like to jump in? The whole thread is trolling CAL - of course you wouldn't be able to work that one out would you? You carry on playing holier than thou - you're not fooling anyone.

I told Justice - I changed my mind about "jumping in" because you lot won't stop. Why does it matter to you what Jackie says about Carol Lee? It's not as if she's criticising you is it?

[Caroline]

I told Justice - I changed my mind about "jumping in" because you lot won't stop. Why does it matter to you what Jackie says about Carol Lee? It's not as if she's criticising you is it?

You are the ONE who comes over with (pseudo) moral code, were it genuine, you should realise that this is an excuse to vilify a woman who wrote a book that some don't like because it doesn't cry innocence. There is no other reason for this and other threads simply used to attack someone who isn't here to defend themselves - but you're just joining in like the rest!

And to use your words right back at you - what does it matter to you what I or others say in response to Jackie - I'm not criticising you? Could the difference be that Jackie is a supporter and I'm not? Before you cry 'tag team' - it's been tag team all the way against a person who isn't able to argue back!