Author Topic: PEN PAL FROM HELL Jeremy Bamber sent me hundreds of twisted letters from prison  (Read 30601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
   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?
   
     

   


Thanks Gringo

It’s all so obvious and a disgrace. A good bit of journalism would be to track down the police man or women who gave her the photo she is bragging about in news articles and get him or her the sack.
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

guest7363

  • Guest
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!
They aren’t clever enough Caroline, the same way as NGB pointed out that the POLICE would not have stopped correspondence between Bamber and CAL, it’s just the same as Jackie stopped correspondence with Bamber when she got pushed out the loop.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
I suspect that Carol Lee didn't actually use the word "twisted".

Has she denied though ?

I can’t find that denial anywhere

I am going to take this up with the makers of the drama
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
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!

Authors who write books should accept that they'll get some criticism, especially those who talk to the press. Now there's an article in The Sun where it's claimed that Carol Lee called Jeremy's letters "twisted". As I said, I suspect she didn't use that word, but it's been attributed to her in that article. It seems that she had an interview with The Sun, and if she's going to stick your neck out like that, she should expect some disagreement and criticism.

I was advised by Justice to look out for who starts this nonsense, and I have to say that in this thread it's you who started it.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2020, 09:26:AM by Kaldin »

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
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.


Trolling started with your post at 11pm last night

You are a disgrace and refuse to debate in a normal way
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Has she denied though ?

I can’t find that denial anywhere

I am going to take this up with the makers of the drama

I haven't seen her deny it, and if they're misquoting her, perhaps she should address that.

guest7363

  • Guest
I haven't seen her deny it, and if they're misquoting her, perhaps she should address that.
Maybe she has 👍

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
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!


Where’s her denial???

She’s happy for the press to run with the story

Well I am going to ask her myself and let’s see if she Denys it
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
Maybe she has 👍

Maybe, in which case we should see a retraction by The Sun.

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
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!


Got up the wrong side of the bed this morning have we?
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

Offline JackieD

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3879
They aren’t clever enough Caroline, the same way as NGB pointed out that the POLICE would not have stopped correspondence between Bamber and CAL, it’s just the same as Jackie stopped correspondence with Bamber when she got pushed out the loop.

Get a life RJ we are on another topic right now, a very important topic
Julie Mugford the main prosecution witness was guilty of numerous crimes, 13 separate cheque frauds, robbery, and drug dealing and also making a deal with a national newspaper before trial that if she could convince a jury her ex boyfriend was guilty of five murders she would receive £25,000

guest7363

  • Guest
Maybe, in which case we should see a retraction by The Sun.
What to satisfy you 😂😂😂😂😂. Oh let’s do a full editorial page “we apologise for calling Bamber twisted, instead we think he’s a deranged psychopathic child killer”.

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
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!

Of course I can work things out for myself. I can also disagree with Jackie without insulting her or baiting her.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27076

Thanks Gringo

It’s all so obvious and a disgrace. A good bit of journalism would be to track down the police man or women who gave her the photo she is bragging about in news articles and get him or her the sack.

Why don't you do just that Jackie and make a complete arse of your self (again). Your problem is, you can't grasp plain English. The police gave her access to the CS photographs and case files for her research as an author. Not some rouge cop who had them hidden up his jumper!  ::) ::) ::) ::)
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Kaldin

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6961
What to satisfy you 😂😂😂😂😂. Oh let’s do a full editorial page “we apologise for calling Bamber twisted, instead we think he’s a deranged psychopathic child killer”.

It's the letters they said were "twisted". Protesting one's innocence isn't twisted. There's no indication that he's done anything else in those letters.