It’s an absolute disgrace.
She needs to come up with some answers
We will start with where are the twisted letters
Next we will ask her what day she actually spoke to Jeremy
Caroline is in contact with her so she should be able to fill us in
I am still not sure where I stand on CAL.
I used to think it was either sloppy research or a lack of critical thinking that led her to her conclusions. But the one sided nature of the book, the supple distortions of the evidence in the book. Plus the discrepancies over the letters. Has me thinking there could be a malicious element to it also. But if she "feels" the man is guilty of five murders. She wont really think she is doing anything wrong. 
It is pretty self evident that CAL's intent all along was to write the book she did. It was never an impartial investigation to find the truth and David is being way too kind in calling the distortions of the evidence, subtle. They are anything but subtle and along with the inconsistent and untrue claims since then, it should be clear to everyone that CAL was acting in bad faith all along.
There are insights into her character for those who care to look. Her attempted sleights against JB reveal much of her own character.
Jackie helpfully highlighted one of the most revealing,
"The author claimed Bamber would not reply to questions about certain subjects, particularly his adoptive sister's Sheila's personal life..." Is CAL aware that the obvious inferences to make here are:
1) Amongst other unstated subjects, CAL was asking questions about Sheila's personal life.
2) Most reasonable people think it reflects poorly on CAL rather than Jeremy that he wouldn't answer questions about Sheila's personal life.
3) Most reasonable and literate people also realise the low level manipulation that CAL is attempting here. Who for one moment believes that had Jeremy answered the unstated personal questions that CAL
asked about Sheila, then CAL would instead be claiming that Bamber had attempted to smear Sheila. She is comically transparent and I find it difficult to believe that someone so obviously insincere is given an iota of credibility.
Given her vague and ambiguous claims, CAL should be lent credibility when, and only when she adds the relevant details to her claims.
1) What specific questions about Sheila's personal life were you asking?
2) For what reason were you asking?
3) What are the other subjects that you felt the need to ask about that Jeremy refuses to discuss?
4) Can you list all the questions that JB refused to answer/discuss?
When we know these details then we would be able to make a fully informed judgement as to whether JB was being somehow evasive/secretive or perhaps CAL's questions revealed her hand as the murder porn writer that she is.
The lack of detail, as is usual with CAL, means we can make a pretty well educated guess.
