Did JM ever really love Jeremy Bamber?

[Jerry]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

[Jackiepreece]

Jerry do you support getting everything released under PII

[Jerry]

Jerry do you support getting everything released under PII

No

[ngb1066]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

[Jackiepreece]

jerry I knew you would say that never mind because it will be I am going to make sure it is.

[Jerry]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

[Jerry]

jerry I knew you would say that never mind because it will be I am going to make sure it is.

There are reasons why some information will never be released so your reference to all is a non starter.

[ngb1066]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

That is exactly the point.  Each of these statements is strongly contested by Jeremy Bamber, and "made up" would certainly be his mild description of the evidence of the statements he was alleged to have made about killing his family.

 

 

[chochokeira]

Jerry where is the proof JB boasted of killing his whole family


Or
Is it mere speculation

Read the statements.

The only "proof" of JB's "boast" is in the evidence given by Julie Mugford.

Exactly, and what a tangled web that 'proof' was.

JM told three different stories of these murders.


Story 1.

When she was first interviewed - in early August, before she was jilted -  JM's first story supported Jeremy's account of what happened on the night of the murders and during the period leading up to the that night.
JM, for example, said in her first statement that Jeremy was disorientated and worried when he rang her at her digs.

Story 2.

When she was was interviewed a month later, in September - after JM had been jilted - JM's then story had dramatically changed. JM then alleged that Jeremy had been planning for some time to kill his entire immediate family and had told her that he had hired a hitman, Mathew Macdonald, to kill five members of his family.
JM further stated that Jeremy had told her during telephone conversations on the night/morning of the murders, "tonight's the night" and "all's going well, there's trouble at the farm".

Story 3.

At the time of Jeremy's Appeal, JM claimed "I sincerely believe he is guilty". As it was established at the trial that, among so many other glaring errors in her testimony, JM was wrong about the hitman, who proved to have an alibi, and as Jeremy was found guilty of murdering his family in person, then JM could only mean that her latest story was that Jeremy Bamber had himself committed the murders.

[Jackiepreece]

You see Jerry that's the difference with you and other guilty posters  nearly all of them would like everything released held under PII

We have just had a situation where a number of photographs have been made available for the defence after many years

There is no reasonable excuse given for why this has happened

Disgraceful

Maybe JB s case will put an end to this secrecy once and for all

Jerry what is your reason?

[curiousessex]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

That is exactly the point.  Each of these statements is strongly contested by Jeremy Bamber, and "made up" would certainly be his mild description of the evidence of the statements he was alleged to have made about killing his family.

NGB

As a non practising barrister how much valididty is there in what Jeremy stated in his original statement on 8th August when he was interviewed as a witness when this statement is compared to what is being claimed 26 years later or is detailed in recordings of Jeremy's comments which are in the public domain.

It is detailed

'[In his statement on 8 August, Jeremy Bamber claimed that he called Chelmsford Police 'immediately' after getting the engaged tone. He timed his father's call at about 3.10 a.m. According to his first statement, it was 'about 3.25 when he telephoned Julie to tell her something seemed to be wrong.] '

I am sure you will be aware there are significant differences.

In the eyes of the law which statements will hold more evidential value / weight?

[Roch]

Jerry, you're not going to like my video. 

But the case is vast enough and has so many strands and aspects, that there is room for all of us to portray our stance. 

[smiffy]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

That is exactly the point.  Each of these statements is strongly contested by Jeremy Bamber, and "made up" would certainly be his mild description of the evidence of the statements he was alleged to have made about killing his family.

NGB

As a non practising barrister how much valididty is there in what Jeremy stated in his original statement on 8th August when he was interviewed as a witness when this statement is compared to what is being claimed 26 years later or is detailed in recordings of Jeremy's comments which are in the public domain.

It is detailed

'[In his statement on 8 August, Jeremy Bamber claimed that he called Chelmsford Police 'immediately' after getting the engaged tone. He timed his father's call at about 3.10 a.m. According to his first statement, it was 'about 3.25 when he telephoned Julie to tell her something seemed to be wrong.] '

I am sure you will be aware there are significant differences.

In the eyes of the law which statements will hold more evidential value / weight?

the extract you speak of "curious" is exactly what...a summary....  where is the source document...
what provenance have you got for the source document....and in what circumstances was the statement taken that this summary extract is formulated from...  it may be hearsay or a fabrication!!

[curiousessex]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

That is exactly the point.  Each of these statements is strongly contested by Jeremy Bamber, and "made up" would certainly be his mild description of the evidence of the statements he was alleged to have made about killing his family.

NGB

As a non practising barrister how much valididty is there in what Jeremy stated in his original statement on 8th August when he was interviewed as a witness when this statement is compared to what is being claimed 26 years later or is detailed in recordings of Jeremy's comments which are in the public domain.

It is detailed

'[In his statement on 8 August, Jeremy Bamber claimed that he called Chelmsford Police 'immediately' after getting the engaged tone. He timed his father's call at about 3.10 a.m. According to his first statement, it was 'about 3.25 when he telephoned Julie to tell her something seemed to be wrong.] '

I am sure you will be aware there are significant differences.

In the eyes of the law which statements will hold more evidential value / weight?

the extract you speak of "curious" is exactly what...a summary....  where is the source document...
what provenance have you got for the source document....and in what circumstances was the statement taken that this summary extract is formulated from...  it may be hearsay or a fabrication!!

Smiffy

The extract is detailed on page 136 of the book 'Blood Relations' by Roger Wilkes.

I have also included below what preceeds the extracted content........
 
' Stan Jones reminded Jeremy Bamber that he had been asked by several police officers about his actions that night, and that he had said he phoned the police before calling Julie. So what was the correct order?

'I don't remember,' said Jeremy, 'but my first statement was done at the time and must be correct.'

[In his statement on 8 August, Jeremy Bamber claimed that he called Chelmsford Police 'immediately' after getting the engaged tone. He timed his father's call at about 3.10 a.m. According to his first statement, it was 'about 3.25 when he telephoned Julie to tell her something seemed to be wrong.] '

[ngb1066]

Splitting words was your trade but it doesn't work in the real world.  In any event it was Jackie who said "his whole family" after I stated "his family".

He said it so get over it.

It certainly raises the question as to who in their right mind would raise such a matter never mind boast about doing so. I am not surprised that Robert Boutflour was shocked.

"boasting about killing his family" as you well know implies boasting about the murders after committing them.  You do not need to be legally qualified to understand the ordinary meaning of words.   

 

It can be taken either way but in any event these boasts to Robert and then Julie and others was made prior to the murders as well you already know.

He also boasted to Julie after the murders that he had engaged a hitman to do it for hi.  Now I wonder what had changed for him to tell her this?

Not the sort of thing you make up is it?

That is exactly the point.  Each of these statements is strongly contested by Jeremy Bamber, and "made up" would certainly be his mild description of the evidence of the statements he was alleged to have made about killing his family.

NGB

As a non practising barrister how much valididty is there in what Jeremy stated in his original statement on 8th August when he was interviewed as a witness when this statement is compared to what is being claimed 26 years later or is detailed in recordings of Jeremy's comments which are in the public domain.

It is detailed

'[In his statement on 8 August, Jeremy Bamber claimed that he called Chelmsford Police 'immediately' after getting the engaged tone. He timed his father's call at about 3.10 a.m. According to his first statement, it was 'about 3.25 when he telephoned Julie to tell her something seemed to be wrong.] '

I am sure you will be aware there are significant differences.

In the eyes of the law which statements will hold more evidential value / weight?

As a matter of law there is no difference in evidential value between statements made at different times.  It is the evidence given by witnesses in court which is the key evidence, and those witnessses can be cross examined about inconsistencies between their oral evidence and what they have stated in earlier written statements.  As a general rule the recollection of a witness is likely to be more accurate the earlier a witness statement is made, but there can obviously be exceptions to this, for example if a witness is in shock at the time of making the earliest statement. In Jeremy Bamber's case it should be remembered that his earliest statements were taken from him when he was being treated as a witness and the police had already reached a firm view on the four murders and a suicide theory.  They were likely therefore not to be so concerned about detail than they were when much later interviewing Jeremy Bamber as a suspect.