Did JM ever really love Jeremy Bamber?

[grahameb]

Rochford
As plain as anything (and backed up by people who have sent me pm s)  it was to get rid of Ngb because of his experience and to stop us saying anything about the relatives and JM

I am clear on that

Ngb and I have become friends over the last few months and if I had said anything that would have got me in trouble legally he would have warned me

He hasnt

Do I trust him
Yes

Do I trust some of the other posters on here who are saying he doesnt know what he is talking about

No I dont

If they were right me and shona would be looking at 20 years inside for what we have said about Mugford

I assume the pm's that backed up your theory were from pro JB supporters. A poor analogy but, If you ask Man Utd fans who the best team in England is they will say Man Utd, ask City fans the same question and you will get a different answer. Hope you get the point. 

No Simon. I this case you are wrong. What is going on in this forum is wrong whatever side from which you look at it. There is a serious imbalance here and it seems it is constantly coming from the anti Bamber camp. If you think I'm being biased then hard luck, you will just have to stew in your willing ignorance.

[vidvic]

To be fair, he did state that he'd been involved in many defamation cases.

This is getting a tad boring though, he could claim to be the prime minister for all I care, as long as he is civil to others, which for the most part he has been as far as I can see.

It may be becoming a tad boring to you Hartley. But to the one who has this near libellous accusations levelled at him constantly they are becoming more and more distressing and I intend to put a stop to it one way or another.

I think it's a tad boring to everyone.

Finish it then, lock the thread, have a word with the mods and the people involved, take it to PM's rather than on the public boards.

Issue warning or bans, temporary or permanent, delete posts, etc, etc.

It really shouldn't be this difficult.

Hartley I am the kind of person that likes to think the best in people to be adult enough to control their own childish behaviour. There are 7 moderators in this forum. But it seems that I am the only one who has gut enough to admit there is a serious problem with a few posters which by some strange fluke always seem to be in the anti bamber camp who are also it seems to me to be backed up by the anti bamber moderators. I don't know about you, but to me there seems to be some kind of unequal judgement on the part of those particular moderator. The others it seems to me are afraid to take a stand against it? I'm sorry, but this has to be said publically whether folk like it or not.

You are not alone in taking this view, Grahame, I too am concerned about this issue and I know that I am only mod who shares your view.

Do you mean that only you and I have the insight to see what is going on here? Well that is a surprise and a disappointment.

Grahame, I am confused. What do you both mean?

[chochokeira]

To be fair, he did state that he'd been involved in many defamation cases.

This is getting a tad boring though, he could claim to be the prime minister for all I care, as long as he is civil to others, which for the most part he has been as far as I can see.

It may be becoming a tad boring to you Hartley. But to the one who has this near libellous accusations levelled at him constantly they are becoming more and more distressing and I intend to put a stop to it one way or another.

I think it's a tad boring to everyone.

Finish it then, lock the thread, have a word with the mods and the people involved, take it to PM's rather than on the public boards.

Issue warning or bans, temporary or permanent, delete posts, etc, etc.

It really shouldn't be this difficult.

Hartley I am the kind of person that likes to think the best in people to be adult enough to control their own childish behaviour. There are 7 moderators in this forum. But it seems that I am the only one who has gut enough to admit there is a serious problem with a few posters which by some strange fluke always seem to be in the anti bamber camp who are also it seems to me to be backed up by the anti bamber moderators. I don't know about you, but to me there seems to be some kind of unequal judgement on the part of those particular moderator. The others it seems to me are afraid to take a stand against it? I'm sorry, but this has to be said publically whether folk like it or not.

You are not alone in taking this view, Grahame, I too am concerned about this issue and I know that I am only mod who shares your view.

Do you mean that only you and I have the insight to see what is going on here? Well that is a surprise and a disappointment.

Hi Grahame,

Woops!  I'm posting from my office during breaks and totally messed up the post you quote. The post should have stated:

You are not alone in taking this view, Grahame, I too am concerned about this issue and I know that I am NOT the only mod who shares your view.

Apologies  grahame and other mods, posted that too quickly.

[simong]

Rochford
As plain as anything (and backed up by people who have sent me pm s)  it was to get rid of Ngb because of his experience and to stop us saying anything about the relatives and JM

I am clear on that

Ngb and I have become friends over the last few months and if I had said anything that would have got me in trouble legally he would have warned me

He hasnt

Do I trust him
Yes

Do I trust some of the other posters on here who are saying he doesnt know what he is talking about

No I dont

If they were right me and shona would be looking at 20 years inside for what we have said about Mugford

I assume the pm's that backed up your theory were from pro JB supporters. A poor analogy but, If you ask Man Utd fans who the best team in England is they will say Man Utd, ask City fans the same question and you will get a different answer. Hope you get the point. 

No Simon. I this case you are wrong. What is going on in this forum is wrong whatever side from which you look at it. There is a serious imbalance here and it seems it is constantly coming from the anti Bamber camp. If you think I'm being biased then hard luck, you will just have to stew in your willing ignorance.

Grahame i am confused, how am i wrong. My analogy was in direct reference to Jackies post claiming that the mails she had received about a witch hunt against ngb being from pro JB supporters. Are you saying that Jackie has received mails from the anti brigade confirming this witch hunt?

[grahameb]

Rochford
As plain as anything (and backed up by people who have sent me pm s)  it was to get rid of Ngb because of his experience and to stop us saying anything about the relatives and JM

I am clear on that

Ngb and I have become friends over the last few months and if I had said anything that would have got me in trouble legally he would have warned me

He hasnt

Do I trust him
Yes

Do I trust some of the other posters on here who are saying he doesnt know what he is talking about

No I dont

If they were right me and shona would be looking at 20 years inside for what we have said about Mugford

I assume the pm's that backed up your theory were from pro JB supporters. A poor analogy but, If you ask Man Utd fans who the best team in England is they will say Man Utd, ask City fans the same question and you will get a different answer. Hope you get the point. 

No Simon. I this case you are wrong. What is going on in this forum is wrong whatever side from which you look at it. There is a serious imbalance here and it seems it is constantly coming from the anti Bamber camp. If you think I'm being biased then hard luck, you will just have to stew in your willing ignorance.

Grahame i am confused, how am i wrong. My analogy was in direct reference to Jackies post claiming that the mails she had received about a witch hunt against ngb being from pro JB supporters. Are you saying that Jackie has received mails from the anti brigade confirming this witch hunt?

No Simon. I'm referring to the general downtrend of the forum.

[simong]

I never mentioned the forum in my post 

[Jerry]

No Simon. I this case you are wrong. What is going on in this forum is wrong whatever side from which you look at it. There is a serious imbalance here and it seems it is constantly coming from the anti Bamber camp. If you think I'm being biased then hard luck, you will just have to stew in your willing ignorance.

When it was the other way round or when the boot was on the other foot and anti Bamber posters were being abused, criticised and even banned for daring to speak the truth, then pro Bamber posters were quite content to languish in their indifference to such blatantly one-sided ongoings.

[Jackiepreece]

Jerry social services are aware of your behaviour I will leave you to work that one out

[Jerry]

Jerry social services are aware of your behaviour I will leave you to work that one out

 

[Jerry]

...unfortunately JB thought just by telling the truth that would be enough.

Not so much telling the truth but acting the victim I would say.  It isn't surprising that Mike cannot bring himself to post Jeremy's statements on here.

[grahameb]

I never mentioned the forum in my post 

You were comparing JB supporters to Man U supporters and used that analogy I assumed to imply that those moderators on the forum who are pro JB to handle things in an unequal way? I must say though what I have seen is in actual fact the reverse.

[shonapugs]

I feel like I'm in an episode of "The Prisoner."

[grahameb]

...unfortunately JB thought just by telling the truth that would be enough.

Not so much telling the truth but acting the victim I would say.  It isn't surprising that Mike cannot bring himself to post Jeremy's statements on here.

You assume far too much Jerry. In fact what you think is entirely within your own imagination. There is absolutely no way that you can prove that which you assume to be true.

[vidvic]

I feel like I'm in an episode of "The Prisoner."

Wasn't that filmed in a caravan park?..........rofl

[bob]

I feel like I'm in an episode of "The Prisoner."