Scope of Non-Documentary Evidence

[gringo]

I'm not saying I belive Fielder per se. But the number separate batches of images has been contested. The defence based posters' arguments have all the batches accounted for and Caroline's argument had an extra batch, the existence of which, was then not contested by the defence based posters. So in essence, the argument was left up in the air.

  There are no batches of images unaccounted for and I am unsure how you have concluded this, Roch.

[gringo]

  There are no batches of images unaccounted for and I am unsure how you have concluded this, Roch.

    Why would "unaccounted for batches" make a difference anyway? No images were taken to or seen by Fielder. How does a so called unaccounted for batch affect this?
     You have been misled by information, which even if correct(it isn't) would have zero relevance anyway.

[David1819]

    One of the oft repeated arguments is a comment made by another reporter regarding this issue. This really is how piss weak the whole story is relying as it does on second and third hand innuendo.
     From memory, Peter Gruder/Gruber who was an Express hack, I believe. He says that Jeremy never denied it when speaking to him. When you dig down further into this seeming refusal by JB to deny the allegation, it turns out that he wasn't asked/accused. Gruder? had put to JB that the Sun were leading with this accusation and JB had replied, "Interesting", or something like that.
    So, not denying something that he was not being asked counts as evidence that he definitely did it.  Fielder's tale was clearly a smear job on behalf of those that he usually did paid smear jobs for. I see no evidence that his role was anything but this and nobody has yet presented any examples of Fielder's writing which do not contain lies and sexual smears and innuendo.
    It isn't even reasonably disputed that the tale told of the photos of Sheila by Fielder is demonstrably made up of lies invented by him.
   

I wonder who was behind this?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8624.msg411858.html#msg411858

[gringo]

I wonder who was behind this?

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8624.msg411858.html#msg411858

  Demonstrates the point about who these paid hacks are and their role. Thanks for the link. The story is laughable, as you say, but some people are clearly employed for just this reason. Smearing on behalf of some other authority.

[Roch]

    Why would "unaccounted for batches" make a difference anyway? No images were taken to or seen by Fielder. How does a so called unaccounted for batch affect this?
     You have been misled by information, which even if correct(it isn't) would have zero relevance anyway.

OK, the reason why accounting for batches was relevant in the previous forum discussion I am referring to, is because the argument centered around whether Bamber had access to any images in the first place.

According to Caroline, there were three sets discussed by Jeremy and Colin: the modelling pictures from her portfolio (which Bamber wanted to keep); the nude shots taken by Colin; and the more explicit shots taken by an Australian photographer in a friend's back garden.  Apparently, it is the last set that Jeremy described to both Fielder and Colin as 'seeing everything down to the last detail'.  The argument was that, if Fielder is lying, then so is Colin and at that point, Colin thought Bamber was innocent.

Bamber now denies that the shots exist but Sheila's friends confirmed they did and so did Colin. 

[gringo]

OK, the reason why accounting for batches was relevant in the previous forum discussion I am referring to, is because the argument centered around whether Bamber had access to any images in the first place.

According to Caroline, there were three sets discussed by Jeremy and Colin: the modelling pictures from her portfolio (which Bamber wanted to keep); the nude shots taken by Colin; and the more explicit shots taken by an Australian photographer in a friend's back garden.  Apparently, it is the last set that Jeremy described to both Fielder and Colin as 'seeing everything down to the last detail'.  The argument was that, if Fielder is lying, then so is Colin and at that point, Colin thought Bamber was innocent.

Bamber now denies that the shots exist but Sheila's friends confirmed they did and so did Colin.

    Ok Roch, Here is why it is clearly a non relevant point.
     According to everybody there were three sets of slides(an important but overlooked point) not photos. The last set that you claim, as proxy, is "apparently" the set that "Jeremy described to both Fielder and Colin as seeing everything down to the last detail". Well, I have to say that, "apparently", is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
     Fielder's own words and descriptions of the photos(not slides) did not in any way resemble the slides that Jeremy had discussed with Colin. You can view Fielder talking about the photos that he never saw  and his descriptions involve sex toys and other objects. Only Fielder has ever described these photos. They didn't exist and they are not the same set, apparently or otherwise, that Jeremy and Colin discussed. Which makes the photos that Fielder described a mere figment of his own seedy imagination.
Hence, unaccounted batches are irrelevant because Fielder described non existent rather than unaccounted for batches.
     The most simple test is this, Roch, using the verified and not reasonably disagreed on points.
      You either believe that
     1) Jeremy gave Colin the first set of slides to dispose of. Remember that Colin was very much Sheila's ex. Jeremy described further more explicit sets, which Colin was unaware of, and agreed that Colin could arrange also to collect and dispose of.
     Colin went away to Cornwall the day after this and did not contact Jeremy to arrange collection beforehand.
     Whilst he was away, Brett Collins contacted the Sun hack Mike Fielder to arrange a meeting to sell explicit photos of Sheila which Bamber had helpfully informed Colin about, unnecessarily and stupidly if we are to believe stranger to the truth Fielder. Fielder arranged a meeting via Collins but he asked for no photos to be brought to this meeting set up specifically for this reason. Neither Collins or Bamber thought that it would be a good idea either, it seems, to take the photos that they wished to sell to the meeting set up by them for this specific purpose. This is made odder by Fielder's claim that they wanted cash and quickly. 
    At this photo free meeting Fielder claims that "they" described pictures so pornographic that they would be utterly unusable even in the Sun. The descriptions given by Fielder do not, even in the loosest sense, resemble the slides discussed by Colin and Jeremy.
    It is beyond dispute that the press had been sensationalising the murders and the lives of the deceased, particularly Sheila, and had also been giving negative coverage to JB.
   or
     2) Collins set up the meeting according to Bamber for Jeremy to put his side of the story. He claims that Fielder just wanted to ask about nude pictures of Sheila and the next day led with his infamous article.
    The lack of photos at the meeting does fit Jeremy's version of events but is incongruous with Fielders.
    There is no real dispute that Fielder described entirely different photos. The ridiculous "show everything to the last detail" is one turn of phrase and it is not alleged to have been uttered directly by Bamber. The rest of Fielder's description of the photos in no way resembles the actual slides.
    The slides/photos gives it away. Fielder never once speaks of slides only non existent photos. Were his story true, he would have been offered explicit slides.
     Fielder is a liar.
     Every article ever found written by Fielder is full of demonstrable and proven lies.
     Even those who believe that this time his sleazy allegations against a suspect are true, despite his only known previous being sleazy allegations against suspects later proven to have been untrue and entirely invented by him have to acknowledge the demonstrable lies in this article.
     It seems that some believe that Fielder told the truth for exactly nine words in his entire shabby career.
     Oh! and Fielder is a liar.
     

[Steve_uk]

    Ok Roch, Here is why it is clearly a non relevant point.
     According to everybody there were three sets of slides(an important but overlooked point) not photos. The last set that you claim, as proxy, is "apparently" the set that "Jeremy described to both Fielder and Colin as seeing everything down to the last detail". Well, I have to say that, "apparently", is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
     Fielder's own words and descriptions of the photos(not slides) did not in any way resemble the slides that Jeremy had discussed with Colin. You can view Fielder talking about the photos that he never saw  and his descriptions involve sex toys and other objects. Only Fielder has ever described these photos. They didn't exist and they are not the same set, apparently or otherwise, that Jeremy and Colin discussed. Which makes the photos that Fielder described a mere figment of his own seedy imagination.
Hence, unaccounted batches are irrelevant because Fielder described non existent rather than unaccounted for batches.
     The most simple test is this, Roch, using the verified and not reasonably disagreed on points.
      You either believe that
     1) Jeremy gave Colin the first set of slides to dispose of. Remember that Colin was very much Sheila's ex. Jeremy described further more explicit sets, which Colin was unaware of, and agreed that Colin could arrange also to collect and dispose of.
     Colin went away to Cornwall the day after this and did not contact Jeremy to arrange collection beforehand.
     Whilst he was away, Brett Collins contacted the Sun hack Mike Fielder to arrange a meeting to sell explicit photos of Sheila which Bamber had helpfully informed Colin about, unnecessarily and stupidly if we are to believe stranger to the truth Fielder. Fielder arranged a meeting via Collins but he asked for no photos to be brought to this meeting set up specifically for this reason. Neither Collins or Bamber thought that it would be a good idea either, it seems, to take the photos that they wished to sell to the meeting set up by them for this specific purpose. This is made odder by Fielder's claim that they wanted cash and quickly. 
    At this photo free meeting Fielder claims that "they" described pictures so pornographic that they would be utterly unusable even in the Sun. The descriptions given by Fielder do not, even in the loosest sense, resemble the slides discussed by Colin and Jeremy.
    It is beyond dispute that the press had been sensationalising the murders and the lives of the deceased, particularly Sheila, and had also been giving negative coverage to JB.
   or
     2) Collins set up the meeting according to Bamber for Jeremy to put his side of the story. He claims that Fielder just wanted to ask about nude pictures of Sheila and the next day led with his infamous article.
    The lack of photos at the meeting does fit Jeremy's version of events but is incongruous with Fielders.
    There is no real dispute that Fielder described entirely different photos. The ridiculous "show everything to the last detail" is one turn of phrase and it is not alleged to have been uttered directly by Bamber. The rest of Fielder's description of the photos in no way resembles the actual slides.
    The slides/photos gives it away. Fielder never once speaks of slides only non existent photos. Were his story true, he would have been offered explicit slides.
     Fielder is a liar.
     Every article ever found written by Fielder is full of demonstrable and proven lies.
     Even those who believe that this time his sleazy allegations against a suspect are true, despite his only known previous being sleazy allegations against suspects later proven to have been untrue and entirely invented by him have to acknowledge the demonstrable lies in this article.
     It seems that some believe that Fielder told the truth for exactly nine words in his entire shabby career.
     Oh! and Fielder is a liar.
   

But you can change slides into photographs. Jeremy Bamber has never denied the meeting between Fielder and himself at the Nag's Head, Chelmsford. The remark "they show everything, right down to the last detail" was uttered by Jeremy to both Fielder and Colin. How do you explain this when Fielder and Colin never communicated with each other? Only Fielder has ever described these photos? Jeremy declared: "They are really good pictures of Bambi-with the biggest vibrator you ever saw."



Are you suggesting that Colin is lying here?

[gringo]

But you can change slides into photographs. Jeremy Bamber has never denied the meeting between Fielder and himself at the Nag's Head, Chelmsford. The remark "they show everything, right down to the last detail" was uttered by Jeremy to both Fielder and Colin. How do you explain this when Fielder and Colin never communicated with each other? Only Fielder has ever described these photos? Jeremy declared: "They are really good pictures of Bambi-with the biggest vibrator you ever saw."



Are you suggesting that Colin is lying here?

     The remark about showing everything down to the last detail has been covered many times before. Colin claimed in his statement that this was how Jeremy had described the slides to him. He did not say that these were the exact words used. Colin was not asked if the continued descriptions by Fielder were accurate. But that will be because we already know the answer to that.
     Your second alleged quote of Jeremy's to Fielder, "They are really good pictures of Bambi with the biggest vibrator you ever saw". Colin nor anybody else has claimed to hear these words from Jeremy, except Fielder. It sounds oddly like the language a sensationalist tabloid "journalist" would use rather than Bamber. Nor has anyone other than Fielder claimed that these photos exist.
     Those words are all you have and it is piss weak.
     Nobody has offered reasonable explanations why no photos were at this meeting.
     Why Fielder in his own words is so vague as to who offered the pictures.
     Why did Bamber or Collins or both (Fielder is vague) describe pictures that they didn't have which would be unpublishable, given their pornographic description by Fielder, instead of the ones they did  have. It makes no sense to offer pictures that don't exist(vibrators etc.) and couldn't be published even if they did.
      Why would Jeremy offer to sell pornographic pictures of his sister to a newspaper that had been giving him negative press already.
      Why would he give Colin the publishable slides and tell him about the others and arrange for Colin to collect them at a later time.
      Are you not at all suspicious of the fact that the allegations are being made by a reporter whose only reporting we know of consists entirely of lies made up of sexual smears and innuendo against suspects/witnesses before major trials.
      Have you not detected the pattern yet?

[Steve_uk]

     The remark about showing everything down to the last detail has been covered many times before. Colin claimed in his statement that this was how Jeremy had described the slides to him. He did not say that these were the exact words used. Colin was not asked if the continued descriptions by Fielder were accurate. But that will be because we already know the answer to that.
     Your second alleged quote of Jeremy's to Fielder, "They are really good pictures of Bambi with the biggest vibrator you ever saw". Colin nor anybody else has claimed to hear these words from Jeremy, except Fielder. It sounds oddly like the language a sensationalist tabloid "journalist" would use rather than Bamber. Nor has anyone other than Fielder claimed that these photos exist.
     Those words are all you have and it is piss weak.
     Nobody has offered reasonable explanations why no photos were at this meeting.
     Why Fielder in his own words is so vague as to who offered the pictures.
     Why did Bamber or Collins or both (Fielder is vague) describe pictures that they didn't have which would be unpublishable, given their pornographic description by Fielder, instead of the ones they did  have. It makes no sense to offer pictures that don't exist(vibrators etc.) and couldn't be published even if they did.
      Why would Jeremy offer to sell pornographic pictures of his sister to a newspaper that had been giving him negative press already.
      Why would he give Colin the publishable slides and tell him about the others and arrange for Colin to collect them at a later time.
      Are you not at all suspicious of the fact that the allegations are being made by a reporter whose only reporting we know of consists entirely of lies made up of sexual smears and innuendo against suspects/witnesses before major trials.
      Have you not detected the pattern yet?

Yes I'm afraid the pattern is all too typical for those familiar with the case. It's the same pattern which Jeremy used at the funeral when he told Colin what he would like to do to Julie sexually, it's the same pattern which existed in his relationship with Suzette and his brash, indiscreet behaviour at the London nightclubs which he frequented, and of course it's the same pattern with the desire for money at any cost, as evidenced by the Osea Road break-in, and of course the ultimate act of mass murder for substantial financial gain.

[JackieD]

    Ok Roch, Here is why it is clearly a non relevant point.
     According to everybody there were three sets of slides(an important but overlooked point) not photos. The last set that you claim, as proxy, is "apparently" the set that "Jeremy described to both Fielder and Colin as seeing everything down to the last detail". Well, I have to say that, "apparently", is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
     Fielder's own words and descriptions of the photos(not slides) did not in any way resemble the slides that Jeremy had discussed with Colin. You can view Fielder talking about the photos that he never saw  and his descriptions involve sex toys and other objects. Only Fielder has ever described these photos. They didn't exist and they are not the same set, apparently or otherwise, that Jeremy and Colin discussed. Which makes the photos that Fielder described a mere figment of his own seedy imagination.
Hence, unaccounted batches are irrelevant because Fielder described non existent rather than unaccounted for batches.
     The most simple test is this, Roch, using the verified and not reasonably disagreed on points.
      You either believe that
     1) Jeremy gave Colin the first set of slides to dispose of. Remember that Colin was very much Sheila's ex. Jeremy described further more explicit sets, which Colin was unaware of, and agreed that Colin could arrange also to collect and dispose of.
     Colin went away to Cornwall the day after this and did not contact Jeremy to arrange collection beforehand.
     Whilst he was away, Brett Collins contacted the Sun hack Mike Fielder to arrange a meeting to sell explicit photos of Sheila which Bamber had helpfully informed Colin about, unnecessarily and stupidly if we are to believe stranger to the truth Fielder. Fielder arranged a meeting via Collins but he asked for no photos to be brought to this meeting set up specifically for this reason. Neither Collins or Bamber thought that it would be a good idea either, it seems, to take the photos that they wished to sell to the meeting set up by them for this specific purpose. This is made odder by Fielder's claim that they wanted cash and quickly. 
    At this photo free meeting Fielder claims that "they" described pictures so pornographic that they would be utterly unusable even in the Sun. The descriptions given by Fielder do not, even in the loosest sense, resemble the slides discussed by Colin and Jeremy.
    It is beyond dispute that the press had been sensationalising the murders and the lives of the deceased, particularly Sheila, and had also been giving negative coverage to JB.
   or
     2) Collins set up the meeting according to Bamber for Jeremy to put his side of the story. He claims that Fielder just wanted to ask about nude pictures of Sheila and the next day led with his infamous article.
    The lack of photos at the meeting does fit Jeremy's version of events but is incongruous with Fielders.
    There is no real dispute that Fielder described entirely different photos. The ridiculous "show everything to the last detail" is one turn of phrase and it is not alleged to have been uttered directly by Bamber. The rest of Fielder's description of the photos in no way resembles the actual slides.
    The slides/photos gives it away. Fielder never once speaks of slides only non existent photos. Were his story true, he would have been offered explicit slides.
     Fielder is a liar.
     Every article ever found written by Fielder is full of demonstrable and proven lies.
     Even those who believe that this time his sleazy allegations against a suspect are true, despite his only known previous being sleazy allegations against suspects later proven to have been untrue and entirely invented by him have to acknowledge the demonstrable lies in this article.
     It seems that some believe that Fielder told the truth for exactly nine words in his entire shabby career.
     Oh! and Fielder is a liar.
   

Thank you Gringo, I know you have gone into detail about this before but there are always new people viewing the forum.
I think the main focus on any photos should be the missing negatives and the photos Julie Mugford got paid for as part of her NOTW deal

[JackieD]

Yes I'm afraid the pattern is all too typical for those familiar with the case. It's the same pattern which Jeremy used at the funeral when he told Colin what he would like to do to Julie sexually, it's the same pattern which existed in his relationship with Suzette and his brash, indiscreet behaviour at the London nightclubs which he frequented, and of course it's the same pattern with the desire for money at any cost, as evidenced by the Osea Road break-in, and of course the ultimate act of mass murder for substantial financial gain.

[JackieD]

Thank you Gringo, I know you have gone into detail about this before but there are always new people viewing the forum.
I think the main focus on any photos should be the missing negatives and the photos Julie Mugford got paid for as part of her NOTW deal

I think there should be much more focus on Colin’s brash indiscreet behaviour during his marriage to Sheila which probably must have contributed heavily to her mental health issues and her ultimate suicide.
Do you think Colin ever heard or knew the vows ‘in sickness and in health’
Colin was fully aware of Sheila vulnerability for a very long time

[Steve_uk]

I think there should be much more focus on Colin’s brash indiscreet behaviour during his marriage to Sheila which probably must have contributed heavily to her mental health issues and her ultimate suicide.
Do you think Colin ever heard or knew the vows ‘in sickness and in health’
Colin was fully aware of Sheila vulnerability for a very long time

It's easy to condemn someone, and I take my precept from Matthew 7:1..judge not, lest ye be judged. If anyone is facing domestic abuse it's far better to remove oneself from the marital home if possible rather than let the animosity fester and escalate.

[JackieD]

You are joking
How low can you sink
You are now trying to make excuses for Colin’s attitude and behaviour towards the mother of his children by hinting to readers on this forum that he suffered domestic abuse

If the silencer was not used in the murders and when the general public get to learn more about Julie Mugfords deal with the NOTW and it is agreed this is an unsafe conviction I hope Julie Mugford crawls back under that stone beer to show her face again
How dare you quote the bible and promote Julie at the same time
You have truly lost the plot

[Steve_uk]

You are joking
How low can you sink
You are now trying to make excuses for Colin’s attitude and behaviour towards the mother of his children by hinting to readers on this forum that he suffered domestic abuse

If the silencer was not used in the murders and when the general public get to learn more about Julie Mugfords deal with the NOTW and it is agreed this is an unsafe conviction I hope Julie Mugford crawls back under that stone beer to show her face again
How dare you quote the bible and promote Julie at the same time
You have truly lost the plot

I'm not hinting that Colin suffered domestic abuse at all: I'm telling you. You're a complete ignoramus on this case, you have read very little if anything about it and rely on picking other people's brains who have half a brain at best. As for Julie, if I want to believe her statements and trial evidence I will do so.