Confirmation June's bike was stolen.

[Steve_uk]

Thanks for this Adam, I have to say that her testimony raises a few further questions.

In her statement in September she twice mentions Bamber cycling. The first time when he was apparently considering setting fire to the place and to return to the farm, and all she says is via the back road, there’s no detail around exactly where this is and there is no road route directly from Goldhangar to WHF other than through D’Arcy village. Potentially it could be an extension of Pages Lane towards the sea wall - although this does necessitate passing through another Farm yard and is only a road over part of its length - but could possibly be the back road referred to.
By June 1985 this idea has been dismissed anyway, he is now looking at shooting the family and has found another route that he thinks will take 15 minutes and he will try it to be sure. There is no further detail around this route. She says nothing further in her statement around routes.

The police then go and cycle a number of different routes to try them. They log the sea wall as 35 minutes, if Julie has mentioned the sea wall route to them as being his intended route then this instantly means it’s been disproved - otherwise why would they write it as 35 mins and make no attempt to clarify or travel faster if she says it can be done in 15 mins.
If she doesn’t tell them he plans to use the sea wall then why not? It’s an important detail if she knows it at this stage. The police also appear to be unsure of the correct route from Wilkinsons statement so she must have forgotten to tell them this important detail!
However by the time she gets to court she now knows he would have used the sea wall route, how does she know it now and not mention it before - especially when the police think it takes twice as long as she says?
There’s a bit too much inconsistency in the testimony, if she knew the sea wall was the one he would use then she would have said before - not mention it for the first time in court having lead the police to believe it would be a different route (remember the only one measured anywhere near 15 mins by Wilkinson was the Brook House track!)

Maybe because the plan was at an embryonic stage with Jeremy not specifying the exact route. I wouldn't take Wilkes' words as gospel either, and as there's no court transcript it's impossible to check.

[Adam]

Maybe because the plan was at an embryonic stage with Jeremy not specifying the exact route. I wouldn't take Wilkes' words as gospel either, and as there's no court transcript it's impossible to check.

Believe Wilkes may have been at the trial.

A lot of court interaction and facial expressions in his book.

[Adam]

Wilkes's book was 94. In 1986 he was either a reporter or investigative author.

Reasons to be at the trial.

[Steve_uk]

Wilkes's book was 94. In 1986 he was either a reporter or investigative author.

Reasons to be at the trial.

I know, but there's no index so it's impossible to check.

[Kestrel19]

Maybe because the plan was at an embryonic stage with Jeremy not specifying the exact route. I wouldn't take Wilkes' words as gospel either, and as there's no court transcript it's impossible to check.

Quite possible Steve, but if she didn’t know when completing her witness statement then how did she know in court? Assuming of course that Wilkes is accurate in his book on exactly what was said - if he wasn’t then what else comes into question?

[Steve_uk]

Quite possible Steve, but if she didn’t know when completing her witness statement then how did she know in court? Assuming of course that Wilkes is accurate in his book on exactly what was said - if he wasn’t then what else comes into question?

Maybe she had reasoned by that time that he was going via the sea wall. I doubt we will ever know.

[ILB]

Wilkes's book was 94. In 1986 he was either a reporter or investigative author.

Reasons to be at the trial.

Wilkes involvement started with meeting Bamber in HMP Gartree in 1991.

He by his own admission had to do a lot of persuading to convince Bamber to meet him

[Adam]

Wilkes involvement started with meeting Bamber in HMP Gartree in 1991.

He by his own admission had to do a lot of persuading to convince Bamber to meet him

Meeting Bamber in 91 doesn't mean he was not at the trial.

Or he interviewed people who were at the whole trial.

[ILB]

Meeting Bamber in 91 doesn't mean he was not at the trial.

Or he interviewed people who were at the whole trial.

Wilkes involvement started with Jeremy Bamber in 1991.

I think Mike was the person who actually got the ball rolling.

[Steve_uk]

Wilkes involvement started with Jeremy Bamber in 1991.

I think Mike was the person who actually got the ball rolling.

From memory Jeremy cooperated thinking the book would be a sympathetic portrayal, but withdrew his consent once the content became known.

[David1819]

Wilkes involvement started with Jeremy Bamber in 1991.

I think Mike was the person who actually got the ball rolling.

Correct

[ILB]

From memory Jeremy cooperated thinking the book would be a sympathetic portrayal, but withdrew his consent once the content became known.

What consent could he withdraw? The beauty of free legal independent journalism.

Wilkes came to the conclusion that Jeremy Bamber was gulity and gave his reasons.

The book was never meant to be Pro Jeremy. If anything though it gave Jeremy Bamber his first soundbite whilst serving life in prison

Believe Wilkes and Jeremy had a reasonable relationship and rapport

I personally prefer Wilkes book to CAL. Never read Lomaxs or Claire Powell's.

Will someday read Colin's book

[Steve_uk]

What consent could he withdraw? The beauty of free legal independent journalism.

Wilkes came to the conclusion that Jeremy Bamber was gulity and gave his reasons.

The book was never meant to be Pro Jeremy. If anything though it gave Jeremy Bamber his first soundbite whilst serving life in prison

Believe Wilkes and Jeremy had a reasonable relationship and rapport

I personally prefer Wilkes book to CAL. Never read Lomaxs or Claire Powell's.

Will someday read Colin's book

Maybe I didn't frame my words correctly. https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-sunday-telegraph/20200105/282149293240572