Why would the relatives read this forum?

[Alias]

And I agree about the relatives, too. There is no way that they can defend themselves.

They could clarify all the things we wonder about. The silencer that was not just given to police, but instead taken home to the kitchen and perhaps taken apart and a flake of blood removed for "fascination". Needs an explanation, don't you agree? Why DO that? After five of your family members have been brutally murdered, including two little kids. It IS weird. And it IS weird that that was allowed into evidence to condemn a man to life behind bars.
Now, today, that evidence would have been dismissed, I believe. I would like to hear the exact account of that silencer and how it was handled before it was turned over to the police.
Some of the "relatives" did take a rather active role in securing a life sentence for Jeremy Bamber. To get peace, if they have nothing to hide, speak up!

[hartley]

Ive asked many times for Mr T to post the original statements.

[Jackiepreece]

+1 abs x

[bob]

I know too. He was removed, but he saw it coming.

So much for us having mods from both sides of the debate.
Better watch your arse Vic 

[grahameb]

Ive asked many times for Mr T to post the original statements.

Yes that would clear up a lot of things about what they testified. But it would be great if someone could speak up for them?

[grahameb]

I know too. He was removed, but he saw it coming.

So much for us having mods from both sides of the debate.
Better watch your arse Vic 

Untrue Bob. Vic knows the score and he will not be removed by Mike. He is too valuable a member and moderator. I have the utmost confidence in him.

[ngb1066]

We can either nip this in the bud now, or waste an entire evening and my last bottle of sweet sherry, watching you 2 bat to and fro.

Mike - can you say why you haven't replied to ngb?

In fairness to Mike, he has replied very fully and fairly to a private message I sent to him yesterday.  I think a problem may have arisen in the past from the large number of PM's Mike must receive daily, and a lot of his time is taken up with the detailed posts Mike himself makes.  I suspect that the lack of a response to a PM sent by a forum member to Mike in the past may have arisen from the sheer volume of material which Mike has to deal with. 

As you can see I have decided to post on the forum again.  I can see that Grahame in particular has made strenuous efforts to get the forum back onto a proper footing, with those with differing views on the case having the right to post freely without being subject to personal attack.  That does not mean we should avoid vigorous debate and argument, with some banter to liven things up from time to time.  We ought to know where to draw the line but if we overstep the mark the mods can step in.  I do not propose to go into the circumstances in which I decided to stop posting, partly because I do not want to bore forum members with matters which do not relate to the debates on the Jeremy Bamber case, and partly because I do not want to provoke others into raking up old arguments.  Whatever my views on the issues surrounding my decision to pull away (which I still hold firmly) I am prepared to draw a line under them in order to support Grahame and others in their serious efforts to get the forum back on line.  I will certainly do my best to support and help.

 

[jon]

Great to hear from you NG !!

[Jackiepreece]

Brilliant Ngb welcome back 

[grahameb]

We can either nip this in the bud now, or waste an entire evening and my last bottle of sweet sherry, watching you 2 bat to and fro.

Mike - can you say why you haven't replied to ngb?

In fairness to Mike, he has replied very fully and fairly to a private message I sent to him yesterday.  I think a problem may have arisen in the past from the large number of PM's Mike must receive daily, and a lot of his time is taken up with the detailed posts Mike himself makes.  I suspect that the lack of a response to a PM sent by a forum member to Mike in the past may have arisen from the sheer volume of material which Mike has to deal with. 

As you can see I have decided to post on the forum again.  I can see that Grahame in particular has made strenuous efforts to get the forum back onto a proper footing, with those with differing views on the case having the right to post freely without being subject to personal attack.  That does not mean we should avoid vigorous debate and argument, with some banter to liven things up from time to time.  We ought to know where to draw the line but if we overstep the mark the mods can step in.  I do not propose to go into the circumstances in which I decided to stop posting, partly because I do not want to bore forum members with matters which do not relate to the debates on the Jeremy Bamber case, and partly because I do not want to provoke others into raking up old arguments.  Whatever my views on the issues surrounding my decision to pull away (which I still hold firmly) I am prepared to draw a line under them in order to support Grahame and others in their serious efforts to get the forum back on line.  I will certainly do my best to support and help.

+1 for that NGB. 

[clifford]

Brilliant Ngb welcome back 

Welcome back , 1068.
I look forward to your further  posts.

[ngb1066]

Brilliant Ngb welcome back 

Welcome back , 1068.
I look forward to your further  posts.

Thank you cliff, grahame, Jackie and jon for your kind comments.

[smiffy]

also glad to see you back ngb 

[Roch]

Brilliant Ngb welcome back 

Welcome back , 1068.
I look forward to your further  posts.

Thank you cliff, grahame, Jackie and jon for your kind comments.

1068? - He's 2 years post norman conquest!

[grahameb]

Brilliant Ngb welcome back 

Welcome back , 1068.
I look forward to your further  posts.

Thank you cliff, grahame, Jackie and jon for your kind comments.

1068? - He's 2 years post norman conquest!

hope we're not going to be invaded by Normans. Those Freds were hard enough to handle.