Podcast by Bamber's support group containing information about 03/21 submission

[killingeve]

There’s no need for patronizing comment. We are fully aware that the odds are stacked against us. But it’s better to labour for years to discover materials that cast doubt on the conviction than sit and passively accept that the judiciary will always win. It is essential that the evil acts carried out by the police and people such as Mugford and Eaton/Boutflour are exposed even if it doesn’t lead to Jeremy’s release. At least we will have tried.

In terms of “the woman” in the podcast, her name is Yvonne Hartley, one of the finest people I have ever met. Her sacrifices to expose the wrongdoing in the case are staggering. She is an extremely talented investigator and deserves the admiration and respect of everyone.

I apologise if you found my comment patronising but I do believe Bamber, his support group and those commenting here misunderstand the weight of evidence needed for an acquittal. 

I will go through the points raised in the podcast and let you know how each one will be rejected by the review commission.

[killingeve]

Statement of Reasons (Non-referral)

1. Tel call Mr Bamber Snr to the police

Lack of evidence.  Logs as described by PC West in the doc

2. Tel call Sheila to 999

Lack of evidence.  999 call made by GPO/police for purpose of checking line and listening in. 

3. Suicide note

As explained above

4. Grey hair

Biologist testified at trial it was lost and of little forensic value.  Judge confirmed in summing up lost and that even if it came to be there as a result of the rifle making contact with Mr Bamber's head it would not account for the blood in the silencer at the depth it is claimed it was found. 

5. Paint

It is a while since I read the summing up but as far as I can recall the judge did not refer to the paint and scratches.  The focus was on the blood.  Therefore even if Bamber has something to override the paint it is very unlikely to trump the blood. 

6. Defence injuries to Sheila

Lack of evidence.  Unlikely anything will surface to override the pathologist who carried out the post-mortems. 

7.  Windows

As I explained in earlier posts whether anyone agrees or not the judge dealt with this at trial by saying how Bamber entered and left could not affect the outcome.  This was largely based on Bamber's admission that he was able to enter via secured or unsecured windows although to the best of my knowledge he has not at any time said he was able to exit leaving windows secured.

Have I missed anything?

[lookout]

Missing audio tapes concerning calls !
Coroners documents.

[Adam]

Bamber's 2002 & 2012 submissions just made him look more guilty.

The judges said in 2002 'the more we look at the case, the more we believe the jury were right'.

His 2012 appeal just helped explain why the silencer was taken off & put away. As well as highlight the killer was strong & composed enough to lift Nevill onto a coal scuttle & burn his back. So could only be Bamber.

The points in the current submission also make him look more guilty.

[Adam]

The 2002 appeal also brought up that Sheila's legs were pulled after the second shot.

[Roch]

..those commenting here misunderstand the weight of evidence needed for an acquittal. 

No... They don't.  But regardless of this, you will keep telling them that they do. As already explained above, you're here for quick win. Prior to a potential refusal, you have appeared just in time to predict a refusal. Then when the refusal occurs, you can bask in your own self importance. 

[Adam]

Statement of Reasons (Non-referral)

1. Tel call Mr Bamber Snr to the police

Lack of evidence.  Logs as described by PC West in the doc

2. Tel call Sheila to 999

Lack of evidence.  999 call made by GPO/police for purpose of checking line and listening in. 

3. Suicide note

As explained above

4. Grey hair

Biologist testified at trial it was lost and of little forensic value.  Judge confirmed in summing up lost and that even if it came to be there as a result of the rifle making contact with Mr Bamber's head it would not account for the blood in the silencer at the depth it is claimed it was found. 

5. Paint

It is a while since I read the summing up but as far as I can recall the judge did not refer to the paint and scratches.  The focus was on the blood.  Therefore even if Bamber has something to override the paint it is very unlikely to trump the blood. 

6. Defence injuries to Sheila

Lack of evidence.  Unlikely anything will surface to override the pathologist who carried out the post-mortems. 

7.  Windows

As I explained in earlier posts whether anyone agrees or not the judge dealt with this at trial by saying how Bamber entered and left could not affect the outcome.  This was largely based on Bamber's admission that he was able to enter via secured or unsecured windows although to the best of my knowledge he has not at any time said he was able to exit leaving windows secured.

Have I missed anything?

https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/new-ccrc-submission

These are the 8 points of submission.

[killingeve]

https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/new-ccrc-submission

These are the 8 points of submission.

Yes I thought I had missed something and you reminded me - the burns.

8. 'Burns'

Both pathologists at trial, to some extent, agreed they could not even be certain the marks were in fact burns.  Therefore jurors could not possibly have relied on this evidence to reach a verdict.  My view is that they may well be unconnected to the night of the murders. 

[killingeve]

No... They don't.  But regardless of this, you will keep telling them that they do. As already explained above, you're here for quick win. Prior to a potential refusal, you have appeared just in time to predict a refusal. Then when the refusal occurs, you can bask in your own self importance.

As I keep saying I joined early 2020.  Others might recall I spent some considerable time here reading the docs, but unlike you and others here I actually read material, think about it carefully, examine my own thoughts etc, etc before opening my mouth!

Also I am stating my opinions clearly now before the commission issues it statement of reasons.  There's always the possibility I might be wrong and I am sure you and others will be quick to ensure I choke on humble pie! 

[Roch]

As I keep saying I joined early 2020.  Others might recall I spent some considerable time here reading the docs, but unlike you and others here I actually read material, think about it carefully, examine my own thoughts etc, etc before opening my mouth!

Also I am stating my opinions clearly now before the commission issues it statement of reasons.  There's always the possibility I might be wrong and I am sure you and others will be quick to ensure I choke on humble pie!

You're banking on the that possibility being very slight, otherwise you wouldn't be here.

[lookout]

347,000 pages of evidence which EP had withheld from JB, including police logs which all came to light after the 30 years retaining period was not applicable.

Many of these papers prove that the jury were not provided with evidence and were misled repeatedly.

Each of those 8 submissions/ issues which have been set out contain information which answers the questions on the main subjects on which the conviction was based.

Evidence now supports the fact that every part of the case is untrue.

[killingeve]

https://www.jeremy-bamber.co.uk/new-ccrc-submission

These are the 8 points of submission.

I was going off the podcast.  I will look at above.  I tend to stay away from the website as I find it an unreliable source of information. 

[killingeve]

You're banking on the that possibility being very slight, otherwise you wouldn't be here.

You have absolutely no idea why I'm here. 

[JackieD]

I was going off the podcast.  I will look at above.  I tend to stay away from the website as I find it an unreliable source of information.

I would stay away from the police evidence and the relatives statements as well then because it’s unreliable

But you know that anyway don’t you

[Roch]

You have absolutely no idea why I'm here.

I could hazard a few guesses. I'm just going to let you crack on now. Fill your boots.