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

[lookout]

Speaking of influence, the relatives also were able to turn something on its head when JB was " de-categorised " to B from A. They wrote and said how afraid they'd be and as if by magic, he was returned to Cat A.

[lookout]

I think I'd be afraid too if I'd knowingly swindled someone out of millions !!

[JackieD]

A very altruistic one by the sounds of things. 

An you come across as intelligent. Which is ironic considering you continually try to judge people.

Maybe we should discuss any legal action Jeremy will take when his conviction is overturned to get back what is rightfully his.

He will definitely have enough money to take action

[ngb1066]

Thanks.  Can I ask do you believe Bamber factually innocent?

I approach the case from a different perspective, as a defence lawyer would approach it.  I believe that the trial and to an extent JB's defence were deeply flawed and as a result the convictions are unsafe.  By that I mean there is a very real doubt about JB's guilt.  I believe there are valid grounds of appeal to be developed and presented and I obviously believe that the case should be referred again to the Court of Appeal.  If those grounds are properly researched, presented and argued I think there is a realistic chance of the convictions being overturned.  That does not mean an acquittal "on a technicality", it means an acquittal on the basis that the convictions are unsafe.

I have in the past posted some additional views on the case and if you look back to 2011 and 2012 you should be able to find some of this.   

[killingeve]

The CCRC Statement of Reasons is a very lengthy document and it would take a bit of time for me to summarise it here now.  If you search posts here from 2012 you will find a lot written about it and about the subsequent Judicial Review application.

Will do, thanks. 

[killingeve]

It was something that Paul Terzeon had once said when he was acting as JB's defence, in that Terzeon had blamed Ainsley for the withholding of evidence at trial.

Yes I can accept that was a possibility at the 1986 trial but DCI Ainsley is long retired and I don't believe would have any infleuence over the review commission/appeal courts now whatsoever other than obviously anything he may have had a helping in hand in at the time. 

[killingeve]

I approach the case from a different perspective, as a defence lawyer would approach it.  I believe that the trial and to an extent JB's defence were deeply flawed and as a result the convictions are unsafe.  By that I mean there is a very real doubt about JB's guilt.  I believe there are valid grounds of appeal to be developed and presented and I obviously believe that the case should be referred again to the Court of Appeal.  If those grounds are properly researched, presented and argued I think there is a realistic chance of the convictions being overturned.  That does not mean an acquittal "on a technicality", it means an acquittal on the basis that the convictions are unsafe.

I have in the past posted some additional views on the case and if you look back to 2011 and 2012 you should be able to find some of this.

Thanks for the succinct explanation.  I will certainly look through your back posts.

[killingeve]

An you come across as intelligent. Which is ironic considering you continually try to judge people.

Maybe we should discuss any legal action Jeremy will take when his conviction is overturned to get back what is rightfully his.

He will definitely have enough money to take action

Who do you believe I have judged unfairly or otherwise?

I think it is a little premature to be talking about legal action post acquittal but it would certainly be interesting to see what the legal position would be on any claims Bamber might have to his inheritance that was rightfully denied due to his conviction. 

[lookout]

Yes I can accept that was a possibility at the 1986 trial but DCI Ainsley is long retired and I don't believe would have any infleuence over the review commission/appeal courts now whatsoever other than obviously anything he may have had a helping in hand in at the time.

He was more than able to lend a" helping hand" to Carol Ann Lee when she wrote her book, even sending unseen information and photographs----some of which he then destroyed at his home ! What gives anyone the right to destroy what must have been, important documents  ?

[Steve_uk]

Who do you believe I have judged unfairly or otherwise?

I think it is a little premature to be talking about legal action post acquittal but it would certainly be interesting to see what the legal position would be on any claims Bamber might have to his inheritance that was rightfully denied due to his conviction.

He won't get a penny. His case is worse than Barry George's.

[lookout]

I doubt if Jeremy has his eyes set on any financial " prize ". If he should win an appeal he'll become wealthy in his own right.

[JackieD]

Who do you believe I have judged unfairly or otherwise?

I think it is a little premature to be talking about legal action post acquittal but it would certainly be interesting to see what the legal position would be on any claims Bamber might have to his inheritance that was rightfully denied due to his conviction.

You have just labelled  someone altruistic

[JackieD]

He won't get a penny. His case is worse than Barry George's.

You have no idea, you just do not know. Anyway I would think the main legal action will be against the relatives.

Jeremy would be so rich, with books films etc he will be able to instruct the best lawyers

[killingeve]

You have just labelled  someone altruistic

Not so much a label more a description.  How would you describe someone who works pro bono AND funds forensic tests? 

[Adam]

I doubt if Jeremy has his eyes set on any financial " prize ". If he should win an appeal he'll become wealthy in his own right.

Agree with the second sentence.