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

[killingeve]

NGB1066 has seen this document.  I am assuming there's nothing particularly incriminating in it to Bamber, other than what is already known, otherwise I doubt NBG1066 would still be here.

Who esle has seen this document other than I assume Bamber and his defence lawyers at the time?

Have the support group eg Yvonne and Phillip seen it?

[killingeve]

How do those here who support Bamber feel about this document being withheld?

[lookout]

How do those here who support Bamber feel about this document being withheld?

I've actually posted on the wrong thread about this.

[ngb1066]

NGB1066 has seen this document.  I am assuming there's nothing particularly incriminating in it to Bamber, other than what is already known, otherwise I doubt NBG1066 would still be here.

Who esle has seen this document other than I assume Bamber and his defence lawyers at the time?

Have the support group eg Yvonne and Phillip seen it?

It is in my view not damaging to JB's case and I regret that it has not been released.  If it had been released it would be possible to deal with the arguments and show why key positions taken by the CCRC were flawed.  Nothing in the Statement of Reasons in my view weakens the key arguments in favour of a fresh referral to the Court of Appeal.  The document certainly did not change my view of the case in any way.

[killingeve]

It is in my view not damaging to JB's case and I regret that it has not been released.  If it had been released it would be possible to deal with the arguments and show why key positions taken by the CCRC were flawed.  Nothing in the Statement of Reasons in my view weakens the key arguments in favour of a fresh referral to the Court of Appeal.  The document certainly did not change my view of the case in any way.

Thank you NGB1066. 

I am at a loss as to why Bamber would want to withhold it given what you have said especially as he is so passionate about non-disclosure.  If I do not receive a satisfactory response from Yvonne I might email Bamber to hear from the horses mouth. 

[ngb1066]

Thank you NGB1066. 

I am at a loss as to why Bamber would want to withhold it given what you have said especially as he is so passionate about non-disclosure.  If I do not receive a satisfactory response from Yvonne I might email Bamber to hear from the horses mouth.

If you contact Jeremy Bamber he will reply.  He is very good at answering correspondence and is usually happy to discuss aspects of the case and answer questions.  You have to remember however that he has been a prisoner now for most of his life and he does depend very much upon the team of people who support him.  He listens to the views of his close confidants and rarely goes against their advice.  The current stance of the CT seems to be not to disclose much by way of detail.  In the past they have been more open but that has sometimes not played out very well and they seem to be much more cautious now.  Although I have known Jeremy to take an independent line on a particular point I think it this instance he will follow what he is advised by the CT and it is therefore unlikely in my view that he will authorise the release of the CCRC document.  I may be wrong of course, and there is certainly no harm in raising the matter with him.  You can either contact him by post or use the email a prisoner service which works well.

[lookout]

Thank you NGB1066. 

I am at a loss as to why Bamber would want to withhold it given what you have said especially as he is so passionate about non-disclosure.  If I do not receive a satisfactory response from Yvonne I might email Bamber to hear from the horses mouth.

If it's going to be used should there be an appeal, then nobody is going to tell you anything, you should know that, for obvious reasons.

[lookout]

It's not as though many have JB's interests at heart ! Well not genuinely.

[lookout]

I should hope that the CT use judgement !

[killingeve]

I've just stumbled across the following

The CCRC's supposed difficulty in doing so is reflected in the fact that only two cases have ever been referred to the Court of Appeal by the CCRC more than once.[15]

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmjust/850/85005.htm

The doc was published 6 years ago so maybe another couple of cases to add to two but even so it shows the odds really are stacked up against Bamber. 

[killingeve]

If you contact Jeremy Bamber he will reply.  He is very good at answering correspondence and is usually happy to discuss aspects of the case and answer questions.  You have to remember however that he has been a prisoner now for most of his life and he does depend very much upon the team of people who support him.  He listens to the views of his close confidants and rarely goes against their advice.  The current stance of the CT seems to be not to disclose much by way of detail.  In the past they have been more open but that has sometimes not played out very well and they seem to be much more cautious now.  Although I have known Jeremy to take an independent line on a particular point I think it this instance he will follow what he is advised by the CT and it is therefore unlikely in my view that he will authorise the release of the CCRC document.  I may be wrong of course, and there is certainly no harm in raising the matter with him.  You can either contact him by post or use the email a prisoner service which works well.

Thanks.  In the absense of a satisfactory response from Yvonne I will email Jeremy Bamber. 

[killingeve]

If it's going to be used should there be an appeal, then nobody is going to tell you anything, you should know that, for obvious reasons.

Why would the Statement of Reasons detailing the reasons the review commission did not refer in 2011/12 be used again in a fresh submission?  They have already been rejected.  I am interested in what the arguments were and why they were thrown out!

[lookout]

Why would the Statement of Reasons detailing the reasons the review commission did not refer in 2011/12 be used again in a fresh submission?  They have already been rejected.  I am interested in what the arguments were and why they were thrown out!

What I meant to say that because of the rejection I'd be very reluctant to say why, in view of the latest submission. I have my own reasons.

[lookout]

As I've already said, not everyone has Jeremy's interest at heart. I trust nobody !

[lookout]

Why not go the whole hog and contact Newby ?