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

[killingeve]

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.

But do you not find it somewhat hypocritical in that Bamber and his support group bang on about non-disclosure and yet Bamber himself is not revealing his full hand?

Yvonne said she wants as many people to support Bamber as possible.  Why would they when they are denied access to important documents?  Its all very well Yvonne saying she will tell me but I want to read the material word for word and draw my own opinions. 

[killingeve]

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

You're telling me!  They may be well intentioned but the likes of the support group with the podcast and website do Bamber a great disservice in my humble opinion. 

Other miscarriages of justice or even those seeking justice eg the family of Stephen Lawrence have not set up what could be described as a circus.  They have just got on with it quietly and in doing so met with their objectives. 

[Roch]

You're telling me!  They may be well intentioned but the likes of the support group with the podcast and website do Bamber a great disservice in my humble opinion. 

Other miscarriages of justice or even those seeking justice eg the family of Stephen Lawrence have not set up what could be described as a circus.  They have just got on with it quietly and in doing so met with their objectives.

Such people don't have a state induced/supported propaganda campaign against them. A one that can spue erroneous clichés out

[lookout]

But do you not find it somewhat hypocritical in that Bamber and his support group bang on about non-disclosure and yet Bamber himself is not revealing his full hand?

Yvonne said she wants as many people to support Bamber as possible.  Why would they when they are denied access to important documents?  Its all very well Yvonne saying she will tell me but I want to read the material word for word and draw my own opinions.

No I don't find it hypocritical at all as there are some things that people want to hold on to until such times it's convenient for them to decide when to produce and not for others whose opinions could well be used in a way to mislead or misconstrue what that person actually means. Documents can always be twisted to suit unless you physically see them so they're best kept under wraps until hopefully there's an appeal. There's nothing more damaging than " leaked documents ". 

This case has had to be kept in the public eye as there's been no other way. It wouldn't have benefitted from any " behind the scenes " work such as the Stephen Lawrence case.

[killingeve]

Such people don't have a state induced/supported propaganda campaign against them. A one that can spue erroneous clichés out

Oh Roch do me a favour    Bamber was a farmer in rural Essex not a political activist or investigative journalist unearthing some state secrets.

If you had access to the 100 page Statement of Reasons produced by the review commission in 2011/12 you might just think it had a point.   

[killingeve]

No I don't find it hypocritical at all as there are some things that people want to hold on to until such times it's convenient for them to decide when to produce and not for others whose opinions could well be used in a way to mislead or misconstrue what that person actually means. Documents can always be twisted to suit unless you physically see them so they're best kept under wraps until hopefully there's an appeal. There's nothing more damaging than " leaked documents ". 

This case has had to be kept in the public eye as there's been no other way. It wouldn't have benefitted from any " behind the scenes " work such as the Stephen Lawrence case.

I think you have actually agreed with me without realising it!

As you said documents can be twisted unless you physically see them which is exactly why I want Bamber to make this document available to the public to allow them to form their own opinions. 

As it stands Yvonne has said she is unable to make it available but will answer my queries. 

What is Bamber hiding?  NGB1066 has said there's nothing detrimental to Bamber and he would prefer it be in the public domain so why not?

[lookout]

I think you have actually agreed with me without realising it!

As you said documents can be twisted unless you physically see them which is exactly why I want Bamber to make this document available to the public to allow them to form their own opinions. 

As it stands Yvonne has said she is unable to make it available but will answer my queries. 

What is Bamber hiding?  NGB1066 has said there's nothing detrimental to Bamber and he would prefer it be in the public domain so why not?

I would very much doubt that JB is hiding anything in particular which he wouldn't want to produce at a later date. It could well be something personal to himself that for the time being he'd rather not mention, which if that were the case then it's his prerogative. I imagine that anything pressing wouldn't have been given a second thought.
Whatever it is I'm sure we'll hear about it should he be allowed an appeal. It doesn't always do to say too much at this stage of the proceedings and JB will do what he thinks is best.

[Roch]

Oh Roch do me a favour    Bamber was a farmer in rural Essex not a political activist or investigative journalist unearthing some state secrets.

If you had access to the 100 page Statement of Reasons produced by the review commission in 2011/12 you might just think it had a point.

You think the drama was an accurate balanced portrayal of events? Or Theroux? What about the barrage of press articles? And ballistics expert Carol Ann Lee, imparting her sharpshooter narrative on millions of lay people regarding 25 shots / 25 hits?

Come off it. You know full well that a real old style 'rough justice' docu would make the prosecution case look like what it really is. Instead of this dumbed down propaganda being churned out en masse, spawning thousands of copycat podcasts.

[lookout]

Roch I think if the programme Rough Justice had still been shown, there'd have been no case to answer with this one.

[JackieD]

You're telling me!  They may be well intentioned but the likes of the support group with the podcast and website do Bamber a great disservice in my humble opinion. 

Other miscarriages of justice or even those seeking justice eg the family of Stephen Lawrence have not set up what could be described as a circus.  They have just got on with it quietly and in doing so met with their objectives.

Your use of exclamation marks is very telling. You obviously have two much time on your hands so why don’t you use your ‘intelligence’ and try and get all notes and evidence regarding Julie Mugford released. Why aren’t you pressing for those to be released considering she was the main prosecution witness
That will give you something to do

[lookout]

Your use of exclamation marks is very telling. You obviously have two much time on your hands so why don’t you use your ‘intelligence’ and try and get all notes and evidence regarding Julie Mugford released. Why aren’t you pressing for those to be released considering she was the main prosecution witness
That will give you something to do

Jackie, if a person's clever enough it shouldn't take any time at all to see that JM is typical of an embittered person who's been dumped.

[David1819]

Oh Roch do me a favour    Bamber was a farmer in rural Essex not a political activist or investigative journalist unearthing some state secrets.

If you had access to the 100 page Statement of Reasons produced by the review commission in 2011/12 you might just think it had a point.

More info on the 2012 CCRC decision can be found here -

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3777.msg152269.html#msg152269

[killingeve]

More info on the 2012 CCRC decision can be found here -

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3777.msg152269.html#msg152269

Thank you.  I think someone posted up the summary a few days ago.  I would really like to read the full document which I believe is some 100 pages long.  I think it's really hypocritical of Bamber and his support group to be up in arms about non-disclosure when he himself is not disclosing material especially when he is seeking public support.   

[killingeve]

You think the drama was an accurate balanced portrayal of events? Or Theroux? What about the barrage of press articles? And ballistics expert Carol Ann Lee, imparting her sharpshooter narrative on millions of lay people regarding 25 shots / 25 hits?

Come off it. You know full well that a real old style 'rough justice' docu would make the prosecution case look like what it really is. Instead of this dumbed down propaganda being churned out en masse, spawning thousands of copycat podcasts.

In the last year or so I watched docus about Michael Stone and Luke Mitchell.  These featured almost exclusively lawyers, foresnic scientists and former police officers who were assisting the programme makers.  Most will be turned off by Bamber due to the circus he chooses to preside over.   

[lookout]

Thank you.  I think someone posted up the summary a few days ago.  I would really like to read the full document which I believe is some 100 pages long.  I think it's really hypocritical of Bamber and his support group to be up in arms about non-disclosure when he himself is not disclosing material especially when he is seeking public support.   

Why should he when there's a process in progress ? JB will disclose what he's got when he's good and ready. I'm sure you would appreciate that ?