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

[Adam]

You are being very kind to him, of course if we could see Bews situation report this could all be cleared up.

I bet there was no mention of a reflection in it!

I bet there was no mention of a reflection in it!

----------


Agree with that.

[Adam]

I think you might be getting mixed up with the prosecutor who put it to Bamber he murdered his family. Bamber replied "That's for you to prove".  Prove it he did!  This was the opportunity Lookout for Bamber to set out his stall for the jury about movement at the window etc.  No one put any words into his mouth.  He probably sealed his own fate with a stupid comment!

Bamber said 'that is what you have to establish'.

The court transcript is here -

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10797.msg497675.html#msg497675

[lookout]

If this is so I am surprised Michael Turner QC did not raise at Bamber's 2002 appeal but not a word about the whole incident.  He was also involved in the Bridgewater 4 case.

We are really wasting time even discussing this as it will never go anywhere at this stage.  All it could ever have done was sow a seed of doubt in the mind of jurors at trial but after hearing about the silencer and Julie Mugford's evidence I doubt it featured at all.

I think Michael Turner is somewhere in the background of this case. He seems to have kept his ear to the ground. Withheld docs/ photo's prevented the 2002 appeal's success which MC now says that photo's will show the extent of Sheila's psychiatric illness since being " unearthed ".
Thousands of documents had been removed prior to the 2002 appeal, were not used at trial and still remain to be " missing ". These were from the Holmes computer system at the time. Michael Turner had only been given 340,000 documents from the 4 million that should have been available. 

[killingeve]

That depends on whether any further documentation has come to light. I doubt any has come to light. It doesn't matter regarding whether it wasn't in Bamber's statement. Where is the sound moderator in relatives' statements concurrent with its discovery?  If something comes to light that shows force arms were drawn after there was movement noticed in the house, then that blows out of the water any trick of the light claims.

I doubt any has come to light too!  And I doubt any ever will!

I think it rather does matter.  If it is had the sort of importance to it that Bamber/supporters are trying to attach today then why didn't he mention it in his witness statement, interviews, trial? 

How would anything blow the 'trick of the light' out of the water?  No one can be sure what it was and the system will simply write it off as a 'trick of the light' falling back on the silencer and Julie Mugford plus all the other evidence for good measure. 

[killingeve]

Bamber said 'that is what you have to establish'.

The court transcript is here -

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10797.msg497675.html#msg497675

Thanks.  I knew I hadn't got the precise words but couldn't be bothered to check.  It has the same meaning and shows Bamber as arrogant and cocky. 

[killingeve]

I think Michael Turner is somewhere in the background of this case. He seems to have kept his ear to the ground. Withheld docs/ photo's prevented the 2002 appeal's success which MC now says that photo's will show the extent of Sheila's psychiatric illness since being " unearthed ".
Thousands of documents had been removed prior to the 2002 appeal, were not used at trial and still remain to be " missing ". These were from the Holmes computer system at the time. Michael Turner had only been given 340,000 documents from the 4 million that should have been available.

The case was referred to the court of appeal based on the DNA evidence (silencer).  This was demolished by the scientists and hence the other points fell way short of trumping the good old silencer!  Julie Mugford was on standby to reiterate her trial testimony but in the event she wasn't called as it was deemed unnecessary. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2358021.stm

[lookout]

Bamber said 'that is what you have to establish'.

The court transcript is here -

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,10797.msg497675.html#msg497675

I'll bet JB's well learned his lesson by saying that ! Little did he think that neither police nor anyone else was ever on his side and that any help or assistance from his end would fall on deaf ears.
It was a biased trial if ever there was one and those responsible deserve everything damning that  hopefully comes their way !

JB innocently thought that police would do their job-----how wrong he was !

[David1819]

The case was referred to the court of appeal based on the DNA evidence (silencer).  This was demolished by the scientists and hence the other points fell way short of trumping the good old silencer!  Julie Mugford was on standby to reiterate her trial testimony but in the event she wasn't called as it was deemed unnecessary. 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2358021.stm

You can read the entire appeal hearing here. 

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,4276.msg174390.html#msg174390

[Adam]

I'll bet JB's well learned his lesson by saying that ! Little did he think that neither police nor anyone else was ever on his side and that any help or assistance from his end would fall on deaf ears.
It was a biased trial if ever there was one and those responsible deserve everything damning that  hopefully comes their way !

JB innocently thought that police would do their job-----how wrong he was !

Why was the trial biased?

[lookout]

Why was the trial biased?

Because even the defence barrister was a prosecution barrister.

[Aunt Agatha]

AA, unfortunately the initial reporting of this by Bews to HQ was unknown because that particular page of what had been written had been missing ( destroyed ? ) Jeremy had asked for there to be an ESDA test on the page beneath-----and the test had been refused, even though payment had been offered.

This ESDA test was used in the Bridgewater 4 case when a forged paper had been found. Their convictions were overturned 20 years later, thanks to Michael Mansfield.

Would you ask for such a test if you were guilty ?

Precisely!

He spoke to me about the movements, lights, the dog constantly barking.. he did ask for it to be mentioned in court too but his defence let it go as a trick of the light.

[killingeve]

Precisely!

He spoke to me about the movements, lights, the dog constantly barking.. he did ask for it to be mentioned in court too but his defence let it go as a trick of the light.

May I ask what your relationship is with Bamber?  I thought you were part of his defence team based on an earlier post but it seems not?

[Adam]

Precisely!

He spoke to me about the movements, lights, the dog constantly barking.. he did ask for it to be mentioned in court too but his defence let it go as a trick of the light.

Who did Bamber say saw the 'trick of the light'?

[Steve_uk]

May I ask what your relationship is with Bamber?  I thought you were part of his defence team based on an earlier post but it seems not?

Cambridge you have to recognize features of certain members here. They could belong to the same genotype and there are at least four of them:

Bill Robertson

Aunt Agatha

Jack o' Lantern

Will o' the Wisp

[Aunt Agatha]

Who did Bamber say saw the 'trick of the light'?

When Rivkin questioned the copper about the figure at the window, Rivkin himself suggested it was maybe a trick of the light. The moon.