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

[Bill Robertson]

I dont believe he did omit anything.  Bearing in mind all material, including images, was fact checked by the pathologist for the defence.

Yes, it will come as a great shock to many people to see the extent of Vanezis’ deception. All I can say about the defence is that their work must have been shockingly inept and negligent. Hopefully it won’t be long now until doubters can confront the truth

[Roch]

If you read the trial testimony of the Home Office pathologist you will discover the extent of June's injuries.  Bearing in mind this was fact checked by a pathologist instructed by the defence. 

There's no evidence whatsover that June sustained a black eye from a fist. 

You actually do Bamber more harm than good by flooding the board with misinformation.

The pathologist has omitted a number of wounds on both Sheila and June. Other people do not accept this to be the case. I understand that they disagree. However, I disagree with them.

[killingeve]

The Home Office pathologist put June's black eye down to bruising caused by gunshot injuries.

A police officer, DS Jones I believe, told Anne Eaton that June sustained a black eye and that is how the rumour began in terms of either Jeremy or Sheila causing it directly.   

[killingeve]

Yes, it will come as a great shock to many people to see the extent of Vanezis’ deception. All I can say about the defence is that their work must have been shockingly inept and negligent. Hopefully it won’t be long now until doubters can confront the truth

I would be surprised to learn that two pathologists of the calibre of Prof's Vanezis and Knight overlooked anything important in a case of this magnitude. 

[killingeve]

Please bear in mind that there are possibly doctored images floating around after certain individuals have been through files.  I am thinking particularly of fake lawyer Giovanni De Stefano. 

[lookout]

CT do you remember the Ian Tomlinson case, when, besides being unlawfully killed by police ,a police pathologist went on to lie about the injuries during a post-mortem. Thankfully the said pathologist was struck off. His behaviour was classed as having an " attidudinal problem " of which there's a lot of it about among those who think they know everything and know nothing !
Years of service doesn't cut it for me.

[Bill Robertson]

Please bear in mind that there are possibly doctored images floating around after certain individuals have been through files.  I am thinking particularly of fake lawyer Giovanni De Stefano.

The images that I analyzed were provided by the CCRC. They are 100% genuine. Let’s just wait and see.

[David1819]

Yes, it will come as a great shock to many people to see the extent of Vanezis’ deception. All I can say about the defence is that their work must have been shockingly inept and negligent. Hopefully it won’t be long now until doubters can confront the truth

You said that almost six years ago..

The data uncovered is stunning and conclusive; won't be long to wait now. Can't say any more. The forces of darkness are watching.

[JackieD]

I was not there and neither was Jeremy.

We know what was said during the call.

No father would willingly invite his son over to a blood massacre. He more than likely knew he was going to be killed anyway and therefore took the opportunity, the only opportunity, to save his own son.

Jeremy called the good as a result, which was not in the planning.

Why do I have to keep feeding you?

Put yourself in his shoes. What would you have done under the circumstances?

I don’t believe any of your ideas ?  Jeremy never discussed the Mason theory with me. I believe everything was much more simpler involving the relatives and Julie Mugford

All these conspiracy theories do more harm than good

[killingeve]

The images that I analyzed were provided by the CCRC. They are 100% genuine. Let’s just wait and see.

So you do on ocassions think the review commission is reliable?

Unless you are a qualified pathologist with a lot of experience what makes you think you have uncovered something overlooked by the pathologist who carried out the post-mortems and a pathologist that fact-checked the Home Office pathologist and testified at trial?

[killingeve]

CT do you remember the Ian Tomlinson case, when, besides being unlawfully killed by police ,a police pathologist went on to lie about the injuries during a post-mortem. Thankfully the said pathologist was struck off. His behaviour was classed as having an " attidudinal problem " of which there's a lot of it about among those who think they know everything and know nothing !
Years of service doesn't cut it for me.

It was rectified by other pathologists. 

[lookout]

It was rectified by other pathologists.

I know that, but it isn't the point is it, much as you'd rather sweep these things under the carpet.

[killingeve]

I know that, but it isn't the point is it, much as you'd rather sweep these things under the carpet.

What is the point then?

How can you compare the Tomlinson case with Bamber's?

[lookout]

What is the point then?

How can you compare the Tomlinson case with Bamber's?

That there are some dodgy " professionals " around who are only too willing to " do as they're told " under certain circumstances.

[lookout]

If all you can do is to pick holes in posts then there's nothing down for you either . Don't expect me to dance to your tune.