Is this an honest forum?

[Jackiepreece]

After everything I have read in this case and other similar cases I woul love to know what percentage of honest policeman are in the force

I really do not believe if Jeremy has been set up that the people involved should not get exactly the same sentence Jeremy has done

They give drug dealers 30 years and this is far worse

I am surprised Jeremy has never committed suicide after Mike described full Sutton and he only served a fraction of Jeremys 26 years

With this 25 year ruling coming up it wouldn't surprise me now if they let him out  hoping this will go away


On another note Prescott was on tv talking about phone hacking and said

'the shouldn't tell lies'
This is coming from the fat ugliest Mp in parliament who cheated on his wife  uck

[Enigma]

You talk about the police and the extended Bamber family being prosicuted and what sentences they should get as if Bamber was about to be freed!

My understanding is that Bamber has had two failed appeals already. The CCRC have refused a third appeal. Bamber's lawyers have appealled against this decision and that the result of this appeal is due in September.
(I think that is all correct?)

Seeing as he has recently failed to get a third appeal isn't it very unlikely an appeal against that decision will overturn it?

Even if he does get a third appeal isn't that just as likely to fail just as the first two did? And even if successful aren't they likely to just order a new trial? And even if he gets a new trial isn't he just as likely to be found guilty as he was originally?

I hope my understanding is correct. If not please tell me.

Isn't it a huge leap of faith to even discuss what prosecutions may occur if Bamber somehow manages to get through all that and be freed?

I have one more important question please; should the appeal fail in September what possible steps does Bamber then have?

 

[Roch]

  I did indirectly insinuate that PB was 'thick as mince'.  So fair do's.  Apologies for that.

No worries. I will cut out the sarcasm then. But if you think I am being stupid please say so and of course why.
So Rochford you have been a little vague about what you think happened with the Police armed raid; you seem to have implied that the police shot Sheila. Is that what you believe?



Sorry edited in error. No words have been changed. Grahame

Yes I am vague about it.  God knows what went on in that farmhouse, prior to the raid, during the raid and in the aftermath of the building being declared 'thoroughly searched'.  I don't feel comfortable about the weights of some bullets and the sizes of some entry wounds, as per the info that Mike Tesko has posted on here.  I'm pretty sure something occurred between Sheila and the Firearms team.  But I don't know exactly what.  I'm minded to regard Shaw as not necessarily wrong, yet unofficially sourced.  I think it's important to note than Bamber, Tesko and Shaw were / are not in full agreement... but that their beliefs converge considerably.  I don't see anything in the form of denials from ex police officers who have been publicly named.   

Anyway, the show goes on I suppose.

[ngb1066]

You talk about the police and the extended Bamber family being prosicuted and what sentences they should get as if Bamber was about to be freed!

My understanding is that Bamber has had two failed appeals already. The CCRC have refused a third appeal. Bamber's lawyers have appealled against this decision and that the result of this appeal is due in September.
(I think that is all correct?)

Seeing as he has recently failed to get a third appeal isn't it very unlikely an appeal against that decision will overturn it?

Even if he does get a third appeal isn't that just as likely to fail just as the first two did? And even if successful aren't they likely to just order a new trial? And even if he gets a new trial isn't he just as likely to be found guilty as he was originally?

I hope my understanding is correct. If not please tell me.

Isn't it a huge leap of faith to even discuss what prosecutions may occur if Bamber somehow manages to get through all that and be freed?

I have one more important question please; should the appeal fail in September what possible steps does Bamber then have?

 

P B  - Your questions have been dealt with in earlier posts but I accept that there are now so many posts on the forum that it is difficult to search for answers quickly.  I will therefore do my best to answer your questions.

1. It is correct that Jeremy Bamber has already had two appeals heard by the Court of Appeal.  It is not strictly true that the CCRC have "refused a third appeal".  They made a provisional decision earlier this year that they were not minded to refer the case to the Court of Appeal for a further appeal, and gave reasons for that provisional decision.  The CCRC have given Jeremy Bamber time (now extended to September) to make further submissions, and when the CCRC have received those they will make a final decision whether or not to refer the case back to the Court of Appeal.  There is further evidence which has been obtained by Jeremy Bamber's team and some additional scientific analysis to be undertaken and this will all form part of the final submissions to be made on behalf of Jeremy Bamber in September.  It is therefore not possible to say at this stage how likely it is that the CCRC will refer the case to the Court of Appeal.

2.  If the case is referred to the Court of Appeal by the CCRC it will be upon the basis of new evidence not available at the original trial or at the previous two appeals.  The fact that those two appeals were not successful therefore will not have any bearing upon a third appeal.  The CCRC will only refer a case where they believe there are reasonable grounds for believing that the Court of Appeal will overturn the convictions.

3. If the case is referred to the Court of Appeal and the appeal is allowed the Court of Appeal can either order a retrial or can direct that verdicts of not guilty are entered without a retrial.  In this case if the appeal is successful a retrial is highly unlikely.  The reasons are that the passage of time makes it harder for witnesses to recall events, a number of witnesses have died and some of the key evidence has been destroyed. In the unlikely event of a retrial being ordered by the Court of Appeal, the prosecution case would be significantly weaker than it was at the original trial because of the new evidence now available.

4. If the CCRC decide not to refer the case to the Court of Appeal Jeremy Bamber and his team will continue in their efforts to obtain fresh evidence.  Action to challenge the withholding of evidence under PII and also to challenge the refusal to comply with Freedom of Information Act requests will continue.  There is no limit to the number of times a convicted person can make an application to the CCRC.  It is also possible to bypass the CCRC in the event that a particularly powerful piece of evidence is discovered which fundamentally undermines the prosecution case.

I hope this answers your questions.

 

[clifford]

Oh yes, we've heard a lot about the "integrity" of newspapers these days haven't we?

So you're saying Bamber didn't try and sell explicit photos of Sheila to The Sun?
(So The Sun lied, Mugford lied, the extended family lied, the police lied, the courts didn't give him a fair trial, the appeal courts were biased! The list grows by the day on this forum!)

Nah, PB the papers never lie do they.
Been reading the papers lately, how many more cops are going to resign.
Are you trying to say the cops are not corrupt. This is the tip of an iceberg.
The cops can't get away with it now, but in 1985 they operated with imputunity.
Are you aware the police altered expert evidence without the knowlege of the said expert.
Stay alert PB I will be posting soon, and after you wipe the egg off your face you can answer.

You will be posting soon? Oh the anticiption, I can hardley wait.
No I am not aware the police altered expert evidence and unless you explain what you're refferring to it's a pointless question.
So The Sun lied about Jeremy selling Sheilas photos then?
Perhaps you can explain how Sheila battered her 6ft4" farmer father and overpowered him in the kitchen without sustaining a scratch or a bruise. How she (supposedly) shot to death 5 people without a splatter or spot of blood on her or even breaking a finger nail?
Answer any of these questions in detail if you can? Then we can move on to shooting herself in the neck TWICE with a rifle way to long to fire those shots. Then of course there is the magical silencer.
If we carry on we can cover how Mugford must have lied, the police must have lied and conspired (and altered evidence!), how Bamber had an unfail trial, how the extended family lied and conspired and altered evidence and how the appeal courts were just so wrong!
If Bamber is innocent he must be the one of the unluckiest people on earth.
Please do post soon as I have no doubt you will explain everything!

PB in my opinion you know nothing of this case. You are blithering away without posting any facts.
I was not surprised you knew nothing of the experts evidence.
To give you a taster. the expert was not aware that EP had altered the evidence number of the moderator, without her knowledge. [It was pencilled in] I think by DS Jones.
DB states, I removed the moderator, guns and ammo. I took them to Oak farm & left them there.
Later.
The guns travelled in Ann's car, and were unloaded by her in my absence. I do not know where they were stored
17/12/05. I took the items to Ann Eatons, and left them there.
David Boutflour said after the last appeal " No one Wins". Oh yes they did to the tune of half a million quid.
Can I suggest that you acquaint yourself with the facts before posting again, you never know you may learn something.
You keep asking us for answers, yet you bring nothing to the forum other than your unstabuated claims.

[joolz1975]

Hi

Im going to answer the original question as i cant be bother to read the whole thread!

I think this is a very honest forum! people have their own opinions which is what its all about but i dont think there are any posters that are 'dishonest' the original trouble causer comes along that tries to stir things but not very often!

The people for and against are generally very tolerent of each other although things do occasionally get a little heated!!

Im on the fence sort of leaning towards Bamber been guilty so im not as  passionate as some people as i dont really have a strong enough opinion either way!

[Enigma]

Oh yes, we've heard a lot about the "integrity" of newspapers these days haven't we?

So you're saying Bamber didn't try and sell explicit photos of Sheila to The Sun?
(So The Sun lied, Mugford lied, the extended family lied, the police lied, the courts didn't give him a fair trial, the appeal courts were biased! The list grows by the day on this forum!)

Nah, PB the papers never lie do they.
Been reading the papers lately, how many more cops are going to resign.
Are you trying to say the cops are not corrupt. This is the tip of an iceberg.
The cops can't get away with it now, but in 1985 they operated with imputunity.
Are you aware the police altered expert evidence without the knowlege of the said expert.
Stay alert PB I will be posting soon, and after you wipe the egg off your face you can answer.

You will be posting soon? Oh the anticiption, I can hardley wait.
No I am not aware the police altered expert evidence and unless you explain what you're refferring to it's a pointless question.
So The Sun lied about Jeremy selling Sheilas photos then?
Perhaps you can explain how Sheila battered her 6ft4" farmer father and overpowered him in the kitchen without sustaining a scratch or a bruise. How she (supposedly) shot to death 5 people without a splatter or spot of blood on her or even breaking a finger nail?
Answer any of these questions in detail if you can? Then we can move on to shooting herself in the neck TWICE with a rifle way to long to fire those shots. Then of course there is the magical silencer.
If we carry on we can cover how Mugford must have lied, the police must have lied and conspired (and altered evidence!), how Bamber had an unfail trial, how the extended family lied and conspired and altered evidence and how the appeal courts were just so wrong!
If Bamber is innocent he must be the one of the unluckiest people on earth.
Please do post soon as I have no doubt you will explain everything!

PB in my opinion you know nothing of this case. You are blithering away without posting any facts.
I was not surprised you knew nothing of the experts evidence.
To give you a taster. the expert was not aware that EP had altered the evidence number of the moderator, without her knowledge. [It was pencilled in] I think by DS Jones.
DB states, I removed the moderator, guns and ammo. I took them to Oak farm & left them there.
Later.
The guns travelled in Ann's car, and were unloaded by her in my absence. I do not know where they were stored
17/12/05. I took the items to Ann Eatons, and left them there.
David Boutflour said after the last appeal " No one Wins". Oh yes they did to the tune of half a million quid.
Can I suggest that you acquaint yourself with the facts before posting again, you never know you may learn something.
You keep asking us for answers, yet you bring nothing to the forum other than your unstabuated claims.

I will try not to be too sarcastic here!
I feel I have 'acquaint'ed myself with the main facts of this case and I hereby challenge you to state one 'unstabuated' claim I have made?
You said that you were going to post soon and it would be so cutting and profound I would be scraping egg off my face. You talk about 'the expert' but don't even say who he/she is or what their expertise is!
So an evidence number was changed! And that is telling and important because .......
I have just checked in the mirror and still no egg. Perhaps a further taster is in order? 

[clifford]

Oh yes, we've heard a lot about the "integrity" of newspapers these days haven't we?

So you're saying Bamber didn't try and sell explicit photos of Sheila to The Sun?
(So The Sun lied, Mugford lied, the extended family lied, the police lied, the courts didn't give him a fair trial, the appeal courts were biased! The list grows by the day on this forum!)

Nah, PB the papers never lie do they.
Been reading the papers lately, how many more cops are going to resign.
Are you trying to say the cops are not corrupt. This is the tip of an iceberg.
The cops can't get away with it now, but in 1985 they operated with imputunity.
Are you aware the police altered expert evidence without the knowlege of the said expert.
Stay alert PB I will be posting soon, and after you wipe the egg off your face you can answer.

You will be posting soon? Oh the anticiption, I can hardley wait.
No I am not aware the police altered expert evidence and unless you explain what you're refferring to it's a pointless question.
So The Sun lied about Jeremy selling Sheilas photos then?
Perhaps you can explain how Sheila battered her 6ft4" farmer father and overpowered him in the kitchen without sustaining a scratch or a bruise. How she (supposedly) shot to death 5 people without a splatter or spot of blood on her or even breaking a finger nail?
Answer any of these questions in detail if you can? Then we can move on to shooting herself in the neck TWICE with a rifle way to long to fire those shots. Then of course there is the magical silencer.
If we carry on we can cover how Mugford must have lied, the police must have lied and conspired (and altered evidence!), how Bamber had an unfail trial, how the extended family lied and conspired and altered evidence and how the appeal courts were just so wrong!
If Bamber is innocent he must be the one of the unluckiest people on earth.
Please do post soon as I have no doubt you will explain everything!

PB in my opinion you know nothing of this case. You are blithering away without posting any facts.
I was not surprised you knew nothing of the experts evidence.
To give you a taster. the expert was not aware that EP had altered the evidence number of the moderator, without her knowledge. [It was pencilled in] I think by DS Jones.
DB states, I removed the moderator, guns and ammo. I took them to Oak farm & left them there.
Later.
The guns travelled in Ann's car, and were unloaded by her in my absence. I do not know where they were stored
17/12/05. I took the items to Ann Eatons, and left them there.
David Boutflour said after the last appeal " No one Wins". Oh yes they did to the tune of half a million quid.
Can I suggest that you acquaint yourself with the facts before posting again, you never know you may learn something.
You keep asking us for answers, yet you bring nothing to the forum other than your unstabuated claims.

I will try not to be too sarcastic here!
I feel I have 'acquaint'ed myself with the main facts of this case and I hereby challenge you to state one 'unstabuated' claim I have made?
You said that you were going to post soon and it would be so cutting and profound I would be scraping egg off my face. You talk about 'the expert' but don't even say who he/she is or what their expertise is!
So an evidence number was changed! And that is telling and important because .......
I have just checked in the mirror and still no egg. Perhaps a further taster is in order?

Still no facts then PB. Ramble on.Still relying on the expertise of others.
You know nothing, and going gut instinct.
I will not say any more to you . Look up the facts, and don't be lazy

[Alias]

for poor bambi :

can you explain why the blood coming from sheilas neck wounds ( she didnt shoot herself twice in the head as you seemed to think) is still wet ?

why is there no discolouration of her skin, the official version states she had been dead at least 7 hrs, surely there would be some sign of discolouration after 7 hrs ?


the posts i refer to wich you said she shot herslef in the head are POLL do you think bamber is guilty, you posted feb 28th at 10.33 and again you state again she was shot in the head twice at feb28th at 10.47 that was on the common sense argument. just so theres no confusion !!

There should also have been signs of rigor mortis after seven (minimum, rather eight) hours - no matter what (temperatures and other factors); In humans it sets in after about 3 hours, reaches maximum stiffness after 12 hours, and gradually dissipates until approximately 72 hours (3 days) after death.
Yet, in the photos taken at about 10:am, it is clear that her arm and hand were moved without any sign of resistance.

[andrea]

correct abs, did the dr state they could have died anytime the previous night, so did he mean before midnight on the 6th august?

[Alias]

correct abs, did the dr state they could have died anytime the previous night, so did he mean before midnight on the 6th august?

I don't know, but that wouldn't correspond with Nevill´s alleged phonecall to Jeremy, would it?

Your sig line is too funny! I'll let you know if I see a youngish Oliver Reed lookalike! If I don't decide to nick him first, that is.

[andrea]

you cant nick him abs!!!! its not fair !!!



anyway back to the case, the dr never established time of death, or if he did it hasnt been disclosed because it wouldnt tally with the official line.


my earlier post im sure i read somewhere thats what the dr said, i could be mistaken.

but isnt it a basic of forensic investigation, to establish time of death.

[Alias]

you cant nick him abs!!!! its not fair !!!



anyway back to the case, the dr never established time of death, or if he did it hasnt been disclosed because it wouldnt tally with the official line.


my earlier post im sure i read somewhere thats what the dr said, i could be mistaken.

but isnt it a basic of forensic investigation, to establish time of death.

Of course it is. Those bozos made so many mistakes that it screams to high heaven!

Another thing that has been nagging me is the fact that the EP BURNED evidence! Some claim that it was at the request of Jeremy, but I am not buying that!
Have any of you ever heard of police burning evidence at a crime scene (on the grounds)?! It is so effing crazy. They didn´t do it for Jeremy! They did it to cover their butts and all their horrible mistakes, not for Jeremy, give me a break!

[grahameb]

you cant nick him abs!!!! its not fair !!!



anyway back to the case, the dr never established time of death, or if he did it hasnt been disclosed because it wouldnt tally with the official line.


my earlier post im sure i read somewhere thats what the dr said, i could be mistaken.

but isnt it a basic of forensic investigation, to establish time of death.

My stepfather was in the Metropolitan police back in the 40's when coppers were coppers, ello ello ello and whats goin on ere then and evenin all and the like. He dealt with many dead bodies in his time and he said that the abdomen was the last thing to cool down and that he could give a good estimate as to the time of death by putting his hand on the abdomen.

[Enigma]

Oh yes, we've heard a lot about the "integrity" of newspapers these days haven't we?

So you're saying Bamber didn't try and sell explicit photos of Sheila to The Sun?
(So The Sun lied, Mugford lied, the extended family lied, the police lied, the courts didn't give him a fair trial, the appeal courts were biased! The list grows by the day on this forum!)

Nah, PB the papers never lie do they.
Been reading the papers lately, how many more cops are going to resign.
Are you trying to say the cops are not corrupt. This is the tip of an iceberg.
The cops can't get away with it now, but in 1985 they operated with imputunity.
Are you aware the police altered expert evidence without the knowlege of the said expert.
Stay alert PB I will be posting soon, and after you wipe the egg off your face you can answer.

You will be posting soon? Oh the anticiption, I can hardley wait.
No I am not aware the police altered expert evidence and unless you explain what you're refferring to it's a pointless question.
So The Sun lied about Jeremy selling Sheilas photos then?
Perhaps you can explain how Sheila battered her 6ft4" farmer father and overpowered him in the kitchen without sustaining a scratch or a bruise. How she (supposedly) shot to death 5 people without a splatter or spot of blood on her or even breaking a finger nail?
Answer any of these questions in detail if you can? Then we can move on to shooting herself in the neck TWICE with a rifle way to long to fire those shots. Then of course there is the magical silencer.
If we carry on we can cover how Mugford must have lied, the police must have lied and conspired (and altered evidence!), how Bamber had an unfail trial, how the extended family lied and conspired and altered evidence and how the appeal courts were just so wrong!
If Bamber is innocent he must be the one of the unluckiest people on earth.
Please do post soon as I have no doubt you will explain everything!

PB in my opinion you know nothing of this case. You are blithering away without posting any facts.
I was not surprised you knew nothing of the experts evidence.
To give you a taster. the expert was not aware that EP had altered the evidence number of the moderator, without her knowledge. [It was pencilled in] I think by DS Jones.
DB states, I removed the moderator, guns and ammo. I took them to Oak farm & left them there.
Later.
The guns travelled in Ann's car, and were unloaded by her in my absence. I do not know where they were stored
17/12/05. I took the items to Ann Eatons, and left them there.
David Boutflour said after the last appeal " No one Wins". Oh yes they did to the tune of half a million quid.
Can I suggest that you acquaint yourself with the facts before posting again, you never know you may learn something.
You keep asking us for answers, yet you bring nothing to the forum other than your unstabuated claims.

I will try not to be too sarcastic here!
I feel I have 'acquaint'ed myself with the main facts of this case and I hereby challenge you to state one 'unstabuated' claim I have made?
You said that you were going to post soon and it would be so cutting and profound I would be scraping egg off my face. You talk about 'the expert' but don't even say who he/she is or what their expertise is!
So an evidence number was changed! And that is telling and important because .......
I have just checked in the mirror and still no egg. Perhaps a further taster is in order?

Still no facts then PB. Ramble on.Still relying on the expertise of others.
You know nothing, and going gut instinct.
I will not say any more to you . Look up the facts, and don't be lazy

What facts do you want? Bamber is guilty ..... that is a fact.
Do you really think anything you have said is clear and concise and could possibly influence anyone's opinion? And I had such high hopes after you built up your future postings so much.
You said nothing that means anything and now you're taking your ball home and 'don't wanna play no more'. Oh well .... c'est la vie.