hunched figure

[clifford]

tyler- I don't think that a trap door theory would help. As you say- all doors were bolted on the inside;I should have remembered that! However, it has been doubted that JB had used the window for exit-no marks etc. So, back to the drawing board

Also bear in mind Haughton the Bambers had a dog,and had someone tried to get throuh the window the dog would have heard and barked the house down.
It is known that JB disliked the dog, because he had it put down shortly after the murders, yet when the police gained entry it was the only living thing there.

Weren't there two dogs?

Yes Grahame, but one was kept outside, the other was a house dog.

I thought I read somewhere that Jeremy locked the outside dog in the shed?

Not sure about that Grahame, but the police were supposed to have put the house dog in a cupboard.

[haughton]

cliff, did the dog like Jeremy ?

[clifford]

cliff, did the dog like Jeremy ?

The house dog did,nt. Apparently it used to bite him.

[haughton]

cliff  just liked the way he tasted

[Roch]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

[ngb1066]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.



 

[tyler]

andrea- very true. But what will be revealed on 22 july next ? in the words of the Prophet "wait and see"

Haughton,is that the day the CCRC will reveal their decision........or is that just the date for any final submissions to be made from JBs team?

[Roch]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

Thanks.  We did get the two Italian professors' report.  I thought it a little mischeivious to link Woodcock's 'leaking blood' statement with the time of 7.34am.  Now the thing is, ironically, it was 7.34ish when they first saw her body.  And it makes no difference whether it was 7.34 or 8.00am or 8.10am.  Because none of those times, when worked backwards by way of 'not superior to two hours' ... has any affect on bamber becoming guilty for the crime.  I like the two Italians. 

[ngb1066]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

Thanks.  We did get the two Italian professors' report.  I thought it a little mischeivious to link Woodcock's 'leaking blood' statement with the time of 7.34am.  Now the thing is, ironically, it was 7.34ish when they first saw her body.  And it makes no difference whether it was 7.34 or 8.00am or 8.10am.  Because none of those times, when worked backwards by way of 'not superior to two hours' ... has any affect on bamber becoming guilty for the crime.  I like the two Italians.

Fair point - I had forgotten about that.

[jon]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

A question for you NGB , what do you think Rivilin think's of the case today , i have been critical of him in the past , i shouldn't have been as i never knew he worked for JB for nothing at one time , i apologize for this , do you think he feel's anything on the subject ? 

[mike tesko]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

----------------

I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...

[Roch]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

----------------

I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...

Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also.  Now imagine those two both posting on here?   

[mike tesko]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

----------------

I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...

Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also.  Now imagine those two both posting on here?   

-----------------

I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...

[Roch]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

----------------

I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...

Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also.  Now imagine those two both posting on here?   

-----------------

I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...

Do you still have his addy Mike?

[mike tesko]

jb states that when neville phoned him he said sheila has gone beserk, i cant see neville mistakinf someone else for sheila, especially a male.

Andrea   -  I agree with you.  Although the third party theory has some attractions I believe it does not tie in with the known evidence and it is does not take our understanding of the case further forward.  I believe that the theories along these lines advanced some time ago by others then assisting Jeremy Bamber did a lot of harm to his case at the time.

 

I think it was Giovanni Di Stefano who started that story?

Yes it was and it did Jeremy Bamber's case no good whatsoever.  I am not surprised that Jeremy got rid of him and took on a sensible legal team with their feet firmly on the ground and looking at hard evidence rather than wild speculation.

ngb / Mike / jackie...

Are you aware of any positive developments which came about during the GDS period?  It can't have been all bad.  He must have achieved something useful for Jeremy / the defense?

I suppose he raised the profile of the case which in itself had some value at a time when there was not the same level of public interest as there is now.  Apart from that however my own feeling is that Jeremy's case was harmed by the wild and unsupported theory advanced by GDS.  I will try to remember to ask Jeremy for his opinion on this when I next speak to him.  It would also be interesting to hear Mike Tesko's views on this.

----------------

I personally liked GDS, because as you rightly say, he did raise the profile of this miscarriage of justice case, and made everyone sit up and start to take notice. He truly believed in Jeremy's innocence, and but for the fact that some believe that he operated on the very fringes of the law, representing notorious defendants, and that he became known as "The Devils Advocate", I think he did as good a job as Jeremy's former solicitors had done, beforehand. I know that one or two of his approaches to defending Jeremy's case, appeared to be unorthodox, but in all the dealings I had with him, I was and would still have been prepared to carry out any research I could to back up and support those approaches, but as things turned out, Jeremy disposed of his services, and employed his current team, and that is that, there is no hard feelings, and like me, I feel that GDS still supports Jeremy's cause no matter what grounds Jeremy's case is fought on...

Along with emailing Shaw... I think we need to email the Devil's Advocate also.  Now imagine those two both posting on here?   

-----------------

I say, "go for it" - lets get everybody's opinion, I'm all for that...

Do you still have his addy Mike?

-----------------

GDS?

(1) [email protected]

David Shaw?

(2) [email protected]>