Audio interviews with Carol Ann Lee.

[ngb1066]

It occurs to me that if the CT feel the need to 'doctor' photos -and maybe anything else?- does it not suggest that they're not entirely convinced their 'boy' is innocent?

I do not believe the CT have ever "doctored" photographs and they certainly do believe in JB's innocence.  To be clear I am not a member of the CT and never have been. 

[ngb1066]

Doctoring photos is a risky affair and I'm not entirely sure but I'd guess completely illegal.( in terms of submitting evidence to a legal body) not a forum)

I can't see Jeremy Bamber sanctioning doing this

Even if you'd argue out of desperation. Jeremy's not stupid and he would know it would bite him on the arse.

I agree ILB.

[Jane]

I do not believe the CT have ever "doctored" photographs and they certainly do believe in JB's innocence.  To be clear I am not a member of the CT and never have been.

Do you believe there to be photos which have been "doctored"?

[ngb1066]

Do you believe there to be photos which have been "doctored"?

I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.

[Adam]

I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.

The photo of Sheila's neck blood. Where it is bright red.

CAL says that was doctored by the CT. It does look a lot different to the photo on page 2. 

[ILB]

The photo of Sheila's neck blood. Where it is bright red.

CAL says that was doctored by the CT. It does look a lot different to the photo on page 2.

Without a solid admission it's a baseless accusation

[David1819]

Without a solid admission it's a baseless accusation

Its not the first time CAL has made a baseless claim.

[Jane]

Doctoring photos is a risky affair and I'm not entirely sure but I'd guess completely illegal.( in terms of submitting evidence to a legal body) not a forum)

I can't see Jeremy Bamber sanctioning doing this

Even if you'd argue out of desperation. Jeremy's not stupid and he would know it would bite him on the arse.

All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................

[Roch]

All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................

CCRC are not exactly well thought of Jane. They don't come with a glowing rep for helping to overturn wrongful convictions.

[ILB]

All things being equal, I'd agree. However, having had submissions turned down?.......................

He's had a provisional knockback in 2011 and 2012 full one.

In 2001 he got a referral.

CCRC wise

[Jane]

I have no reason to suppose any have been doctored but if you want to draw my attention to any specific ones I will have a look.

Mike and Di Stephano are two who come immediately to mind. As for the CT, I wouldn't expect them to do their own re-presentation.

[ILB]

CCRC are not exactly well thought of Jane. They don't come with a glowing rep for helping to overturn wrongful convictions.

It's just swamped.

What can they do except throw more money at it?

An alternative remedy?

[Zoso]

It's just swamped.

What can they do except throw more money at it?

An alternative remedy?

That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.

[ILB]

That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.

I accept you think him gulity. That's fair enough. I'm not completely 100 per cent sure. He maintains innocence and has done for almost forty years. It's his right to go to the ccrc. It's a right we would all have if in the same situation.

However Bambers just one person. Surely the bigger picture is that as a blank chequebook approach which it is. Money shouldn't be an issue. The CCRC is government funded.

It was Adam I believe who brought up CCRC staff may have to have a nesecary skill set. On reflection I believe he may be correct. It's definitely probably a manpower shortage than funding anyway.

[ILB]

That's because people like Bamber clog up the system, while REAL miscarriages of justice end up waiting longer than need be.

It's the high volume as well.

Bambers case Has clearly take time in all his submissions, his first ccrc application took four years, his second was that submitted in 2005? It took it 2011 to get provisionally refused. His latest submissions are come next March 4 years of age since they were submitted.

Surely for the vast majority of cases, " those clogging up the system " " cases of no merit " would be able to be thrown out much earlier?

It must be a case of manpower.