End of the road ?

[lookout]

CCRC have no intention of reviewing the case. Debate over ?

[Roch]

It sounds like he has written letters in a fit of pique. On one hand you cannot blame him. On the other hand, Newby's silence leaves a void that ends up being filled-in in this manner. It is Newby who should be occasionally and sparsely commenting, using the right language.

[ngb1066]

CCRC have no intention of reviewing the case. Debate over ?

Is there some news?  I have not seen anything.

[Cambridgecutie]

CCRC have no intention of reviewing the case. Debate over ?

It's a piece of propaganda by Jeremy Bamber.

He's trying to keep it in the news.

It's nothing to do with being frustrated.  But his story generally is dying a death, and Bamber knows it. To be honest the 2002 CoA was his last hurrah, and all subsequent appeals are just a vanity project for himself.   

So this is just Bamber trying to manipulate the media to get a bit of free publicity, and to connect with a handful of supporters, who love an excuse to accuse our institutions of corruption/incompetence/not caring,  or whatever.

The fact is the CCRC are bending over backwards to serve Bamber.  The reason why they are taking so long is because they are taking it seriously.

The CCRC may quote an average length of time that each appeal application  takes.  And Bamber may say why doesn't that timescale apply to him.  But those average timescales that the CCRC may quote don't apply to Bamber because he makes multiple submissions per submission.  And I don't think many if any other people do that.

The CCRC have to investigate every single piece of 'new evidence'. Each investigation into a piece of 'new evidence' will be a separate investigation.  And they'll almost certainly be investigated sequentially, rather than concurrently.

It will take months to review each piece of 'new evidence'

And let's say for the sake of argument, that it takes 3 months per piece of evidence, and he's submitted 12 pieces of 'new evidence', then that on its own will be 3 years.

However, the CCRC make it clear that they take into account all previously submitted material from all previously submitted appeals.  So everything that has gone before, from the failed 1989 appeal attempt, up until the present day, will have to be reviewed and crossed referenced with everything from Bamber s current submissions.

And that will take time.

So 12 pieces of evidence will take significantly longer than 3 years, maybe 4 or 5 years. 

I'm not sure how many pieces of 'new evidence' he has made in this latest appeal attempt, but it took him 10 years to collect the evidence and make his application.

He is fully aware that his application will take years. This public 'complaint' that he's made is nothing to do with the CCRC, and is not a complaint.

One clue as to Jeremy Bambers true motives lies in the quote that he has made in this latest press release..

In the Daily Mirror...

Bamber said the independent body had been sent new evidence which is “100% proof” he did not murder his family in 1985.

So the press release comes with the usual Bamber hyperbole.  The absolute proof of innocence and the guaranteed release from prison that it will immediately demand. Blah blah blah, yawn, yawn, yawn.

Bamber is not frustrated, and he knows the processes as well as anyone, including timescales for investigations.  This is just a calculated press release to keep him in the news.

[Roch]

Is there some news?  I have not seen anything.

No news, just Mirror and Mail articles based on letter communication between JB and A N Other.

[Roch]

It's a piece of propaganda by Jeremy Bamber.

He's trying to keep it in the news.

It's nothing to do with being frustrated.  But his story generally is dying a death, and Bamber knows it. To be honest the 2002 CoA was his last hurrah, and all subsequent appeals are just a vanity project for himself.   

So this is just Bamber trying to manipulate the media to get a bit of free publicity, and to connect with a handful of supporters, who love an excuse to accuse our institutions of corruption/incompetence/not caring,  or whatever.

The fact is the CCRC are bending over backwards to serve Bamber.  The reason why they are taking so long is because they are taking it seriously.

The CCRC may quote an average length of time that each appeal application  takes.  And Bamber may say why doesn't that timescale apply to him.  But those average timescales that the CCRC may quote don't apply to Bamber because he makes multiple submissions per submission.  And I don't think many if any other people do that.

The CCRC have to investigate every single piece of 'new evidence'. Each investigation into a piece of 'new evidence' will be a separate investigation.  And they'll almost certainly be investigated sequentially, rather than concurrently.

It will take months to review each piece of 'new evidence'

And let's say for the sake of argument, that it takes 3 months per piece of evidence, and he's submitted 12 pieces of 'new evidence', then that on its own will be 3 years.

However, the CCRC make it clear that they take into account all previously submitted material from all previously submitted appeals.  So everything that has gone before, from the failed 1989 appeal attempt, up until the present day, will have to be reviewed and crossed referenced with everything from Bamber s current submissions.

And that will take time.

So 12 pieces of evidence will take significantly longer than 3 years, maybe 4 or 5 years. 

I'm not sure how many pieces of 'new evidence' he has made in this latest appeal attempt, but it took him 10 years to collect the evidence and make his application.

He is fully aware that his application will take years. This public 'complaint' that he's made is nothing to do with the CCRC, and is not a complaint.

One clue as to Jeremy Bambers true motives lies in the quote that he has made in this latest press release..

In the Daily Mirror...

Bamber said the independent body had been sent new evidence which is “100% proof” he did not murder his family in 1985.

So the press release comes with the usual Bamber hyperbole.  The absolute proof of innocence and the guaranteed release from prison that it will immediately demand. Blah blah blah, yawn, yawn, yawn.

Bamber is not frustrated, and he knows the processes as well as anyone, including timescales for investigations.  This is just a calculated press release to keep him in the news.

The ballistics and burns reports from a decade ago haven't even been challenged. Scientifically, they still stand.

In other words, there are some cases where you can deliberately place blood in to a sound moderator and that evidence can simply be regarded as sound, even when science and expertise makes a mockery of it.

That's hardly a ringing endorsement of CCRC due diligence.

[Zoso]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/murderer-jeremy-bamber-claims-investigators-27512631

https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/white-house-farm-murderer-jeremy-7349792

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11025861/White-House-Farm-killer-Jeremy-Bamber-claims-100-proof-did-not-murder-family.html

[lookout]

It sounds like he has written letters in a fit of pique. On one hand you cannot blame him. On the other hand, Newby's silence leaves a void that ends up being filled-in in this manner. It is Newby who should be occasionally and sparsely commenting, using the right language.

I think I'd be a tad more than " in a fit of pique " being that nobody's either sounded JB out or even spoken up for him. I'd be more than cracking the whip at this stage. It's frustrating when your hands are tied as in JB's case.

[Jane]

I think I'd be a tad more than " in a fit of pique " being that nobody's either sounded JB out or even spoken up for him. I'd be more than cracking the whip at this stage. It's frustrating when your hands are tied as in JB's case.

Lookout, from what he says regarding his treatment by case managers "over the last 20 years", it sounds very much like, that at some point, they stopped believing in his innocence.

[Roch]

Lookout, from what he says regarding his treatment by case managers "over the last 20 years", it sounds very much like, that at some point, they stopped believing in his innocence.

They should be evidence driven, not belief driven. And they should have an understanding of the indicators of MOJs. Their role shouldn't be to take police answers at face value. Their role should be to probe and challenge police answers. Their role should be facilitating further exploration.

I'm going to be frank here - guilters hide behind an ineffective CCRC. A CCRC that fails to properly hold other agencies to account and fails to do enough digging, effectively acts as a protective shield to guilters, who would otherwise rely only upon their own pretty poor arguments. 

[Jane]

They should be evidence driven, not belief driven. And they should have an understanding of the indicators of MOJs. Their role shouldn't be to take police answers at face value. Their role should be to probe and challenge police answers. Their role should be facilitating further exploration.

I'm going to be frank here - guilters hide behind an ineffective CCRC. A CCRC that fails to properly hold other agencies to account and fails to do enough digging, effectively acts as a protective shield to guilters, who would otherwise rely only upon their own pretty poor arguments.

Well Roch, as one of those you're accusing of "hiding", I'm going to suggest that for some of those on the 'other' side, there's more interest in showing how ineffective is the CCRC than JB being innocent. That he's not innocent in the strictest terms appears secondary.

[Adam]

Bamber's submission had a lot points. If he found out things were not going well, he may add more points. Hoping something works.  Which will take more time.

These articles are properganda statement updates for supporters.

[Roch]

Bamber's submission had a lot points. If he found out things were not going well, he may add more points. Hoping something works.  Which will take more time.

These articles are properganda statement updates for supporters.

This view doesn't really tie in with Mark Newby's statement from March 2021. The statement was fairly clear in what it was claiming. Bamber is merely repeating sentiments that tie in with Newby's assessment of the case.

(Regarding his innocence and regarding wrongdoing on the part of police).

[lookout]

Nobody's going to admit defeat are they ?  CCRC are bloody spineless cowards.

[Steve_uk]

It's a piece of propaganda by Jeremy Bamber.

He's trying to keep it in the news.

It's nothing to do with being frustrated.  But his story generally is dying a death, and Bamber knows it. To be honest the 2002 CoA was his last hurrah, and all subsequent appeals are just a vanity project for himself.   

So this is just Bamber trying to manipulate the media to get a bit of free publicity, and to connect with a handful of supporters, who love an excuse to accuse our institutions of corruption/incompetence/not caring,  or whatever.

The fact is the CCRC are bending over backwards to serve Bamber.  The reason why they are taking so long is because they are taking it seriously.

The CCRC may quote an average length of time that each appeal application  takes.  And Bamber may say why doesn't that timescale apply to him.  But those average timescales that the CCRC may quote don't apply to Bamber because he makes multiple submissions per submission.  And I don't think many if any other people do that.

The CCRC have to investigate every single piece of 'new evidence'. Each investigation into a piece of 'new evidence' will be a separate investigation.  And they'll almost certainly be investigated sequentially, rather than concurrently.

It will take months to review each piece of 'new evidence'

And let's say for the sake of argument, that it takes 3 months per piece of evidence, and he's submitted 12 pieces of 'new evidence', then that on its own will be 3 years.

However, the CCRC make it clear that they take into account all previously submitted material from all previously submitted appeals.  So everything that has gone before, from the failed 1989 appeal attempt, up until the present day, will have to be reviewed and crossed referenced with everything from Bamber s current submissions.

And that will take time.

So 12 pieces of evidence will take significantly longer than 3 years, maybe 4 or 5 years. 

I'm not sure how many pieces of 'new evidence' he has made in this latest appeal attempt, but it took him 10 years to collect the evidence and make his application.

He is fully aware that his application will take years. This public 'complaint' that he's made is nothing to do with the CCRC, and is not a complaint.

One clue as to Jeremy Bambers true motives lies in the quote that he has made in this latest press release..

In the Daily Mirror...

Bamber said the independent body had been sent new evidence which is “100% proof” he did not murder his family in 1985.

So the press release comes with the usual Bamber hyperbole.  The absolute proof of innocence and the guaranteed release from prison that it will immediately demand. Blah blah blah, yawn, yawn, yawn.

Bamber is not frustrated, and he knows the processes as well as anyone, including timescales for investigations.  This is just a calculated press release to keep him in the news.

Are we allowed to know the substance of this 100% proof?