Alan George Dovey Statement - 20/03/2002

[grahameb]

Every time I read Mr.Dovey's statement I seethe   

In JM's 2002 statement she makes a HUGE point of saying that herself and Battersby were not expected at the bank,and yet Mr.Dovey explains how the Police phoned AHEAD and AFTER the visit.
And JM blatantly states that they were not accompanied by a police officer and yet how many times does Mr.Dovey say in his statement that a Police Officer was present!
Mugford was STILL lying in statements in 2002,how are we supposed to believe ANYTHING she has ever said!

As ngb might have said, "May I suggest Miss Mugford that your entire statement is all a tissue of lies?"

[Patti]

Every time I read Mr.Dovey's statement I seethe   

In JM's 2002 statement she makes a HUGE point of saying that herself and Battersby were not expected at the bank,and yet Mr.Dovey explains how the Police phoned AHEAD and AFTER the visit.
And JM blatantly states that they were not accompanied by a police officer and yet how many times does Mr.Dovey say in his statement that a Police Officer was present!
Mugford was STILL lying in statements in 2002,how are we supposed to believe ANYTHING she has ever said!

It makes you wonder if this statement was withheld from the defence at trial.....Had they had known this surely they would have used in order to discredit both girls statement that that went alone.....I ask why this was not used in the appeals......or was it?   Its obvious the police had some influence over this in some way....I suspect Jones was the one who accompanied them...I'd like to see his original statement.... 

[grahameb]

One way of "witholding" evidence is to minimise its importance to the court.

[Patti]

One way of "witholding" evidence is to minimise its importance to the court.

Its one hell of lie thought isn't it? I've just been reading SB's statement 2002 and she clearly states: I do not remember the police attending the bank with us, not giving us a lift.  As far as, I'm aware the police had no involvement during this process.  She remembered the time thought didn't she....

[tyler]

Re-read JM's 2002 statement. She is adamant that no police officer accompanied them! Funnily enough,as Dovey states,he wasn't asked to give evidence in court. I bet he wasn't!

[Patti]

Re-read JM's 2002 statement. She is adamant that no police officer accompanied them! Funnily enough,as Dovey states,he wasn't asked to give evidence in court. I bet he wasn't!

Not read any of her statements yet only snippets....I'm such a slow reader and it would take me hours to read it....them!

This is an odd question, but I wonder if any of the jury of 1986 has changed their minds and if they have; what can they do about it??? 

[Caroline R]

Re-read JM's 2002 statement. She is adamant that no police officer accompanied them! Funnily enough,as Dovey states,he wasn't asked to give evidence in court. I bet he wasn't!

I agree Tyler - I get hacked off when I think about it too - blatant lie from all three of them (Mugford, Battersby and Jones!!)

[lookout]

Talk about bribery and corruption. Hasn't ANYONE seen these statements at all.? Judge,jury,et al.?

[grahameb]

Re-read JM's 2002 statement. She is adamant that no police officer accompanied them! Funnily enough,as Dovey states,he wasn't asked to give evidence in court. I bet he wasn't!

But it is little inaccuraces like this that might have swayed the jury to bring in a not guilty verdict?

[Patti]

But it is little inaccuraces like this that might have swayed the jury to bring in a not guilty verdict?

I think you are right it would have discredited JM and her friends. It may have even discredited  the time of the call made from Jeremy to Julie. Because, if they can lie in one instance they can lie in another.   

[lookout]

But it is little inaccuraces like this that might have swayed the jury to bring in a not guilty verdict?

Then why the devil is everyone dragging their feet.? It's abysmal.!
I'm sure if the rellies read and digested just some of these statements,,along with the brilliant posts,,,surely they'd stop and think.? Wouldn't they.? Or are they completely void of emotion of any sort.?
Any reasonable person would look " at the other side of the story ",,if they had anything about them.
You give a person the benefit of the doubt before jumping in feet first like they did.

[grahameb]

Then why the devil is everyone dragging their feet.? It's abysmal.!
I'm sure if the rellies read and digested just some of these statements,,along with the brilliant posts,,,surely they'd stop and think.? Wouldn't they.? Or are they completely void of emotion of any sort.?
Any reasonable person would look " at the other side of the story ",,if they had anything about them.
You give a person the benefit of the doubt before jumping in feet first like they did.

I think that they are quite frankly fed up with hearing about the whole thing. What happens of course if you have believed the same thing for years, then you are very reluctant to let that belief go. Especially if any so called new evidence is going to completely turn your life upside down. I think the immediate family are genuinely afraid that Bamber will ever be released? As I have mentioned before my wife works in a retirement home and a long time ago one of the relatives was a resident there and she was genuinely afraid that Bamber was going to escape and come and kill her.

[Jane]

I think that they are quite frankly fed up with hearing about the whole thing. What happens of course if you have believed the same thing for years, then you are very reluctant to let that belief go. Especially if any so called new evidence is going to completely turn your life upside down. I think the immediate family are genuinely afraid that Bamber will ever be released? As I have mentioned before my wife works in a retirement home and a long time ago one of the relatives was a resident there and she was genuinely afraid that Bamber was going to escape and come and kill her.

I think that the visit to the bank MAY be the only opportunity there is of exposing Julie as a liar, because it's the ONLY situation we know of which CAN be proved. It really only needs the proof of one lie to suggest the possibility of others.

[lookout]

I think that they are quite frankly fed up with hearing about the whole thing. What happens of course if you have believed the same thing for years, then you are very reluctant to let that belief go. Especially if any so called new evidence is going to completely turn your life upside down. I think the immediate family are genuinely afraid that Bamber will ever be released? As I have mentioned before my wife works in a retirement home and a long time ago one of the relatives was a resident there and she was genuinely afraid that Bamber was going to escape and come and kill her.

Yes,,Grahame,,it's called being indoctrinated. I've just been reading about another poor soul who was imprisoned for 27 years for a murder he didn't commit,,his fellow prisoners gave him Hell,,and so he was moved a few times. The case dated back to 1973,,Stephen Downing and the " Bakewell Tart " murder,Derbyshire. He was framed. After 27 years,his conviction was quashed,,and he was awarded for his time as an MOJ,to which became a nightmare too when he suddenly gathered " loads of friends ".Poor man. Nevertheless,,in its day,it was this countrys' worst MOJ at the time.
I can see another one forthcoming.!

Downings former girlfriend had reckoned she'd taped him confessing to the murder.! Revenge again.

[Patti]

I think that the visit to the bank MAY be the only opportunity there is of exposing Julie as a liar, because it's the ONLY situation we know of which CAN be proved. It really only needs the proof of one lie to suggest the possibility of others.

Well said April.....