[quoteAnd in your opinion what aspect/s of the Bamber case am I ignorant about?
Excuse me for accepting that the jury and so many appeal court judges and everyone left alive related to Bamber know better than Bamber's Fan Club!
I probably know this case as well as anyone on here and the more I know, the more I know he is guilty! Literally just as the judges said!
]
Poor Bambi, you should really be referred back to the 'Foyer' section of the forum. You are not debating any attachments, many of which may include information that has come to light since the 2002 appeal. This is depsite repeated requests for you to debate on a deeper level. All you are currently doing is trolling. If you continue to troll then I'm not sure there's much point in having you on this forum?
There's only so many times that other posters can ask you to participate properly on forum so that arguments are progressed. That's not the same thing as trolling. You will only get so much rope on here.
[/quote]
I have openly debated specifics of the case with Grahame in a respectful way even though I know I will get all the supporter comments for Grahame and against me. I think Grahame would accept it was a decent debate on case specifics.
Nearly every comment I make is attacked on sight by the usual suspects of which you are one. I have made quite a few posts on evidence threads. I have looked at the logs thread but quite frankly I can't read them ... maybe I need Specsavers!
ChoCho and Jackie especially are like Rottweillers with a bone whatever I say on a post .... so exactly what do you expect?
The logs: Yes they do show Police incompetance; I think they made many mistakes but that is all; mistakes not Police conspiracy. The City Police investigated the Essex Police and accepted the investigation stank but they and the appeal court judges did not consider this would have effected the original trial verdict; I agree with that!
Now what do you want to discuss in detail?
Or boot me off the forum if you wish.
