Re: Jeremy Bamber cross examination Anthony Arlidge QC

[ILB]

Assume Wilkinson or someone else from EP testified about the Sea Wall.

Arlidge could have got Bamber to agree it was a remote cycle friendly route which he knew well.

It seemed pretty mild for a cross examination in fairness

At points though it seems like Arlidge had Bamber flusted

I get the impression the judge was skeptical of Bamber despite being neutral. Asking for clarification on certain answers

[ILB]

Seems Bamber complained the relatives were  staring at him and putting him off. Rivlin requested they leave and the judge granted the request

[David1819]

It seemed pretty mild for a cross examination in fairness

I haven't had time to read it all.

But I get the impression that he doesn't believe the defendant is guilty. And is just doing his job.

Do you know whereabouts he says "That's for you to establish"?

[ILB]

I haven't had time to read it all.

But I get the impression that he doesn't believe the defendant is guilty. And is just doing his job.

Do you know whereabouts he says "That's for you to establish"?

I personally think it's been made to make Bamber look arragant by authors and journalists. It may have been a tetchy reply but I think it's been twisted. He also added on the end and " that is untrue "

Up to that point the cross examination had been particular benign. Prior to Jeremy making the comment Arlidge had outly accused him of being untruthful which is why I believe Jeremy delivered the comment he did

The books have people believe he more or less sat there cackling manically saying " that's what you have got to establish "

[Steve_uk]

"But I didn't know what was going to happen, did I.."

"You are not telling the truth about it, are you?"

"I am telling.."

"That you didn't do it.."

"That is what you have got to try and establish and that is not right."

It's a devastating admission that Arlidge's attacks on Jeremy's association with the murder weapon are hitting home. He attempts to deflect blame from himself and place it on his sister. He's also questioning the Prosecution strategy and tacitly acknowledging its effectiveness.

[ILB]

"But I didn't know what was going to happen, did I.."

"You are not telling the truth about it, are you?"

"I am telling.."

"That you didn't do it.."

"That is what you have got to try and establish and that is not right."

It's a devastating admission that Arlidge's attacks on Jeremy's association with the murder weapon are hitting home. He attempts to deflect blame from himself and place it on his sister. He's also questioning the Prosecution strategy and tacitly acknowledging its effectiveness.

Disagree Steve, having been in a witness box on a few occasions. Tempers will flare, sarcastic comments will surface, disdainful questions from prosecuting counsel, the defendant and witnesses be crown or defence get flustered. As did Julie did by Rivlin

It's an old saying but I remember my solicitor saying to me many years ago that be prepared to be called " a pig to do a dog when you go up there "

Things seemed to calm down quickly after, I don't believe Arlidge landed a catch I think it's been twisted to portray Jeremy Bamber in a negative light

[Steve_uk]

Disagree Steve, having been in a witness box on a few occasions. Tempers will flare, sarcastic comments will surface, disdainful questions from prosecuting counsel,

Things seemed to calm down quickly after, I don't believe Arlidge landed a catch I think it's been twisted to portray Jeremy Bamber in a negative light

It's a mark of respect to the Prosecution barrister and one which shows how Bamber's mind is working at this juncture, namely: "I'm guilty as hell but you'll never be able to prove it.."

[ILB]

He's taunting Arlidge on a personal level. He could have said: "It's your job to find me guilty" or "You are paid to find me guilty"but he dresses it up into "That is what you have to establish." It's a mark of respect to the Prosecution barrister and one which shows how Bamber's mind is working at this juncture, namely: "I'm guilty as hell but you'll never be able to prove it.."

I believe it was a flash of temper from Jeremy Bamber and he gave out a sarcastic " clever bastard " response to Arlidge.

But that doesn't mean he was taunting in the regard you say. I believe it was more frustration. Before that and straight after communication between both had been very benign especially for a prosecution circumstance!

I think Jeremy got riled up by the " you are not telling the truth comment" of course we are reading from a script so we can't tell the tone of what Arlidge delivered the question but Id hazard a guess it was in sarcastic mockery or along those lines

[ILB]

It's a mark of respect to the Prosecution barrister and one which shows how Bamber's mind is working at this juncture, namely: "I'm guilty as hell but you'll never be able to prove it.."

He was respectful to the barrister throughout the exchanges.

It was Jeremy's head on the chopping block, not Arlidges!

[Steve_uk]

I believe it was a flash of temper from Jeremy Bamber and he gave out a sarcastic " clever bastard " response to Arlidge.

But that doesn't mean he was taunting in the regard you say. I believe it was more frustration. Before that and straight after communication between both had been very benign especially for a prosecution circumstance!

I think Jeremy got riled up by the " you are not telling the truth comment" of course we are reading from a script so we can't tell the tone of what Arlidge delivered the question but Id hazard a guess it was in sarcastic mockery or along those lines

No, Arlidge is pointing out that the whole story about Jeremy's association with the murder weapon that particular August evening is a pack of lies.

[Adam]

The rifle sights are discussed a lot by Arlidge. This was not discussed on here much until last year.

The sights were taken off the rifle by Bamber in the week leading up to the massacre. This was to make close range shooting easier.

[ILB]

No, Arlidge is pointing out that the whole story about Jeremy's association with the murder weapon that particular August evening is a pack of lies.

Yes. And Bamber is denying it with a hint of disdain

[Rob_]

The rifle sights are discussed a lot by Arlidge. This was not discussed on here much until last year.

The sights were taken off the rifle by Bamber in the week leading up to the massacre. This was to make close range shooting easier.

Shooting at point blank range with the sights either on or off would make no difference.

[Adam]

Shooting at point blank range with the sights either on or off would make no difference.

I disagree going by photos of the rifle with sights attached.

Bamber knew he needed to be quick, mobile, silent and accurate once he opened fire.

So the sights were taken off in the week before the massacre. The silencer staying on.

[Rob_]

I disagree going by photos of the rifle with sights attached.

Bamber knew he needed to be quick, mobile, silent and accurate once he opened fire.

So the sights were taken off in the week before the massacre. The silencer staying on.

Well it would only take a few minutes to put them back on if he so wanted.