Was there really a disclosure of 347,000 documents in 2012 ??

[BarefootDanC]

I do not believe the full account of this has been made public but I think there are some references to it on the official JB websites.

Is it a secret?

[ngb1066]

Is it a secret?

Those involved directly with the case know the details but as far as I can recall the details have not been published.  It is not a secret as such but I would not post more on it without a green light from others.  There is nothing sinister in this but it may be a bit sensitive.  I am sorry to be vague but I do not feel comfortable saying more.

[BarefootDanC]

Those involved directly with the case know the details but as far as I can recall the details have not been published.  It is not a secret as such but I would not post more on it without a green light from others.  There is nothing sinister in this but it may be a bit sensitive.  I am sorry to be vague but I do not feel comfortable saying more.

I understand, but it seems to be an argument in itself, which goes something like this - "the system is corrupt and we had to fight hard to receive all these 347,000 documents ... what were the CPS trying to hide ... etc" but then there is some reason why they won't publish details.

Yet other stuff can be published, and every nown and then, I am told on Facebook groups "this information was only disclosed with the 347,000 documents", but then when I do my own research, I find it was published on here in 2010 or early 2011, before the great disclosure supposedly took place.

[Rob_]

I understand, but it seems to be an argument in itself, which goes something like this - "the system is corrupt and we had to fight hard to receive all these 347,000 documents ... what were the CPS trying to hide ... etc" but then there is some reason why they won't publish details.

Yet other stuff can be published, and every nown and then, I am told on Facebook groups "this information was only disclosed with the 347,000 documents", but then when I do my own research, I find it was published on here in 2010 or early 2011, before the great disclosure supposedly took place.

I am not sure why you take this point of view? If the original case notes were disclosed I am sure the case collapses against Bamber?

[BarefootDanC]

I am not sure why you take this point of view? If the original case notes were disclosed I am sure the case collapses against Bamber?

I can't see why this issue is "sensitive" for Bamber's supporters, or why they would feel the need to be vague about what led to the disclosure of the 347,000 documents.

[Rob_]

I can't see why this issue is "sensitive" for Bamber's supporters, or why they would feel the need to be vague about what led to the disclosure of the 347,000 documents.

I don't know exactly what has and has not been disclosed, there were court orders a while ago for Essex police to disclose and to my knowledge key documents have still not been handed over.

Disclosure is a huge problem in MOJ's why are EP dragging their feet after all this time?

[Bill Robertson]

I can't see why this issue is "sensitive" for Bamber's supporters, or why they would feel the need to be vague about what led to the disclosure of the 347,000 documents.

They are not being "vague", it has been outlined on the JBIC website:

In 1995 a court case, Taylor V Anderton resulted in an important decision that was to greatly assist Jeremy 10 years later. The ruling was to ensure that one party does not enjoy an unfair advantage or suffer an unfair disadvantage in litigation because of a document not being produced for inspection. This meant that in 2005 Jeremy’s lawyers were able to secure the release of case documentation previously not disclosed, though Essex Police took a further six years to release the documentation.

[Cambridgecutie]

They are not being "vague", it has been outlined on the JBIC website:

In 1995 a court case, Taylor V Anderton resulted in an important decision that was to greatly assist Jeremy 10 years later. The ruling was to ensure that one party does not enjoy an unfair advantage or suffer an unfair disadvantage in litigation because of a document not being produced for inspection. This meant that in 2005 Jeremy’s lawyers were able to secure the release of case documentation previously not disclosed, though Essex Police took a further six years to release the documentation.

I thought it was a 30 year rule that allowed the documentation to be released.

[Cambridgecutie]

I thought it was a 30 year rule that allowed the documentation to be released.

Just checked.

According to the Guardian newspaper, it was the 30 year rule that allowed the documents to be released.

According to the Guardian...

The challenge is based on 347,000 pages of evidence, including Essex police logs, that were originally withheld from Bamber under public interest immunity laws that no longer apply after 30 years.

Jeremy Bamber pretends that this stuff was hidden for corrupt reasons, but all of his accusations through the many legal avenues he pursues, failed miserably, due to the fact that they were all fake, and were not based on truth or fact.

And in the end, it was the dry, mundane passing of time that allowed the documents to be made available to him.  Just the normal legal process.  No drama.

it is this bundle of 347000 documents upon which Jeremy Bamber is basing his 2021 application to the CCRC on.

And in 2018 the CPS confirmed that there is no documentary evidence that there were ever more than one silencer.  And I am fairly sure that this CPS statement was based on so called 'new evidence'  that came from the 347000 documents.

And as we already know, at least 3 of Jeremy Bambers claims made in the 2021 CCRC application for permission to apply for an appeal, have been fully investigated and the results known.  Jeremy Bamber never makes public anything that goes against him, and therefore, we also know that those 3 claims have failed.

Assuming that the CCRC investigate the strongest claims first, and assuming that Jeremy Bamber submits his claims in order of their strength, then the failure of the remaining 7 claims is a foregone conclusion. 

[BarefootDanC]

Just checked.

According to the Guardian newspaper, it was the 30 year rule that allowed the documents to be released.

According to the Guardian...

The challenge is based on 347,000 pages of evidence, including Essex police logs, that were originally withheld from Bamber under public interest immunity laws that no longer apply after 30 years.

Jeremy Bamber pretends that this stuff was hidden for corrupt reasons, but all of his accusations through the many legal avenues he pursues, failed miserably, due to the fact that they were all fake, and were not based on truth or fact.

And in the end, it was the dry, mundane passing of time that allowed the documents to be made available to him.  Just the normal legal process.  No drama.

it is this bundle of 347000 documents upon which Jeremy Bamber is basing his 2021 application to the CCRC on.

And in 2018 the CPS confirmed that there is no documentary evidence that there were ever more than one silencer.  And I am fairly sure that this CPS statement was based on so called 'new evidence'  that came from the 347000 documents.

And as we already know, at least 3 of Jeremy Bambers claims made in the 2021 CCRC application for permission to apply for an appeal, have been fully investigated and the results known.  Jeremy Bamber never makes public anything that goes against him, and therefore, we also know that those 3 claims have failed.

Assuming that the CCRC investigate the strongest claims first, and assuming that Jeremy Bamber submits his claims in order of their strength, then the failure of the remaining 7 claims is a foregone conclusion.

That's something else which doesn't add up! If it is 30 years from 1985, that would be 2015. 30 years to 2011 would be 1981.

[BarefootDanC]

They are not being "vague", it has been outlined on the JBIC website:

In 1995 a court case, Taylor V Anderton resulted in an important decision that was to greatly assist Jeremy 10 years later. The ruling was to ensure that one party does not enjoy an unfair advantage or suffer an unfair disadvantage in litigation because of a document not being produced for inspection. This meant that in 2005 Jeremy’s lawyers were able to secure the release of case documentation previously not disclosed, though Essex Police took a further six years to release the documentation.

Thank you for providing this information, but there are still a lot of questions unanswered. Why did it take a further six years - especially as there were CCRC submissions between 2004 - 2011?

Bamber's lawyers only manage to secure the documents after the CCRC had decided to refuse.

Bamber's lawyers are very litigious - nothing wrong with that - I would be the same. Surely if there was some kind or court order or ruling which said they were entitled to documents and the CPS* were not complying, why couldn't this be enforced by an injunction or judicial review?

*note, not "Essex police" - the CPS.

[ngb1066]

That's something else which doesn't add up! If it is 30 years from 1985, that would be 2015. 30 years to 2011 would be 1981.

It was nothing to do with the 30 year rule.

[BarefootDanC]

It was nothing to do with the 30 year rule.

Indeed, there was no "30 year rule which expired"

[BarefootDanC]

It was nothing to do with the 30 year rule.

The plot thickens. I think I have worked out what the "30 year" period is referring to. The Campaign Team examined some documents in 2015, which is 30 years from 1985 (and 29 years after Bamber was prosecuted).

So when they say it was disclosed after 30 years, they are forgetting that they claim to have received them in 2011, rather than 2015!

Here is what they said in on the 10th September 2015

"
With hundreds of pages Jeremy and I have still to examine in great detail it is a tantalising and exciting thought that more evidence to support Jeremy’s innocence could lie within these pages waiting for us to discover.

Thousands of pages of documents and photographs still remain undisclosed, and it is believed that Essex Police know that the proof of Jeremy’s innocence is contained within them or else why not disclose them to us 30 years after the events? "

scroll down:  https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3777.0.html

[BarefootDanC]

My understanding is that there were 347,000 individual pages. Still a huge number of documents overall but not 347,000 documents. Likewise, sometimes it said that there are 4 million documents involved in the case; I guess that means 4 million pages.
I do know that Essex Police supplied the pages completely in random order with multiple copies of the same witness statements, often with different dates on them, many undated and unsigned. It took 6 months just to put them in a sensible order. It then took years to work through them. Only then could a submission be made to the CCRC.

Bill,

The Campaign Team are definitely claiming that it was 347,000 documents - documents not pages !!