Author Topic: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination  (Read 3177 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13162
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #135 on: January 07, 2024, 10:02:PM »
The window catch had been replaced in July 1985.

The window cache at the bottom behind the bowl obscured?
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #136 on: January 07, 2024, 10:12:PM »
The window cache at the bottom behind the bowl obscured?

Jeremy supposedly left White House Farm through the kitchen window, banging it from the outside to drop the catch back into place and making it appear no one had left through the window. This was a theory put forward by the family because the catch was supposedly faulty.

Evidence now sits with the CCRC that a builder, Michael Horsnall, gave a statement pre-trial that he had replaced that very catch in JULY 1985. The month before the shootings at White House Farm. Of course, this was never told to the jury. It seems Essex Police knew Jeremy didn't leave through that window but pushed that theory anyway.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13162
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #137 on: January 07, 2024, 10:23:PM »
Jeremy supposedly left White House Farm through the kitchen window, banging it from the outside to drop the catch back into place and making it appear no one had left through the window. This was a theory put forward by the family because the catch was supposedly faulty.

Evidence now sits with the CCRC that a builder, Michael Horsnall, gave a statement pre-trial that he had replaced that very catch in JULY 1985. The month before the shootings at White House Farm. Of course, this was never told to the jury. It seems Essex Police knew Jeremy didn't leave through that window but pushed that theory anyway.


I thought it was just a turn handle mechanism from what the photo provided.

« Last Edit: January 07, 2024, 10:26:PM by ILB »
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #138 on: January 07, 2024, 10:59:PM »
I thought it was just a turn handle mechanism from what the photo provided.
The police pulled a fast one. They used a photo taken from a different angle which gave the impression that the window was not fully locked. This is one of several big issues forming the latest submission. The photo they used is on this site but not in the archive. David has a file he has amassed he may be able to assist.

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #139 on: January 07, 2024, 11:31:PM »
The police pulled a fast one. They used a photo taken from a different angle which gave the impression that the window was not fully locked. This is one of several big issues forming the latest submission. The photo they used is on this site but not in the archive. David has a file he has amassed he may be able to assist.

This video explains the window issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65t__yHjAjk

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21102
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #140 on: January 08, 2024, 12:17:AM »
This video explains the window issue.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65t__yHjAjk
..and the 2002 Appeal dealt with the windows issue, namely that Jeremy Bamber fabricated an excuse to scratch the sash windows when he entered White House Farm on 14/09/1985. (Points 268-270). Note also Points 283,284.  http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

Offline Cambridgecutie

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6599
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #141 on: January 08, 2024, 12:47:AM »
Jeremy supposedly left White House Farm through the kitchen window, banging it from the outside to drop the catch back into place and making it appear no one had left through the window. This was a theory put forward by the family because the catch was supposedly faulty.

Evidence now sits with the CCRC that a builder, Michael Horsnall, gave a statement pre-trial that he had replaced that very catch in JULY 1985. The month before the shootings at White House Farm. Of course, this was never told to the jury. It seems Essex Police knew Jeremy didn't leave through that window but pushed that theory anyway.


All that matters is that Jeremy Bamber was able to enter and exit the house without going through the doors.  He admitted  at the time that he knew how to enter the house via the windows.  He entered and exited the house via the windows when he needed his passport.  And that was after the murders.

It was never properly established what window he got in and out of, and at trial what was presented was a theory based on plausibility.

It is also not known how he got from Goldhanger to WHF and back again, but a plausible theory was used to fill the knowledge gap.

The evidence that condemns Jeremy Bamber (in this particular matter) is his admission that he knew how to enter the house via the windows, and the fact that he actually did enter and exit WHF by this very method after the murders had taken place.  That is the only concrete evidence regarding the windows.

It should be remembered that Jeremy Bamber was convicted on many, many small pieces of evidence.  His eventual conviction was death by a thousand cuts. 

The fact remains (with or with a new fitted catch in July) that on the 7th August between midnight and 3 am, Jeremy Bamber knew how to enter and exit WHF via the windows. 

And that undeniable fact is just one of those thousand cuts.  Just. One. 

No locksmith is gonna get him off. Oooooh no. No, no, no.  Nopety nope. Nyet!  Nein!  Non, non, non.....and so on.
Patrick O'Connor, Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers: "It will have to be a slam dunk.  It will have to be something of a blockbuster piece of evidence to have a chance".

All goals from Lionesses Euro 2025:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DQq5gnwGjs

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #142 on: January 08, 2024, 06:05:AM »
Instantly admitting he could get in and out of WHF windows was surprising. He then testified he knew how to do this from an early age.

Maybe friends, family, ex girlfriends, farm workers, Julie, Barbara Wilson, the house keeper were aware he could do it. So there was no point denying it.

If not, the police could still say there were a lot of ground floor windows that were accessible.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #143 on: January 08, 2024, 06:15:AM »
All that matters is that Jeremy Bamber was able to enter and exit the house without going through the doors.  He admitted  at the time that he knew how to enter the house via the windows.  He entered and exited the house via the windows when he needed his passport.  And that was after the murders.

It was never properly established what window he got in and out of, and at trial what was presented was a theory based on plausibility.

It is also not known how he got from Goldhanger to WHF and back again, but a plausible theory was used to fill the knowledge gap.

The evidence that condemns Jeremy Bamber (in this particular matter) is his admission that he knew how to enter the house via the windows, and the fact that he actually did enter and exit WHF by this very method after the murders had taken place.  That is the only concrete evidence regarding the windows.

It should be remembered that Jeremy Bamber was convicted on many, many small pieces of evidence.  His eventual conviction was death by a thousand cuts. 

The fact remains (with or with a new fitted catch in July) that on the 7th August between midnight and 3 am, Jeremy Bamber knew how to enter and exit WHF via the windows. 

And that undeniable fact is just one of those thousand cuts.  Just. One. 

No locksmith is gonna get him off. Oooooh no. No, no, no.  Nopety nope. Nyet!  Nein!  Non, non, non.....and so on.

How do you think he got to/from WHF?

The prosecution case is he cycled on the bike that arrived at his cottage 2 days before the massacre.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #144 on: January 08, 2024, 06:20:AM »
There is some confusion over why the bike arrived at Goldhanger.

Bamber was very vague in his police interviews.

Julie testified she had suggested a bike 12 months earlier. This is so she could cycle from Goldhanger to New Malden. Where she was working at the time.

Bamber testified it was so Julie could cycle to shops when she was staying at Goldhanger.

The CT are saying it was so Julie could cycle to a bus station when going home. This refutes Bamber's testimony.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 06:21:AM by Adam »
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #145 on: January 08, 2024, 08:05:AM »
No locksmith is gonna get him off. Oooooh no. No, no, no.  Nopety nope. Nyet!  Nein!  Non, non, non.....and so on.

Jury should have been told.

Offline Bubo bubo

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #146 on: January 08, 2024, 08:57:AM »
..and the 2002 Appeal dealt with the windows issue, namely that Jeremy Bamber fabricated an excuse to scratch the sash windows when he entered White House Farm on 14/09/1985. (Points 268-270). Note also Points 283,284.  http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

This does not undermine the issue of entry if he entered to retrieve his passport before 01/10/85 but after the murders. The other reference was during interview and whilst he admits he could enter the house at times in the past it does not mean he did it on that night as both Taff and Ainsley say the property was secure. He may have not known about the work to fix the kitchen window he did not live at WHF and he may have tempered his remarks at interview if he had known.
« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 10:04:AM by Bubo bubo »

Offline Roch

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17586
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #147 on: January 08, 2024, 09:27:AM »
..and the 2002 Appeal dealt with the windows issue, namely that Jeremy Bamber fabricated an excuse to scratch the sash windows when he entered White House Farm on 14/09/1985. (Points 268-270). Note also Points 283,284.  http://www.homepage-link.to/justice/judgements/Bamber/index.html

Are you saying Miller lied?  Neither the defence nor the jury were made aware of Miller's verbal evidence provided to Robert Boutfour.  This means that Miller was never questioned before the jury regarding his evidence on this matter.

If Miller lied, what does this say about his credibility as a police officer and witness in this case?

« Last Edit: January 08, 2024, 09:28:AM by Roch »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13787
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #148 on: January 08, 2024, 10:28:AM »
It should be remembered that Jeremy Bamber was convicted on many, many small pieces of evidence. 

Such as?

Offline Cambridgecutie

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6599
Re: Re: Julie Mugford Trial examination/cross examination
« Reply #149 on: January 08, 2024, 10:44:AM »
Patrick O'Connor, Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers: "It will have to be a slam dunk.  It will have to be something of a blockbuster piece of evidence to have a chance".

All goals from Lionesses Euro 2025:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DQq5gnwGjs