Emma Morris

[David1819]

You have completely misunderstood the point which Roch has made.

And for the record. This alleged job of delving into members' long past posts. Have they never heard of google advanced search functions or python scraping libraries? The idea that I go through thousands of posts one by one is ridiculous.

[Hardy Boy]

You are well out of order. I have been investigating this potential MOJ since 2009 and have been posting my thinking since 2019. I have one major problem. I cannot understand why EP after all these years still refuses to disclose a very large number of documents despite court orders and a highly detailed request from the CT which lists these items as they can produce evidence that they exist. These documents are in the form of a booklet and can be found here.

https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/m2bg7o208f2pivkufoo66/MEP-booklet-copy-docx.pdf?rlkey=owoy6pie44fffa992bwaoyabd&e=1&dl=0

In addition PII has been used to prevent disclosure of some material. This mechanism is more usually applied where issues of national security are involved and one must question as to why this has been used in a criminal case where there is no foreseeable reason for its application. It is can also be used to obtain information from citizens offering them immunity for any potential prosecution as a result of them disclosing information.

This being the case I decided that it would be pertinent to construct an alternative narrative from that put forward by the police. This narrative is deeper and wider than the issue of the AGA and the burns.

For those that are interested I have set out my thinking on a whole range of issues. Much of this has been posted before your return to the forum.

Here is a list of the issues I have trouble with.

It is possible to make lists of case issues from both a guilt and innocence perspective. The publishing of long lists requiring answers is a tactic that David1819 often criticises and is called a Gish gallop, if I remember correctly. He would use this term when Adam produced his huge lists.
Still, what is sauce for the Goose is sauce for the Gander.

I list all the following as what I see as potential problems with JB’s conviction. It is not a full list by any means. I have posted about all of these at various times.

I have also raised doubts about the integrity of PV who from my perspective appears to have assisted EP in the first instance to cover up an accidental shooting only to be dragged into a conspiracy to frame JB.
 
The original SIO was Chief superintendent Harris, and he was at the scene before Taff. His statement states that he was attending a shooting incident not a siege and he too could have checked the security situation before Taff arrived. He also says SC had been shot ONCE.  Evidence that is supported by Dr Craig.

There are many examples of witness statement manipulation that I have presented and the police were allowed to use composite statements which were unsigned. I believe JB's legal team have raised this with the IOPC and that it has been shown that this process has been abused by EP

1 NB’s body was moved/staged as evidenced by the Aga Burns

2 SC’s body was also staged as determined by Ismail. Pictures show she was placed on a perculier bedside rug and that efforts were made to conceal this.

3 SC was shot by more than one rifle (Brno) as evidenced by the swapping of PV20 by MF and who made the second shot?

4 The police retrieved a SM on the day and covered this up as evidenced by the Blue Socks argument. There were two SM's as now can be proved. The original belonged to AP and was different from the one that the family and EP used to construct a swap.

5 The blood flake was introduced after the Blood tests by the defence expert Patrick Lincoln had cast doubt of the composition of the blood in the SM and it was not present when RWC dismantled the silencer before it was sent to the FSS.

6 A demonstrably false timeline was constructed to suggest JB’s call was at 03.36 and other statements were altered to support this.

7 The blood stains on the bed are not consistent with June being shot in bed.

8 There is no pool of blood by June’s head.

9 A fake Xray was produced to suggest that a rifle shot to SC had fragmented.

10 There is a photo showing only one shot to the neck of SC. I showed this to Roch and NGB. In a forum message. Unfortunately, since I presented it and discussed it on the forum and the source it has been deleted from the Net.
https://bambermugfordaccomplicestomurder.blogspot.com/2012/03/httpmiscarriageofjustice.html

11 A single round from the 30 on the kitchen work top was not sent to MF. I say it was used to replace the round that killed June.

12 Why does the Samples list for PV25 not agree with the autopsy text?

13 Why has the Samples list for PV20 been changed?

14 Why did the police withhold a photo at trial which showed that the kitchen window was firmly shut?

15 Why did PC Bird produce two witness statements on the same day with different contents? This was part of the Blue Socks argument. EP sought to disguise the finding of a SM on the day. He also changed DB1 to a soil sample and claimed that the fire debris came from the fire pit and not the Aga. This is false since the blue socks were found in the house.

16 The evidence suggests that the chin contact shot to SC was made without the SM destroying the back spatter argument. The neck shot was not a contact shot as described by MF and PV

17 The items under the heading fire debris consist of material that could have been used in a cover up. Namely a slip on shoe, parts of a plastic Macintosh, scarf, pieces of blanket and an overcoat. Why were these found in the Aga?

Finally I would argue the following. If my narrative is wrong EP can easily dispel its veracity by releasing the mountain of nondisclosed documents. Further since the main physical evidence against JB was the SM  there can be no harm in disclosing this documentation.

Non disclosure is the single biggest cause of MOJ's

So spare me your bullying rants. I will not be swayed by your obnoxious posting. I am happy to argue these points free of swearing and insinuations about my mental capacity. I have told you what my views are. I have told you several times to examine my narrative in detail. Feel free to engage in serious debate.

I may not be correct in all aspects but I would point out that I suggested that the burns to NB were made by the AGA  six years ago and whether you agree with PB or not his findings suggest that I may well be correct on this issue.

No i Am not out of order,  making a false accusation is a crime and i stand by this and i will defend against your accusations and Bullying of People not here to defend themselves whether you like it or not.  You accuse me of swearing, yet the only one swearing is you, Calling a post Bullshit is not swearing, it is a rebuke to utter total nonsense.  If my standing up for someone not here to defend themself is classed as Bullying, then yes i will Bully your Bullshit.  As for insinuations about your mental capacity,  how many times have you called someone Stupid.

[Jane]

No i Am not out of order,  making a false accusation is a crime and i stand by this and i will defend against your accusations and Bullying of People not here to defend themselves whether you like it or not.  You accuse me of swearing, yet the only one swearing is you, Calling a post Bullshit is not swearing, it is a rebuke to utter total nonsense.  If my standing up for someone not here to defend themself is classed as Bullying, then yes i will Bully your Bullshit.  As for insinuations about your mental capacity,  how many times have you called someone Stupid.

Oh! Is that what he constitutes as calling his mental health into question? It's been mentioned on several occasions, but other than occasionally referring to him as being 'stupid' -something he does with alarming frequency- I've never seen his mental health questioned. I suppose it's yet another stick to poke at one?

[Bubo bubo]

No i Am not out of order,  making a false accusation is a crime and i stand by this and i will defend against your accusations and Bullying of People not here to defend themselves whether you like it or not.  You accuse me of swearing, yet the only one swearing is you, Calling a post Bullshit is not swearing, it is a rebuke to utter total nonsense.  If my standing up for someone not here to defend themself is classed as Bullying, then yes i will Bully your Bullshit.  As for insinuations about your mental capacity,  how many times have you called someone Stupid.

I find your logic difficult. You are suggesting that no one can question any element of the case because they  (EP) are not able to defend themselves and the CT's claims under the perfectly legal CCRC process are BS. The police can and does defend itself against claims from a whole variety of sources.

I would be happy for them to defend themselves about my suggestions.

[Hardy Boy]

I find your logic difficult. You are suggesting that no one can question any element of the case because they  (EP) are not able to defend themselves and the CT's claims under the perfectly legal CCRC process are BS. The police can and does defend itself against claims from a whole variety of sources.

I would be happy for them to defend themselves about my suggestions.

I think accusing is far different to questioning or thinking,  if you think something it then becomes debatable, but when you accuse someone without evidence you are projecting that they actually did it.

[Jane]

I find your logic difficult. You are suggesting that no one can question any element of the case because they  (EP) are not able to defend themselves and the CT's claims under the perfectly legal CCRC process are BS. The police can and does defend itself against claims from a whole variety of sources.

I would be happy for them to defend themselves about my suggestions.

You really do seem to put your importance at a very high level! It shows in such phrasing as "I have been investigating......" and "I have set out my thinking......." and "I would be happy for them to defend themselves about my suggestions" What on earth would lead you to think they'd take the slightest interest in your suggestions. I imagine the only way they might know of them is if you keep them informed on a regular basis. If any of them should be members/guests here, they probably would dismiss them.

[Bubo bubo]

I think accusing is far different to questioning or thinking,  if you think something it then becomes debatable, but when you accuse someone without evidence you are projecting that they actually did it.

I am still having problems with your logic (Boy). I can think what I like but I am not allowed to express my thoughts on an open forum. A forum which would be and is open to anyone to counteract my expressed thoughts. I have never to my knowledge said 'I accuse EP of this that or the other. Are you suggesting I should commence each post with "I question the following". I do not know the detail of the CCRC submission but since it appears that at least one of my so called accusations may be included how do you or I know how many other of my expressed thoughts also form part of the submission.

How much clap trap is used against JB which falls into the category of accusation. There is no evidence to prove many things against JB which are all  purely circumstantial but guilt supporters continue to repeat these "accusations". Just one simple example. He used his mums bike in the execution of his plan. Are they not projecting that he actually did it. There is no evidence for this and innocence and fence sitting supporters argue against it.

I will continue to express my thinking/thoughts without fear or favour and will happily debate these aspects of the case.

[Hardy Boy]

I am still having problems with your logic (Boy). I can think what I like but I am not allowed to express my thoughts on an open forum. A forum which would be and is open to anyone to counteract my expressed thoughts. I have never to my knowledge said 'I accuse EP of this that or the other. Are you suggesting I should commence each post with "I question the following". I do not know the detail of the CCRC submission but since it appears that at least one of my so called accusations may be included how do you or I know how many other of my expressed thoughts also form part of the submission.

How much clap trap is used against JB which falls into the category of accusation. There is no evidence to prove many things against JB which are all  purely circumstantial but guilt supporters continue to repeat these "accusations". Just one simple example. He used his mums bike in the execution of his plan. Are they not projecting that he actually did it. There is no evidence for this and innocence and fence sitting supporters argue against it.

I will continue to express my thinking/thoughts without fear or favour and will happily debate these aspects of the case.

The difference is, Jeremy Bamber is a convicted criminal, Vanezis is not Sunshine.

[Hardy Boy]

I am still having problems with your logic (Boy). I can think what I like but I am not allowed to express my thoughts on an open forum. A forum which would be and is open to anyone to counteract my expressed thoughts. I have never to my knowledge said 'I accuse EP of this that or the other. Are you suggesting I should commence each post with "I question the following". I do not know the detail of the CCRC submission but since it appears that at least one of my so called accusations may be included how do you or I know how many other of my expressed thoughts also form part of the submission.

How much clap trap is used against JB which falls into the category of accusation. There is no evidence to prove many things against JB which are all  purely circumstantial but guilt supporters continue to repeat these "accusations". Just one simple example. He used his mums bike in the execution of his plan. Are they not projecting that he actually did it. There is no evidence for this and innocence and fence sitting supporters argue against it.

I will continue to express my thinking/thoughts without fear or favour and will happily debate these aspects of the case.

You see, this is a perfect example of how the Bullshitter behaves, when he's backed into a corner he resorts to insults, there was nothing in my previous post to insult him, yet he chooses to offer the term Boy, meaning small child in his response.

[Bubo bubo]

The difference is, Jeremy Bamber is a convicted criminal, Vanezis is not Sunshine.

But his conviction rests almost entirely on two issues. The SM and the testimony of JM. That does not mean that Guilt supporters can regurgitate unevidenced issues as facts. They are not and as such fall in to the same category as suggestions/thoughts/questions raised by innocence supporters. PV is entitled to use this forum.

I believe he was mortified by the outcome. There are some signs that he tried belatedly to help JB by making mildly supportive remarks in his statements. The obvious one was the 'had to be a nutter to stage it in that way' remark. Another was the 'I was led to believe that the case was being resolved as four murders and a suicide'.

[Bubo bubo]

You see, this is a perfect example of how the Bullshitter behaves, when he's backed into a corner he resorts to insults, there was nothing in my previous post to insult him, yet he chooses to offer the term Boy, meaning small child in his response.

Wow now you are really up a gum tree Hardy Boy. You are criticising me when it was you who was  according to your post  at 8 pm yesterday who first resorted to this wording. I was only giving as good as I got and it seems you have clearly marked yourself as a Bullshitter.

So lets go over your theory, you accuse the raid team/police, raid team 2 or Dr Craig,  of moving Neville from in front of the  AGA to burn material in the AGA after the raid team shot June?  That's an accusation against the Police on a forum and i'm quite entitled to respond to such a baseless accusation how i see fit, and if i think it's Bonkers/bullshit i will say so, have you got it Sunshine my old Boy.  I personally think some of your accusations are Bordering liable, they are not only suggestions they are accusations.   i don't like the way you accuse without evidence it's as simple as that BOY.  you even accuse Peter Vanezis of a cover up without evidence...............BUBO'S words, I believe PV assisted with the coverup but not the latter framing of JB.

[Hardy Boy]

Wow now you are really up a gum tree Hardy Boy. You are criticising me when it was you who was  according to your post  at 8 pm yesterday who first resorted to this wording. I was only giving as good as I got and it seems you have clearly marked yourself as a Bullshitter.

I was refering to my post earlier that you responded to, you couldn't resist another goad.

[Bubo bubo]

I was refering to my post earlier that you responded to.

Ok so it is OK for you to use it providing it is not in a consecutive post. You really do take the biscuit. Are you suggesting that your original use of this wording was not goading.

[Hardy Boy]

Ok so it is OK for you to use it providing it is not in a consecutive post. You really do take the biscuit.

Thank you

[Zoso]

If a certain member wasn't playing a game, then other members wouldn't be on the lookout for new incarnations of that member. 

Then new members have got far less chance of being wrongly accused of being someone that they are not. It's unforseen consequences of said member's actions. 

Do you think the member I'm referring to gives a sh*t about some other poor member being accused of being them?

Probably laughing about it.

Probably not, so lets grow up and stop doing it. I find the whole accusing thing a bit beyond a joke. What difference does it make? People keep doing it there won't be any new members at all - just the same old BS going around and around.

You think the member in question is the only game player?