Julie Charged As An Accomplice To Murder?

[Adam]

People are bound to question the motives of Julie in this case, from the behaviour and the fact the man maintains innocence.

Julie is for social media. Either on discussion forums or properganda purposes by the CT. Which is not surprising as she was the main witness.

She has not been a ground for any of the CCRC/COA submissions since the trial as will never retract.

[ILB]

Julie is for social media. Either on discussion forums or properganda purposes by the CT. Which is not surprising as she was the main witness.

She has not been a ground for any of the CCRC/COA submissions since the trial as will never retract.

Agree she will never retract. If he's gulity she has no reason to, if he's innocent she'd be going to prison for a long time.

[ILB]

Julie is for social media. Either on discussion forums or properganda purposes by the CT. Which is not surprising as she was the main witness.

She has not been a ground for any of the CCRC/COA submissions since the trial as will never retract.

Julie for Jeremy, should be his number one priority, her testimony is one of two key reasons he has spent 39 years rotting in jail.

[ILB]

Julie is for social media. Either on discussion forums or properganda purposes by the CT. Which is not surprising as she was the main witness.

She has not been a ground for any of the CCRC/COA submissions since the trial as will never retract.

You need to show something that undermines the original verdict.

You may remember Victor Temple QC, the respondent counsel in Bambers 2002 appeal

[Adam]

Julie for Jeremy, should be his number one priority, her testimony is one of two key reasons he has spent 39 years rotting in jail.

What can he do. Regarding including her in a CCRC submission?

[ILB]

What can he do. Regarding including her in a CCRC submission?

Go in heavily on the NOTW pre verdict scenario. But I don't believe it will amount to much either way.

In all honesty it was word against word back in 1986, and word against word what helped secure the gulity verdict. Loosely
translated the late justice drake said words to the effect " I kept an open mind in regard to Jeremy and Julie until I began to believe the latter "

I personally only believe that undermining Julie and the silencer are they only ways " slam dunk " wise to undermine the verdict, burns, coppers slack paperwork, will not do that. The window might have mileage but it's heavily disputed.

Like you say, how he goes about that in a legal arena is a difficult feat.

[ILB]

In the event of a ccrc referral once it goes to the COA the crown have a respondent KC.

Here is a little bit from victor Temple QC in 2002.

To this day ( 20 odd years on ) the CT are heavily reliant on slack paperwork.

[Adam]

Go in heavily on the NOTW pre verdict scenario. But I don't believe it will amount to much either way.

In all honesty it was word against word back in 1986, and word against word what helped secure the gulity verdict. Loosely
translated the late justice drake said words to the effect " I kept an open mind in regard to Jeremy and Julie until I began to believe the latter "

I personally only believe that undermining Julie and the silencer are they only ways " slam dunk " wise to undermine the verdict, burns, coppers slack paperwork, will not do that. The window might have mileage but it's heavily disputed.

Like you say, how he goes about that in a legal arena is a difficult feat.

I thought they did that in 2002. Julie attended the COA but was not called up.

[ILB]

I thought they did that in 2002. Julie attended the COA but was not called up.

I believe they did do so. She was released as a witness.

[Zoso]

In the event of a ccrc referral once it goes to the COA the crown have a respondent KC.

Here is a little bit from victor Temple QC in 2002.

To this day ( 20 odd years on ) the CT are heavily reliant on slack paperwork.

I totally agree with Mr Temple.

[Roch]

I totally agree with Mr Temple.

It might help if stuff didn't get put away for 70-94 years.

[Hardy Boy]

I stand by Julie being involved, she was in line with his thinking, if this is not encouraging Bamber i don't know what is..................... I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins. I asked him why kill Sheila and the twins as they had done nothing to him...................  I remember that I made a joke about the house saying that he couldn’t burn it down because it was so beautiful................ He said he thought about getting cyanide but wherever he got it would be recorded.

Would Julie  know about Cyanide being recorded unless she was told by Bamber, she was a 21 year trainee school teacher,  not a Chemist,  it can be used in manufacturing, pesticides?

[Jane]

I stand by Julie being involved, she was in line with his thinking, if this is not egging Bamber on i don't know what is..................... I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins. I asked him why kill Sheila and the twins as they had done nothing to him...................  I remember that I made a joke about the house saying that he couldn’t burn it down because it was so beautiful................ He said he thought about getting cyanide but wherever he got it would be recorded.

Would Julie  know about Cyanide being recorded unless she was told by Bamber, she was a 21 year trainee school teacher,  not a Chemist,  it can be used in manufacturing, pesticides?

She was, undoubtedly, his sounding board. How much credence he placed on anything she may have said, is questionable.

[ILB]

I stand by Julie being involved, she was in line with his thinking, if this is not encouraging Bamber i don't know what is..................... I asked him why as I could understand him talking about his parents like that but not about Sheila and the twins. I asked him why kill Sheila and the twins as they had done nothing to him...................  I remember that I made a joke about the house saying that he couldn’t burn it down because it was so beautiful................ He said he thought about getting cyanide but wherever he got it would be recorded.

Would Julie  know about Cyanide being recorded unless she was told by Bamber, she was a 21 year trainee school teacher,  not a Chemist,  it can be used in manufacturing, pesticides?

I've always looked at the case from every angle. And I totally can envisage the scenario of them being in it together.

I suppose though if that's the case she was taking a gamble herself on the event he confessed and implicated her? Even to this day, imagine if he confessed and implicated her. If this is the case she must have never had a decent night's sleep.

I can see why he would maintain innocence if they were in league together as screwing her over wouldn't bring him freedom. They'd be nothing in it for him to gain apart from putting Julie behind bars as well.

[Hardy Boy]

I've always looked at the case from every angle. And I totally can envisage the scenario of them being in it together.

I suppose though if that's the case she was taking a gamble herself on the event he confessed and implicated her? Even to this day, imagine if he confessed and implicated her. If this is the case she must have never had a decent night's sleep.

I can see why he would maintain innocence if they were in league together as screwing her over wouldn't bring him freedom. They'd be nothing in it for him to gain apart from putting Julie behind bars as well.

I agree ILB, there are not many Women in League with this kind of talk with their Partners,  any sensible person would give this a very wide berth and give the person who is constantly planning such a wide berth, unless they are in League and looking to gain?  She's full of shit and it doesn't wash with me, she had numerous opportunities to get out or go to the Police,  she never had any thought for those poor victims, it was only when she realised she wasn't going to get what she thought,  she was as bad as him.