Jeremy's Campaign Team: People's view of them

[BarefootDanC]

The PGM group was missing in the tests done on the flake, so of the 5 groups we only have four groups returning a result and two of these were only tested once and not twice as they should have been.

Also keep in mind how the silencer was treated, and I don't think the result is very reliable?

Neither of the defence expert witnesses - Dr Patrick Lincoln and Mark Webster - thought that the blood evidence was unreliable due to how it was handled or the PGM group.

[Steve_uk]

Painting everyone black, and Jeremy Bamber whiter than white won't work.

There are plenty of other avenues for anyone who has an interest in the case to go down instead of just listening to the CT.

That seems to be the strategy though, the worst culprit being Jeremy Bamber himself.

[Steve_uk]

He certainly had his flaws. Hard one to work out. Was capable of ripping the prosecution case apart, but still believed guilt.

A shame really. He upbraided me for the choice of avatar and posted lewd and offensive comments at times. If I had to guess his history he (allegedly) joined the army at 18 and shot someone outside a pub in the Rheindahlen Military Complex when an argument became overheated. He bettered himself educationally whilst inside for murder, though it came at a cost, becoming emotionally damaged in the process due to the lack of human contact. He looks back to his childhood with affection, in particular the Christmas period, but suffers still from anomie or some such other psychopathic condition.

[ILB]

That seems to be the strategy though, the worst culprit being Jeremy Bamber himself.

Only person really he should paint black is Julie.

And the coppers if he and the CT as it seems he and the CT swear by it. I  personally don't and have never bought no EP cover up. But Jeremy thinks there is. Although he himself narrows it down to three key officers, who I believe are Ainsley, SBJ, and Cook.

All the evidence of AE, RB, etc is just tittle tattle, I personally don't believe the conversation between Jeremy Bamber and Robert Boutflour happened.

James Richards evidence was Ludicrous. He heard Bamber say " I fucking hate my parents " an utterance made by many children, teens and twenty somethings.

[Steve_uk]

Only person really he should paint black is Julie.

And the coppers if he and the CT as it seems he and the CT swear by it. I  personally don't and have never bought no EP cover up. But Jeremy thinks there is. Although he himself narrows it down to three key officers, who I believe are Ainsley, SBJ, and Cook.

All the evidence of AE, RB, etc is just tittle tattle, I personally don't believe the conversation between Jeremy Bamber and Robert Boutflour happened.

James Richards evidence was Ludicrous. He heard Bamber say " I fucking hate my parents " an utterance made by many children, teens and twenty somethings.

But it was corroborated by other sources, which made it all the more damning.

[BarefootDanC]

Only person really he should paint black is Julie.

And the coppers if he and the CT as it seems he and the CT swear by it. I  personally don't and have never bought no EP cover up. But Jeremy thinks there is. Although he himself narrows it down to three key officers, who I believe are Ainsley, SBJ, and Cook.

All the evidence of AE, RB, etc is just tittle tattle, I personally don't believe the conversation between Jeremy Bamber and Robert Boutflour happened.

James Richards evidence was Ludicrous. He heard Bamber say " I fucking hate my parents " an utterance made by many children, teens and twenty somethings.

Supposing Jeremy Bamber is innocent, he would know that Julie Mugford was lying and he may feel that his relatives and/or the police framed him and feel angry with them for it, but he has absolutely no evidence.|

Rivlin QCs defence was, essentially, that none of the evidence against him was 100%. For example, the blood could have been a mixture of the Nevill's and June and maybe her hands and feet were clean because she had a wash.

[ILB]

But it was corroborated by other sources, which made it all the more damning.

I believe the conversation did happen between Richards and Jeremy. But it is the typical conversation between young people which was used in a sinister way to bolster the prosecution case.

Richards was a friend of Julie's not Bambers. He only knew him via her.

[ILB]

Rivlin QCs defence was, essentially, that none of the evidence against him was 100%. For example, the blood could have been a mixture of the Nevill's and June and maybe her hands and feet were clean because she had a wash.

The case is built on Julie and the silencer.

Although the silencer evidence was strong and Justice Drake gave direction that on the silencer evidence alone you can convict him, I agree with the late Anthony Arlidge that the strongest piece of ammo was Julie. Evidence of a confession. The partner of the accused. That swung it.  I believe that's what influenced the jury. Many would have been lost with backsplatter and blood evidence.

They are 12 humans from a variety of backgrounds like the rest of us. However a partner confession is something we can all understand easy.

I agree with you reference Rivlin. It was a difficult case to defend. It is one man v et Al. He didn't have much to work with. Bamber was a man who lived alone with no alibi, with his girlfriend and relatives against him. And the evidence of the silencer that was deemed damning.

[ILB]

Supposing Jeremy Bamber is innocent, he would know that Julie Mugford was lying and he may feel that his relatives and/or the police framed him and feel angry with them for it, but he has absolutely no evidence.|

What else can he, me you or anyone else in that situation (on the basis that he is innocent ) say? Except that she's a liar?

[ILB]

But it was corroborated by other sources, which made it all the more damning.

Was the conversation between Richards and Jeremy when they were just alone?

All I have heard with Jeremy's relationship with Richards is that they used to play monopoly together and Jeremy was a good player but didn't like losing.

At trial Jeremy said there was a problem between him and Richards over a girl at some point.

[BarefootDanC]

Was the conversation between Richards and Jeremy when they were just alone?

All I have heard with Jeremy's relationship with Richards is that they used to play monopoly together and Jeremy was a good player but didn't like losing.

At trial Jeremy said there was a problem between him and Richards over a girl at some point.

Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?

[ILB]

Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?

Jeremy at trial said he said to Richards something along the lines of " oh my fucking parents" that was Jeremy's version of events.


I doubt how anybody could perjure themselves in any shape or form in a legal setting with such a miniscule throwaway remark as it can't be conclusively proved it happened or didn't happen in the context it was portrayed. In any event it was only used to bla ken Bambers character. It's not blatant lying or it's not attempting to provide an alibi. The conversation between the two did happen. I don't believe Richards to be a liar. But I think it's been dressed wrongly.

It's a throwaway conversation which has been used in a sinister light due to the circumstances. Richards probably only recalled the conversation at police probing. If I had a penny for the amount of times someone had said to me " I fucking hate someone " I'd be a wealthy man. It's a forgettable conversation. I don't believe Richards when he said in the theroux documentary " I remembered it because it had so much vehemence, it's bollocks, police probing and perhaps a conversation with Julie post Jeremy's arrest.

[ILB]

Would that really be a strong enough motive for Richards to purge himself in a high-profile, multi-murder case?

The Judge echoed that very question to Jeremy Bamber at trial, but in a different phrase.

Jeremy Bamber said he believed that Richards had misinterpreted what he said ( oh my fucking parents) he also said that he was a friend of Julie's and was probably influenced by events.

Feasible? I believe so personally. From a lay point of view.

[BarefootDanC]

The Judge echoed that very question to Jeremy Bamber at trial, but in a different phrase.

Jeremy Bamber said he believed that Richards had misinterpreted what he said ( oh my fucking parents) he also said that he was a friend of Julie's and was probably influenced by events.

Feasible? I believe so personally. From a lay point of view.

.... or maybe Richard hadn't misrepresented what he said. After all, Robert Boutflour said Jeremy said "I could kill my parents at any time".

If you look at the photos of Jeremy at the funeral, it is clear that he is faking mourning for them.

[ILB]

.... or maybe Richard hadn't misrepresented what he said. After all, Robert Boutflour said Jeremy said "I could kill my parents at any time".

If you look at the photos of Jeremy at the funeral, it is clear that he is faking mourning for them.

Jeremy denies that conversation ever took place. Jeremy says that in his entire lifetime he can not even pinpoint a time he had ever even had a one on one conversation with Robert Boutflour.

In regards to Richards it is a throwaway remark made by children, teens and twenty somethings that's been dressed up sinister.