Author Topic: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?  (Read 5159 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #120 on: April 12, 2025, 02:03:PM »
309.

Joanne Woad first made a statement on 16 September. In that statement she said that she thought the time was about 2 a.m.

On 3 October, she made a further statement in which she explained why she had said about 2 a.m. She said:

"In my original statement I stated that this call was at 2 a.m. To be more precise I can add that when I awoke I remember looking at my digital radio/alarm clock at the foot of my bed and reading the hour figure as "2". I do not remember noting the minute reading and therefore the time could have been anywhere between 2 a.m. and 2.59 a.m."

310.

In evidence Miss Woad gave precisely the same account and she would not accept in cross-examination that she was wrong.

----------

It would have been very close to 3.00am. Which matches SB's WS.

Bamber would not committ the massacre so early he was back at GH by 2am. Or wait 90 minutes before calling the police.

Why can't any of these people give an exact time?
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #121 on: April 12, 2025, 02:09:PM »
Why can't any of these people give an exact time?

They did -

3 people did not check the time.

One said 3.00am.

One said 2.00am - 3.00am.

----------

SB & JW's WS's do match the 30 minute period when Bamber had to shower, change, wash clothes and eat.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #122 on: April 12, 2025, 02:40:PM »
SB wasn't sure the clock was even set ten minutes fast. She say she sometimes set the clock fast. It is likely he phoned Julie at 3.15AM

Where Woad got 2am from I have no idea.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #123 on: April 12, 2025, 02:42:PM »
For me.

NB to JB - 3.10

JB to JM 3.15

JB to police 3.26am.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Cambridgecutie

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6599
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #124 on: April 12, 2025, 02:53:PM »
We have no official timestamp.

We're relying on a bunch of stoners and students getting a time to a tee. Which they fail doing so.

Battersby in her first WS say she was out at pub drinking 13 days later was in the flat when Jeremy called Julie!

And yet according to you JB and likes of Emma Morris are reliable witnesses 40 years after the event.  Its called confirmation bias  ::)

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 ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #125 on: April 12, 2025, 03:01:PM »
And yet according to you JB and likes of Emma Morris are reliable witnesses 40 years after the event.  Its called confirmation bias  ::)

Here she is.

Can you give me a detailed character assassination on EM?
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #126 on: April 12, 2025, 03:03:PM »
And yet according to you JB and likes of Emma Morris are reliable witnesses 40 years after the event.  Its called confirmation bias  ::)

Jeremy Bamber had an AM.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Cambridgecutie

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6599
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #127 on: April 12, 2025, 03:14:PM »
Jeremy Bamber had an AM.

If only you had some evidence to support your argument JB had an AM pre murders.  Oh hang about you do...JB and Emma Morris 40 years after the event  ;D
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 ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #128 on: April 12, 2025, 03:21:PM »
If only you had some evidence to support your argument JB had an AM pre murders.  Oh hang about you do...JB and Emma Morris 40 years after the event  ;D

I'm not arguing he had an AM. He said he had ownership of one.

It's from him direct.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #129 on: April 12, 2025, 04:17:PM »
And yet according to you JB and likes of Emma Morris are reliable witnesses 40 years after the event.  Its called confirmation bias  ::)

If Bamber is not a reliable witness, there is no hope.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline ILB

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 13160
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #130 on: April 12, 2025, 04:25:PM »
If Bamber is not a reliable witness, there is no hope.

Well it's pretty much Jeremy's word v et Al.
If yesterday you hated me. Then today you can not stop the love that binds from me to you. And you to me

Offline BarefootDanC

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #131 on: April 12, 2025, 04:44:PM »
Well it's pretty much Jeremy's word v et Al.

Much of this case comes down to Jeremy's word versus everyone else. Many of Bamber's supporters say everyone is lying except for Bamber.

Offline BarefootDanC

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #132 on: April 12, 2025, 04:46:PM »
Why can't any of these people give an exact time?

"The last of the flatmates, Susan Battersby, made a statement on 10 September. In that statement she said that she had been woken by the telephone and had looked at her radio clock and noticed that it was 3.15 a.m. She went on to point out that the time might not be accurate because she kept her clock 10 minutes fast. On 19 December, she made a further statement. In that statement she again referred to the telephone call being at 3.15 a.m. but later in the statement she said:

    "I can say that sometime during the evening of Thursday 8 August 1985, I telephoned Julie at Jeremy's house in Goldhanger. I spoke to Julie in relation to the time of the telephone call from Jeremy to our flat during the early hours of Wednesday 7 August 1985. I told Julie that Jeremy had phoned her at 3.12 a.m. I can now remember that when I looked at my clock radio display, the time showed 3.12 a.m. Previously I had said the phone call was at 3.15 a.m. I am positive the time was 3.12 a.m. I was aware that Julie wanted to know the time of this phone call as she had phoned the flat trying to contact me that day when she spoke to Helen Eaton."

In her evidence to the jury Susan Battersby was adamant that the time shown by her clock was 3.12 a.m. and that she had kept her clock approximately 10 minutes fast. The prosecution supported her evidence about keeping the clock fast by calling evidence from her boyfriend and also by evidence from a police officer who had been to check the timing on her clock at a later date without forewarning her. In cross-examination the fact that she had originally said that the time was 3.15 a.m. was put to her. She explained that she had been quite nervous when she made her first statement and had not then appreciated the importance of giving the time exactly. Later she had thought about it and she could picture in her mind the time as being 3.12 a.m. and she remained certain that that was the time shown on the clock. "

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #133 on: April 12, 2025, 04:47:PM »
SB wasn't sure the clock was even set ten minutes fast. She say she sometimes set the clock fast. It is likely he phoned Julie at 3.15AM

Where Woad got 2am from I have no idea.

I put Woads information up earlier.

Woad & SB WS's are both within the 30 minute period where Bamber had to do various things at GH prior to 3.26am.

So will go by there court testimonies.

But appreciate you being 'on the fence' say 3 10am, 3.15am & 3.26am.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.

Offline Adam

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 44411
Re: Why no Julie 10pm call mention in JBs first WS?
« Reply #134 on: April 12, 2025, 04:50:PM »
Even SB's boyfriend testified. Regarding her keeping her clock 10 minutes fast.

A police officer did a check of her clock. Without warning.
'Only I know what really happened that night'.