Tell me you are conspiract theorist without telling me you are a consp. theorist

[BarefootDanC]

Tell me you are conspiract theorist without telling me you are a conspiracy theorist

So many of Bamber's supporters are conspiracy theorists. We are told that the latest CCRC submission if full of compelling arguments, both material which undermines the conviction and material which actually proves innocence (e.g. Sheila still being alive at 6:09 and lack of liver mortis), and at 1,000+ pages it is very detailed.

If the CCRC submission is so compelling, inevitably the CCRC will refer his case to the Court of Appeal, especially as it only needs a "real possibility" of success.

But many Bamber supporters don't believe that. They think "the establishment" are controlling the CCRC and deliberately stopping it from making a referral.

But this is impossible as the CCRC and the Court of Appeal are both independent of the government (and independent of each other) and their is no mechanism for the "establishment" to stand in the way of referral or a successful appeal!

In the Facebook group: Jeremy Bamber (and other) Discussion group, I asked the question in a poll:

"Will the CCRC refer Jeremy's case to the Court of Appeal and if not why not?" and results were:

Yes they will refer his case to the Court of Appeal: 1 vote
No, because there are no grounds: 11 votes
No, because the establishment will not allow it: 11 votes
No, because the CCRC are inept: 3 votes
I live in hope: 4 votes

[Cambridgecutie]

Tell me you are conspiract theorist without telling me you are a conspiracy theorist

So many of Bamber's supportersare conspiracy theorists. We are told that the latest CCRC submission if full of compelling arguments, both material which undermines the conviction and material which actually proves innocence (e.g. Sheila still being alive at 6:09 and lack of liver mortis), and at 1,000+ pages it is very detailed.

If the CCRC submission is so compelling, inevitably the CCRC will refer his case to the Court of Appeal, especially as it only needs a "real possibility" of success.

But many Bamber supporters don't believe that. They think "the establishment" are controlling the CCRC and deliberately stopping it from making a referral.

But this is impossible as the CCRC and the Court of Appeal are both independent of the government (and independent of each other) and their is no mechanism for the "establishment" to stand in the way of referral or a successful appeal!

In the Facebook group: Jeremy Bamber (and other) Discussion group, I asked the question in a poll:

"Will the CCRC refer Jeremy's case to the Court of Appeal and if not why not?" and results were:

Yes they will refer his case to the Court of Appeal: 1 vote
No, because there are no grounds: 11 votes
No, because the establishment will not allow it: 11 votes
No, because the CCRC are inept: 3 votes
I live in hope: 4 votes

What's the definition of a supporter?  And how many does JB have?  In 2025 the population of planet earth is circa 8.2 billion, so 30 votes in your poll is not exactly representative of the global population!

As I see it 'supporters' are akin to all groups with a common interest where each individual sits on a spectrum.  Much the same as you have moderate and extreme views with regards to religion, politics etc.  A lot of extremism born out of an ignorance of the facts and dogma:

It was only through debating the case with harcore guilters such as Bridget, Hartley, John, Myster, Puglove and Scipio that I learned more about the case and became convinced of JB's innocence.  I have those guys to thank for my knowledge.  Had I listened to the CT and the likes of Bubo and Snow I might well have walked away unconvinced either way. 

[snow66!]

What's the definition of a supporter?  And how many does JB have?  In 2025 the population of planet earth is circa 8.2 billion, so 30 votes in your poll is not exactly representative of the global population!

As I see it 'supporters' are akin to all groups with a common interest where each individual sits on a spectrum.  Much the same as you have moderate and extreme views with regards to religion, politics etc.  A lot of extremism born out of an ignorance of the facts and dogma:

It was only through debating the case with harcore guilters such as Bridget, Hartley, John, Myster, Puglove and Scipio that I learned more about the case and became convinced of JB's innocence.  I have those guys to thank for my knowledge.  Had I listened to the CT and the likes of Bubo and Snow I might well have walked away unconvinced either way.

Ha ha! Thanks Cutie!

[ngb1066]

It was only through debating the case with harcore guilters such as *** John, Myster, Puglove *** that I learned more about the case and became convinced of JB's innocence.  I have those guys to thank for my knowledge. 

Really?  Are you serious?

[Bubo bubo]

What's the definition of a supporter?  And how many does JB have?  In 2025 the population of planet earth is circa 8.2 billion, so 30 votes in your poll is not exactly representative of the global population!

As I see it 'supporters' are akin to all groups with a common interest where each individual sits on a spectrum.  Much the same as you have moderate and extreme views with regards to religion, politics etc.  A lot of extremism born out of an ignorance of the facts and dogma:

It was only through debating the case with harcore guilters such as Bridget, Hartley, John, Myster, Puglove and Scipio that I learned more about the case and became convinced of JB's innocence.  I have those guys to thank for my knowledge.  Had I listened to the CT and the likes of Bubo and Snow I might well have walked away unconvinced either way.

From post 14/08/21
"Like many Jeremy supporters I have spent hours pondering the Silencer evidence. When I first started my investigations I took a completely neutral stance. I started with the notion that both the police and Jeremy were telling the truth and that somehow quite by chance in a psychotic episode Sheila had framed Jeremy by her actions in creating the crime scene."

My views are based on information latterly acquired from persons who will remain anonymous and my detailed examination of the documentation provided on the forum.

It is clear, to me at least, that JB was framed by EP. The next question to be answered is why?. Many moons ago Zoso said why would EP go to all this effort to frame a 24 year old farmers adopted son.

My view to which I am entitled is that EP had something they had to hide. Something which warranted the enormous lengths they engaged in order to obtain a conviction.

[Roch]

Tell me you are conspiract theorist without telling me you are a conspiracy theorist

So many of Bamber's supporters are conspiracy theorists. We are told that the latest CCRC submission if full of compelling arguments, both material which undermines the conviction and material which actually proves innocence (e.g. Sheila still being alive at 6:09 and lack of liver mortis), and at 1,000+ pages it is very detailed.

If the CCRC submission is so compelling, inevitably the CCRC will refer his case to the Court of Appeal, especially as it only needs a "real possibility" of success.

But many Bamber supporters don't believe that. They think "the establishment" are controlling the CCRC and deliberately stopping it from making a referral.

But this is impossible as the CCRC and the Court of Appeal are both independent of the government (and independent of each other) and their is no mechanism for the "establishment" to stand in the way of referral or a successful appeal!

In the Facebook group: Jeremy Bamber (and other) Discussion group, I asked the question in a poll:

"Will the CCRC refer Jeremy's case to the Court of Appeal and if not why not?" and results were:

Yes they will refer his case to the Court of Appeal: 1 vote
No, because there are no grounds: 11 votes
No, because the establishment will not allow it: 11 votes
No, because the CCRC are inept: 3 votes
I live in hope: 4 votes

I wanted to split my vote across the bottom two choices. Apparently I am a 'conspiracy theorist' in any event (I am on board with opinion that security services are involved in various terror incidents).

[Cambridgecutie]

Ha ha! Thanks Cutie!

Well this whole Aga burn thing is utter nonsense.  I'm sorry but it is.   

[Cambridgecutie]

Really?  Are you serious?

Yes!  Eg Puglove would go on about the lack of fingerprints on the rifle.  This caused me to go off and find out why.  I then discovered that certain surfaces, especially firearms, are difficult to recover fingerprints from. 

Myster and I mass debated quite happily together and spent hours going over the scene of crime evidence which then led to the soc reconstruction. 

[Cambridgecutie]

From post 14/08/21
"Like many Jeremy supporters I have spent hours pondering the Silencer evidence. When I first started my investigations I took a completely neutral stance. I started with the notion that both the police and Jeremy were telling the truth and that somehow quite by chance in a psychotic episode Sheila had framed Jeremy by her actions in creating the crime scene."

My views are based on information latterly acquired from persons who will remain anonymous and my detailed examination of the documentation provided on the forum.

It is clear, to me at least, that JB was framed by EP. The next question to be answered is why?. Many moons ago Zoso said why would EP go to all this effort to frame a 24 year old farmers adopted son.

My view to which I am entitled is that EP had something they had to hide. Something which warranted the enormous lengths they engaged in order to obtain a conviction.

Need I say more...

[Cambridgecutie]

I wanted to split my vote across the bottom two choices. Apparently I am a 'conspiracy theorist' in any event (I am on board with opinion that security services are involved in various terror incidents).

You will be like a bear with a sore head when the CCRC throw out the most recent submissions.

[snow66!]

Well this whole Aga burn thing is utter nonsense.  I'm sorry but it is.

What is your take on the marks Cutie?
Old war wounds, or at least made sometime before the murders?
Or, made on the night of the murders with rifle or poker? [for what reason??]

[Roch]

You will be like a bear with a sore head when the CCRC throw out the most recent submissions.

Not sure about that. I've consistently said it won't be referred. I'm with the critics of the CCRC. They do desktop reviews. I also think some stuff will be dismissed because it's not tight enough to get around alternative explanations.

[Cambridgecutie]

What is your take on the marks Cutie?
Old war wounds, or at least made sometime before the murders?
Or, made on the night of the murders with rifle or poker? [for what reason??]

Surgical hardware. 

[BarefootDanC]

You will be like a bear with a sore head when the CCRC throw out the most recent submissions.

Why will they throw out the most recent submissions? Because the submissions have no substance or because "the establishment won't allow it"?

[Cambridgecutie]

Not sure about that. I've consistently said it won't be referred. I'm with the critics of the CCRC. They do desktop reviews. I also think some stuff will be dismissed because it's not tight enough to get around alternative explanations.

Of course they do desktop reviews.  Its not the CCRC's role to carry out an investigation.