DocMaker article on Milbank

[ILB]

A report by a psychologist on Jeremy Bamber references that Jeremy Bamber himself said " that as a neutral he himself would have convicted himself on the evidence at trial available"

[ILB]

He said he has trawled FB & forums. So our paths may have crossed.

He said the 2020 WHF drama got him interested & then he read up on the case. Obviously thinks he is now knowledgeable enough to create a lot of Vlogs & charge people for the priviledge of reading them.

Guest29835 used to boast about how knowledgeable he was on the case.

Cant see him getting many people paying for his posts.

Paywall puts many a folk off no matter how wealthy.

Plus there's a vast load of information elsewhere to be gained for free.

[Roch]

Who is this Doc Maker?

He appeared out of nowhere a year ago & has created over 40 long Vlogs.

Most you have to subscribe to in order to have the privilege to read it all.

Surprisingly, an award winning documentary filmmaker. He has an extensive oven ready documentary. However, TV / media companies will not air it. This is because it doesn't fit with the accepted narrative of the case. CAL's narrative is the accepted narrative. It is safe territory. The Mindhouse production was relatively safe territory.

The doc makers film would not be safe territory.  'Independence' regarding Britain's media is a concept in name only.

[ngb1066]

The internet and the media shouldn't, at least in theory, make any different to the original trial because if a newspaper article or a social media post affects the jury in any way, this is Contempt of Court.

Also, had Jeremy's lawyers started to suggest that there were 2 - 5 silencers, all the CPS would have to do would be to recall the FSS as witnesses and ask them if they handled two different silencers. Them confirming that there was only one would silence this theory.

Even at the third appeal in 2002, despite Jeremy's lawyers putting forward 16 grounds, even they weren't prepared to argue silly things like 2-5 silencers.

That is because they did not have information about that then.

[snow66!]

Do you think it is  coincidence that the Doc Maker started posting after Guest29835's forum became defunct?

Both of them use the term 'Oskan's Razor'.

Both say they trawled forums & have a dig at them.

Occams or Ockhams, Adam!

[Adam]

Surprisingly, an award winning documentary filmmaker. He has an extensive oven ready documentary. However, TV / media companies will not air it. This is because it doesn't fit with the accepted narrative of the case. CAL's narrative is the accepted narrative. It is safe territory. The Mindhouse production was relatively safe territory.

The doc makers film would not be safe territory.  'Independence' regarding Britain's media is a concept in name only.

Has he not put anything on Youtube or TikTok?

[Curiosity]

Has he not put anything on Youtube or TikTok?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoMRBm2_ycc&ab_channel=Wedio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-nEWh22H6M&ab_channel=Wedio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZI22w1OcZg

[Adam]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoMRBm2_ycc&ab_channel=Wedio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-nEWh22H6M&ab_channel=Wedio

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZI22w1OcZg

You are just putting up rubbish.

[Curiosity]

Surprisingly, an award winning documentary filmmaker. He has an extensive oven ready documentary. However, TV / media companies will not air it. This is because it doesn't fit with the accepted narrative of the case. CAL's narrative is the accepted narrative. It is safe territory. The Mindhouse production was relatively safe territory.

The doc makers film would not be safe territory.  'Independence' regarding Britain's media is a concept in name only.

Something about a short 12 min. Pro-Sieben news report in Germany on the WHF case edited by him was posted on red a while ago, by whom I can't recall.  When it was questioned why only in Germany when it had nothing to do with them, the post, its link and the info on his website was hastily deleted. Nothing more was said.

I can't see that any new docu which "promises to be one of the most shocking true crime stories in years" will make a blind bit of difference to the safety of Bamber's conviction.  There have been more than enough of them, both past and recent, which have told the real truth of what happened, not some inflated and questionable accusations of corruption and conspiracy by Essex Police. We might get a few shots of a pig's leg being well and truly burned by an AGA on its highest setting though.

[Curiosity]

You are just putting up rubbish.

You wanted anything he put on YouTube, so you got it matey.

[Adam]

https://thedocmaker.substack.com/p/claude-vs-the-criminal-cases-review-51b?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=5m0d4c&fbclid=IwY2xjawLvZ3pleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHgNpt55C2p1qZ-BKk2aTmOi5ylGN9N8-le-RkZFIqQZlv7tiuWRN-Lgl65S4_aem_09eVclHF-y-lMpdN4hOqBw&triedRedirect=true

I have also been told "Pc Milbank's interview will be in the New Yorker’s “In the Dark” podcast series at the end of September/beginning of October. it will contain audio of Heidi Blake’s interview with Nicholas Milbank."

September/October.

Don't rush things.

[ngb1066]

September/October.

Don't rush things.

The timing of this is nothing to do with JB or the CT.  They would have liked this made public as soon as possible.  It is the New Yorker which has decided the timing.

 

[Adam]

The timing of this is nothing to do with JB or the CT.  They would have liked this made public as soon as possible.  It is the New Yorker which has decided the timing.

Did the CCRC hear the audio of Millbank's interview?

[ngb1066]

Did the CCRC hear the audio of Millbank's interview?

No

[Adam]

No

The sooner the CCRC and the public hear it, the better.