Pat Brown's Take On JB's Case (and David Bain's)

[Jane]

Perhaps I should watch it all? Without Julie I don't see how you can get the case to court even?

To be honest, I didn't expect to enjoy it, but she took it right back to basics, cutting through the 'frills' which came later, and dismissing 'stuff' claimed by both sides. She added a strong dose of what I'd call common sense.

[Cambridgecutie]

To be honest, I didn't expect to enjoy it, but she took it right back to basics, cutting through the 'frills' which came later, and dismissing 'stuff' claimed by both sides. She added a strong dose of what I'd call common sense.

Do you think she is a bona fide Criminal Profiler with a degree from Boston Uni in Criminal Justice?

[Cambridgecutie]

I do not believe Pat Brown is a bona fide criminal profiler with a degree in criminal justice from Boston Uni.  I find it quite remarkable that members here seem unable/unwilling to discern between a fake and a reliable source of info/expert witness.     

As a contrast, and wow what a contrast, the following appear to be bona fide profilers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laura_Richards_(advocate)

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helin%C3%A4_H%C3%A4kk%C3%A4nen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dppQW714hU

[Cambridgecutie]

Do you mean you're a bit of a snob..

Snob?  How am I being a 'snob' by calling out a fake?

[Cambridgecutie]

Managed to listen to Pat Brown's take on Bamber & Bain.
She seems to glaze over a lot of the details particularly the silencer & 911 calls in the Bamber case.
Interestingly she said there was more evidence against Bain than Bamber, mainly because of the blood forensic evidence from his brother Stephen.
This tells me there was no forensic evidence found to speak of against Bamber. Yet Bamber probably had the bigger motive than David Bain.

This being primarily a forum about Jeremy Bamber, I can see that people in the guilty camp could be polarised into believing Pat Brown's take of her other opinions e.g. Maddie McCann etc.

When I listen to her, which is painful to say the least, all that screams out is F-A-K-E!

[Cambridgecutie]

I tried to watch this a while ago but like you thought she was glazing over a lot of detail.  I stopped watching it after 20 minutes or so.

I really would not waste your time.  She rambles on for 2 hours and is no more a criminal profiler than I am the Virgin Mary!

[Cambridgecutie]

She picked out the salient points: the murder weapon being left on the settle and not locked away, Neville would telephone police himself if injured, not leave it to a proxy, Sheila's appearance made it unlikely she was involved in a fight with her father, Jeremy embellished a story about Nicholas and Daniel being taken away from their mother, when it was Colin who had charge anyway.

Robin was supposed to be wearing gloves when there was no point if he were bent on suicide, the ridiculous typewritten part-ungrammatical sentence left on the computer, when it was Arawa who was the star of the family,  the marks on David's person in contrast to the tiny scratch on Robin.

She did not refer to the weapon being left on the settle.  She referred to it being left in the kitchen which is wrong.  She was absolutely clueless about the case.  I will highlight one other point because I simply cannot be bothered to go through it all.  She said no one else except JB made ref to the fostering.  This is simply wrong.  Colin's mother made ref to this in her wit stat.  But the point I wish to make here is that she trailed off telling viewers that had she been incapable of looking after her own children her family, or that of her ex-husband's, would have stepped up, or words to this effect.  A professional criminal profiler would not bring their own family into it.  The woman is a crank.

[Cambridgecutie]

She picked out the salient points: the murder weapon being left on the settle and not locked away, Neville would telephone police himself if injured, not leave it to a proxy, Sheila's appearance made it unlikely she was involved in a fight with her father, Jeremy embellished a story about Nicholas and Daniel being taken away from their mother, when it was Colin who had charge anyway.

Robin was supposed to be wearing gloves when there was no point if he were bent on suicide, the ridiculous typewritten part-ungrammatical sentence left on the computer, when it was Arawa who was the star of the family,  the marks on David's person in contrast to the tiny scratch on Robin.

Re Bain she also dismissed the gurgling sounds DB said he heard coming from Laniet Bain and yet a pathologist said he could not rule this out:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/laniet-bains-gurgling-explainable-pathologist/J2TSQHE2MCRDS2EFDZBLRMDE3Q/

No wonder she is your go to source Steve. 

[Cambridgecutie]

I thought she picked out the salient points very succinctly. She made it perfectly clear, on several occasions, how easy it is to pull out individual points as -allegedly!- denoting innocence, but it's only the evidence as a whole which is pertinent.

I'd previously known nothing at all about the David Bain case.I really can't believe that a second jury found him innocent.

And you still don't if Pat Brown is your only source!

I really can't believe you find this woman remotely credible.

And you still don't if your only source is Pat Brown! 

[Cambridgecutie]

And at the end of her 2 hour ramble she had the audacity to say she thinks civil juries (assume she means lay juries) are not good as they are incapable of understanding the evidence!  Oh and she dislikes defence lawyers as they attempt to defend too much!   

I feel for anyone who takes this woman seriously.  Total fake. 

[Steve_uk]

Do you think she is a bona fide Criminal Profiler with a degree from Boston Uni in Criminal Justice?

Yes. Maybe you're a tad jealous. Did you gain a degree Cambridgecutie?

[Steve_uk]

Snob?  How am I being a 'snob' by calling out a fake?

..because she doesn't conform to your idea of what a criminal profiler should be.

[Steve_uk]

I really would not waste your time.  She rambles on for 2 hours and is no more a criminal profiler than I am the Virgin Mary!

..or Naughty Nun.

[Steve_uk]

She did not refer to the weapon being left on the settle.  She referred to it being left in the kitchen which is wrong.  She was absolutely clueless about the case.  I will highlight one other point because I simply cannot be bothered to go through it all.  She said no one else except JB made ref to the fostering.  This is simply wrong.  Colin's mother made ref to this in her wit stat.  But the point I wish to make here is that she trailed off telling viewers that had she been incapable of looking after her own children her family, or that of her ex-husband's, would have stepped up, or words to this effect.  A professional criminal profiler would not bring their own family into it.  The woman is a crank.

We only have Jeremy's word that the fostering conversation took place that last evening. Pat discusses it at the 46:00 point.

[Steve_uk]

Perhaps I should watch it all? Without Julie I don't see how you can get the case to court even?

Julie is mentioned briefly around the 1:00:18 mark.