0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Well i would tend to agree with the expert with 50 years experience. If he hadnt been able to deduce what he did he would have said so.He was paid to do a job, it didnt make a jot of difference to him what the outcome was. The carpet pucture was clear enough to see that there were no particles on the floor which he sajd he would of expected.like jane says u pay yer money you make yer choice
Suthurst agreed that his methods weren't scientific - his findings were ripped to shreds and he was discredited.
We'll see.
See what? He was discredited Lookout, that ship sailed.
That " Bamber is innocent ",I meant.
Absolutely, as have been every other claim that Bamber is innocent.
It was after JM had accused JB of murdering his family,so why did she cash the cheque that he'd given to her for her holiday ? Would anyone else have done that or handed it in to police ?
She didn't actually get to cash it - it bounced!!
She still went on holiday though at his expense. Does it state anywhere that the cheque bounced ?
