Author Topic: Anglia News item  (Read 33830 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #135 on: November 09, 2011, 06:40:PM »
I do not disagree with what Jackie has to say per se, however strongly disagre with the manner in which she does things on some occasions, particularly when she launches nasty personal attacks on me for absolutely no reason and fails to apologise at all. My only point is that I am on this forum, trying to find out more information to further my current belief that JB is innocent. I sincerely hope that Z is genuine and he can provide evidence that JB is innocent and I sincerely hope that evidence about the silencers and other things are true. My only challenge to Jackie or other 100% pro JB posters is that we want / need to see this evidence, before we will follow blindly. I've been on this forum for several months now and hoped to be convinced of JBs innocence, but sadly nothing I have read or heard since has furthered this yet. I'm still 70% and  I genuinely genuinely hope I see evidence to further convince me, over the coming days, weeks and months.

jackiepreece

  • Guest
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #136 on: November 09, 2011, 06:50:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #137 on: November 09, 2011, 07:13:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent

Do I really have to justify my beliefs to you?  Why do u think i am a fu***** idiot who should go play with the traffic? Could u justify that?

He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2011, 07:14:PM by petey »

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #138 on: November 09, 2011, 07:20:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent

Do I really have to justify my beliefs to you?  Why do u think i am a fu***** idiot who should go play with the traffic? Could u justify that?

He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey , can ask your view's on the log's ?

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #139 on: November 09, 2011, 07:32:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent

Do I really have to justify my beliefs to you?  Why do u think i am a fu***** idiot who should go play with the traffic? Could u justify that?

He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey , can ask your view's on the log's ?

undecided to be honest

mertol22

  • Guest
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #140 on: November 09, 2011, 07:39:PM »
Petey im a bit of a loss here the 70% outweighs the 30%  towards JB being innocent  .

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #141 on: November 09, 2011, 07:53:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent

Do I really have to justify my beliefs to you?  Why do u think i am a fu***** idiot who should go play with the traffic? Could u justify that?

He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey. Jackie asked a reasonable question. She didn't ask you to justify your beliefs to her. Please try and move on from her insult to you. Try turning the other cheek. If you do that then you put the ball back into her court so to speak and put the onus onto her to apologise.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2011, 07:54:PM by Grahame »

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #142 on: November 09, 2011, 08:00:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent


He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey. Jackie asked a reasonable question. She didn't ask you to justify your beliefs to her. Please try and move on from her insult to you. Try turning the other cheek. If you do that then you put the ball back into her court so to speak and put the onus onto her to apologise.

Is that not a reasonable expression of my beliefs?!

Offline vidvic

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • R.i 99.9
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #143 on: November 09, 2011, 08:02:PM »
Jackie,

Firstly, it was yourself that made the point that I didn't know the family in 1985/86. The point I am making is that you didn't know Jeremy either in 1985. I don't see how that makes things I post any less valid. As I have said before, Jeremy tells you things, the family tells me things. How are we any different from each other? You defend your friend, I defend my friends.

You constantly make the point that the family inherited. I would counter that with the fact that the boutflours, the speakmans and by marriage, the Eatons, were already extremely wealthy. I don't believe there is a financial motive for them to frame Jeremy.

There is no doubt in my mind that Julie Mugford was far from an angel. But nor was Jeremy either. They were both as bad as each other. Jeremy instigated the caravan park robbery, Julie her cheque fraud. The family hold no great love for Julie either. They firmly believe she could and should have saved their family. She lied to Ann after the identification of the bodies and I firmly believe that if Jeremy hadn't have dumped her, he would not be where he is now.

Maybe you could ask Jeremy on one of his calls, why he had to leave New Zealand in such a hurry? It certainly was VERY urgent. You might recall Jackie, that Jeremy's love of farming and his Father was such that he went to New Zealand, with no notice, right in the middle of harvest, causing a huge row with Nevill. He had so much respect for his Father that he reduced him to tears at Marks Tey Hotel, by pretending to be gay in front of Nevill's farmers union pals.

I do not speak to Ann daily nor do I post from her viewpoint. In fact I was quite nervous telling her about this forum as I didn't want to be disrespectful to her or the family, but on reading some of the posts felt that I wanted to defend.

I read everything that's posted, I've read the books, I have all the same information as you do.

The family members you speak of bear no resemblance to the people I know. People speak of Jeremy's believable nature and I would definitely say the same of the family. If they tell me something I have no reason to disbelieve them and nothing they have told me has ever been disproved on this forum. Again, we have the same point of reference. Believable friends.

I firmly believe that Jeremy Bamber is where he belongs.

The phone call didn't happen. Jeremy has changed his timings, several witnesses say he called Julie around 3am, and he didn't call 999. Only last year he changed his timings again. He couldn't even remember if he called Julie before or after the Police. If Jeremy gets confused it's put down to grief. If the family's evidence is called into question, then it's deception.

I would love to see the interviews with the police. Why have they not been posted? I understand from what I've read that they are not very favourable to his cause. I'm sure that's why we haven't seen them.

A rifle is left out with a loaded magazine, with the sights and silencer removed that is usualy used with them. It is then used by a woman who no living person, even Jeremy, has ever seen pick one up, let alone know how to use it and without missing a shot, kills her own family? That woman pictured on this forum killed her own family and then shot herself twice or was killed by the police after playing dead in the kitchen? Even though the open phone line detected no movement or sound except the plainly terrified dog.

We are now told that Jeremy saw a person in the window of the house and that proves it wasn't him, yet it took Mike Tesko, a year after he was convicted, to point out to Jeremy the significance of this sighting.

Incidently, with his daughter holding a loaded rifle, in the middle of a massive psycotic episode, Nevill calls Jeremy, not the police, nor hits the panic alarm, and all of this without waking the boys.

After the murders Jeremy behaves, out of grief, like no other grieving relative I've ever heard. Amsterdam, South of France, it's all a matter of record. The cash spend from the farm coffers was swift and excessive. Old family money is not in the safe, it's in valuable possessions, Sotherby's were called, his dealings with Colin and the boy's things. 2 journalists went on record and were interviewed on TV, saying that Jeremy even tried to sell pictures of Sheila in the pub at Goldhanger.
Grief is a funny thing.....

Jackie, I don't need Ann to tell me that Jeremy did it. I believe that all the evidence you need is right there in front of you.
rumor vagatus stulti et acceptantur a Idiotae

Offline mike tesko

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51079
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #144 on: November 09, 2011, 08:06:PM »
Jackie,

Firstly, it was yourself that made the point that I didn't know the family in 1985/86. The point I am making is that you didn't know Jeremy either in 1985. I don't see how that makes things I post any less valid. As I have said before, Jeremy tells you things, the family tells me things. How are we any different from each other? You defend your friend, I defend my friends.

You constantly make the point that the family inherited. I would counter that with the fact that the boutflours, the speakmans and by marriage, the Eatons, were already extremely wealthy. I don't believe there is a financial motive for them to frame Jeremy.

There is no doubt in my mind that Julie Mugford was far from an angel. But nor was Jeremy either. They were both as bad as each other. Jeremy instigated the caravan park robbery, Julie her cheque fraud. The family hold no great love for Julie either. They firmly believe she could and should have saved their family. She lied to Ann after the identification of the bodies and I firmly believe that if Jeremy hadn't have dumped her, he would not be where he is now.

Maybe you could ask Jeremy on one of his calls, why he had to leave New Zealand in such a hurry? It certainly was VERY urgent. You might recall Jackie, that Jeremy's love of farming and his Father was such that he went to New Zealand, with no notice, right in the middle of harvest, causing a huge row with Nevill. He had so much respect for his Father that he reduced him to tears at Marks Tey Hotel, by pretending to be gay in front of Nevill's farmers union pals.

I do not speak to Ann daily nor do I post from her viewpoint. In fact I was quite nervous telling her about this forum as I didn't want to be disrespectful to her or the family, but on reading some of the posts felt that I wanted to defend.

I read everything that's posted, I've read the books, I have all the same information as you do.

The family members you speak of bear no resemblance to the people I know. People speak of Jeremy's believable nature and I would definitely say the same of the family. If they tell me something I have no reason to disbelieve them and nothing they have told me has ever been disproved on this forum. Again, we have the same point of reference. Believable friends.

I firmly believe that  is where he belongs.

The phone call didn't happen. Jeremy has changed his timings, several witnesses say he called Julie around 3am, and he didn't call 999. Only last year he changed his timings again. He couldn't even remember if he called Julie before or after the Police. If Jeremy gets confused it's put down to grief. If the family's evidence is called into question, then it's deception.

I would love to see the interviews with the police. Why have they not been posted? I understand from what I've read that they are not very favourable to his cause. I'm sure that's why we haven't seen them.

A rifle is left out with a loaded magazine, with the sights and silencer removed that is usualy used with them. It is then used by a woman who no living person, even Jeremy, has ever seen pick one up, let alone know how to use it and without missing a shot, kills her own family? That woman pictured on this forum killed her own family and then shot herself twice or was killed by the police after playing dead in the kitchen? Even though the open phone line detected no movement or sound except the plainly terrified dog.

We are now told that Jeremy saw a person in the window of the house and that proves it wasn't him, yet it took Mike Tesko, a year after he was convicted, to point out to Jeremy the significance of this sighting.

Incidently, with his daughter holding a loaded rifle, in the middle of a massive psycotic episode, Nevill calls Jeremy, not the police, nor hits the panic alarm, and all of this without waking the boys.

After the murders Jeremy behaves, out of grief, like no other grieving relative I've ever heard. Amsterdam, South of France, it's all a matter of record. The cash spend from the farm coffers was swift and excessive. Old family money is not in the safe, it's in valuable possessions, Sotherby's were called, his dealings with Colin and the boy's things. 2 journalists went on record and were interviewed on TV, saying that Jeremy even tried to sell pictures of Sheila in the pub at Goldhanger.
Grief is a funny thing.....

Jackie, I don't need Ann to tell me that Jeremy did it. I believe that all the evidence you need is right there in front of you.

I will be posting police interviews very soon, in the not too distant future...
« Last Edit: November 09, 2011, 08:07:PM by mike tesko »
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when we first practice to deceive"...

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #145 on: November 09, 2011, 08:09:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent


He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey. Jackie asked a reasonable question. She didn't ask you to justify your beliefs to her. Please try and move on from her insult to you. Try turning the other cheek. If you do that then you put the ball back into her court so to speak and put the onus onto her to apologise.

Is that not a reasonable expression of my beliefs?!
Yes of course it is. But you spoke as if she was asking you to justify your beliefs to her and that was not what she was saying.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #146 on: November 09, 2011, 08:16:PM »
Jackie,

Firstly, it was yourself that made the point that I didn't know the family in 1985/86. The point I am making is that you didn't know Jeremy either in 1985. I don't see how that makes things I post any less valid. As I have said before, Jeremy tells you things, the family tells me things. How are we any different from each other? You defend your friend, I defend my friends.

You constantly make the point that the family inherited. I would counter that with the fact that the boutflours, the speakmans and by marriage, the Eatons, were already extremely wealthy. I don't believe there is a financial motive for them to frame Jeremy.

There is no doubt in my mind that Julie Mugford was far from an angel. But nor was Jeremy either. They were both as bad as each other. Jeremy instigated the caravan park robbery, Julie her cheque fraud. The family hold no great love for Julie either. They firmly believe she could and should have saved their family. She lied to Ann after the identification of the bodies and I firmly believe that if Jeremy hadn't have dumped her, he would not be where he is now.

Maybe you could ask Jeremy on one of his calls, why he had to leave New Zealand in such a hurry? It certainly was VERY urgent. You might recall Jackie, that Jeremy's love of farming and his Father was such that he went to New Zealand, with no notice, right in the middle of harvest, causing a huge row with Nevill. He had so much respect for his Father that he reduced him to tears at Marks Tey Hotel, by pretending to be gay in front of Nevill's farmers union pals.

I do not speak to Ann daily nor do I post from her viewpoint. In fact I was quite nervous telling her about this forum as I didn't want to be disrespectful to her or the family, but on reading some of the posts felt that I wanted to defend.

I read everything that's posted, I've read the books, I have all the same information as you do.

The family members you speak of bear no resemblance to the people I know. People speak of Jeremy's believable nature and I would definitely say the same of the family. If they tell me something I have no reason to disbelieve them and nothing they have told me has ever been disproved on this forum. Again, we have the same point of reference. Believable friends.

I firmly believe that Jeremy Bamber is where he belongs.

The phone call didn't happen. Jeremy has changed his timings, several witnesses say he called Julie around 3am, and he didn't call 999. Only last year he changed his timings again. He couldn't even remember if he called Julie before or after the Police. If Jeremy gets confused it's put down to grief. If the family's evidence is called into question, then it's deception.

I would love to see the interviews with the police. Why have they not been posted? I understand from what I've read that they are not very favourable to his cause. I'm sure that's why we haven't seen them.

A rifle is left out with a loaded magazine, with the sights and silencer removed that is usualy used with them. It is then used by a woman who no living person, even Jeremy, has ever seen pick one up, let alone know how to use it and without missing a shot, kills her own family? That woman pictured on this forum killed her own family and then shot herself twice or was killed by the police after playing dead in the kitchen? Even though the open phone line detected no movement or sound except the plainly terrified dog.

We are now told that Jeremy saw a person in the window of the house and that proves it wasn't him, yet it took Mike Tesko, a year after he was convicted, to point out to Jeremy the significance of this sighting.

Incidently, with his daughter holding a loaded rifle, in the middle of a massive psycotic episode, Nevill calls Jeremy, not the police, nor hits the panic alarm, and all of this without waking the boys.

After the murders Jeremy behaves, out of grief, like no other grieving relative I've ever heard. Amsterdam, South of France, it's all a matter of record. The cash spend from the farm coffers was swift and excessive. Old family money is not in the safe, it's in valuable possessions, Sotherby's were called, his dealings with Colin and the boy's things. 2 journalists went on record and were interviewed on TV, saying that Jeremy even tried to sell pictures of Sheila in the pub at Goldhanger.
Grief is a funny thing.....

Jackie, I don't need Ann to tell me that Jeremy did it. I believe that all the evidence you need is right there in front of you.
Some very good points Vic.

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #147 on: November 09, 2011, 08:20:PM »
Well Petey please explain your reasons for the 30% guilty as you are not convinced Jeremy is innocent


He was found guilty in a court of law and has had all of his appeals rejected. However shoddy the investigation and however much evidence has been witheld, lost of gone missing, I have still not seen any tangible evidence that proves his innocence, however much i want to believe this. On the evidence that I have seen available on this forum (and i know that there's lots that i haven't seen) I believe u could make out a credible case for JB being guilty, Sheila being guilty or a 3rd party being guilty. That is why I am awaiting further information and evidence before I jump in and say he is 100% innocent. Nobody on this forum knows 100% what happened that night, not even you.
Petey. Jackie asked a reasonable question. She didn't ask you to justify your beliefs to her. Please try and move on from her insult to you. Try turning the other cheek. If you do that then you put the ball back into her court so to speak and put the onus onto her to apologise.

Is that not a reasonable expression of my beliefs?!
Yes of course it is. But you spoke as if she was asking you to justify your beliefs to her and that was not what she was saying.

She was questionning my audacity to not believe 100% that JB is innocent.  When I see further reliable evidence / information that he is, then I'm sure I will move towards 100%  Why do I need to explain to her my 30% guilty belief. As i stated before no-one on this forum knows 100% what happened and therefore I don't believe that anybody on this forum can say they know 100% that JB is guilty or innocent.

Offline petey

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #148 on: November 09, 2011, 08:22:PM »
Petey im a bit of a loss here the 70% outweighs the 30%  towards JB being innocent  .

70% innocent  30% guilty is my current belief

lucy70

  • Guest
Re: Anglia News item
« Reply #149 on: November 09, 2011, 08:28:PM »
Jackie,

Firstly, it was yourself that made the point that I didn't know the family in 1985/86. The point I am making is that you didn't know Jeremy either in 1985. I don't see how that makes things I post any less valid. As I have said before, Jeremy tells you things, the family tells me things. How are we any different from each other? You defend your friend, I defend my friends.

You constantly make the point that the family inherited. I would counter that with the fact that the boutflours, the speakmans and by marriage, the Eatons, were already extremely wealthy. I don't believe there is a financial motive for them to frame Jeremy.

There is no doubt in my mind that Julie Mugford was far from an angel. But nor was Jeremy either. They were both as bad as each other. Jeremy instigated the caravan park robbery, Julie her cheque fraud. The family hold no great love for Julie either. They firmly believe she could and should have saved their family. She lied to Ann after the identification of the bodies and I firmly believe that if Jeremy hadn't have dumped her, he would not be where he is now.

Maybe you could ask Jeremy on one of his calls, why he had to leave New Zealand in such a hurry? It certainly was VERY urgent. You might recall Jackie, that Jeremy's love of farming and his Father was such that he went to New Zealand, with no notice, right in the middle of harvest, causing a huge row with Nevill. He had so much respect for his Father that he reduced him to tears at Marks Tey Hotel, by pretending to be gay in front of Nevill's farmers union pals.

I do not speak to Ann daily nor do I post from her viewpoint. In fact I was quite nervous telling her about this forum as I didn't want to be disrespectful to her or the family, but on reading some of the posts felt that I wanted to defend.

I read everything that's posted, I've read the books, I have all the same information as you do.

The family members you speak of bear no resemblance to the people I know. People speak of Jeremy's believable nature and I would definitely say the same of the family. If they tell me something I have no reason to disbelieve them and nothing they have told me has ever been disproved on this forum. Again, we have the same point of reference. Believable friends.

I firmly believe that Jeremy Bamber is where he belongs.

The phone call didn't happen. Jeremy has changed his timings, several witnesses say he called Julie around 3am, and he didn't call 999. Only last year he changed his timings again. He couldn't even remember if he called Julie before or after the Police. If Jeremy gets confused it's put down to grief. If the family's evidence is called into question, then it's deception.

I would love to see the interviews with the police. Why have they not been posted? I understand from what I've read that they are not very favourable to his cause. I'm sure that's why we haven't seen them.

A rifle is left out with a loaded magazine, with the sights and silencer removed that is usualy used with them. It is then used by a woman who no living person, even Jeremy, has ever seen pick one up, let alone know how to use it and without missing a shot, kills her own family? That woman pictured on this forum killed her own family and then shot herself twice or was killed by the police after playing dead in the kitchen? Even though the open phone line detected no movement or sound except the plainly terrified dog.

We are now told that Jeremy saw a person in the window of the house and that proves it wasn't him, yet it took Mike Tesko, a year after he was convicted, to point out to Jeremy the significance of this sighting.

Incidently, with his daughter holding a loaded rifle, in the middle of a massive psycotic episode, Nevill calls Jeremy, not the police, nor hits the panic alarm, and all of this without waking the boys.

After the murders Jeremy behaves, out of grief, like no other grieving relative I've ever heard. Amsterdam, South of France, it's all a matter of record. The cash spend from the farm coffers was swift and excessive. Old family money is not in the safe, it's in valuable possessions, Sotherby's were called, his dealings with Colin and the boy's things. 2 journalists went on record and were interviewed on TV, saying that Jeremy even tried to sell pictures of Sheila in the pub at Goldhanger.
Grief is a funny thing.....

Jackie, I don't need Ann to tell me that Jeremy did it. I believe that all the evidence you need is right there in front of you.
What a great post Vidvic  :)
You always seem so calm and logical despite everything that's been thrown at you.