"I haven't rehearsed what I am going to tell the jury." (JM)

[jackiepreece]

The statistics involving cases the CCrc  has handled are horrendous

Anyone fighting a miscarriage of justice has a mammoth task

[ngb1066]

The statistics involving cases the CCrc  has handled are horrendous

Anyone fighting a miscarriage of justice has a mammoth task

Very true.

[simong]

Rocky
The more evidence that comes to light the tougher it would be for the guilty camp to put up an argument.

Because this is a case of circumstantial evidence everything seems to point to the jury should have found Jeremy innocent because of reasonable doubt.

Just the tiniest thing like the NOTW deal not coming to light or the withholding of some information about how bad Sheilas illness was probably would have changed the jurors verdict

Hartley was very bad tempered off late because we were all fed up with his 'I believe Mugford' statements and it was out in the open he was not impartial as he was a friend of the relatives

He kept that hidden for ages making his arguments and views more credible

It is going to be difficult to find anti Bamber people with the information out there now and there is something strange going on after Shonas message 'she was having to leave the forum'

It was a nice message and we hadn't fallen out so It's a big mystery

I agree with your first, second and third points.  Though the second point seems to have been canceled out over the years, by the relatives' genuine belief in Jeremy's guilt and their successful ability to project this belief on to their associates.  Now I suppose it could be argued that if the silencer evidence is falsified, then the relatives have a vested interest in shoring up their position.  And it becomes difficult for us to decipher whether their belief in Jeremy's guilt actually is genuine.  I suspect if it wasn't, Vidvic and Hartley would have sussed this by now.

I always got on with Hartley but at times I found his opposition to Mike exasperating.  I believe both he and Vidvic (who I have also always personally found decent) have acted out of a misplaced loyalty to the relatives.  They might disagree but that's how I see it.

I didn't see Shona's parting message but I got on very well with her, albeit we were on completely opposite sides.

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

P.S Shona, i am sorry i missed your last pm but i was logged on but not actually at my P.C and missed it, if that makes sense. Please get in touch on my e-mail account.

[jackiepreece]

simong
I think this would be a good time for you and Paul to come back to the forum.
Things change on a daily basis with this case and you have probably read what has been going on with the campaign centre.
I am only interested in the truth and I have only ever been interested in the truth and at the moment I am horrified about what is going on supposedly on Jeremys say so.
I am going to canvass for some more people to join the forum even if they are anti Bamber as there is still much to discuss
If you think I am confident of Jeremys case being referred I am not, and if the police, CCrc read the forum, Bambertweets and Jeremys blog things do not seem clear cut at all,

This is still a brilliant forum and the only place where we can debate openly

[grahameb]

The statistics involving cases the CCrc  has handled are horrendous

Anyone fighting a miscarriage of justice has a mammoth task

In fact they have probably made it more difficult to obtain an appeal than it was before? The reason? They are part of the appeal process and not independent of it.

[grahameb]

Rocky
The more evidence that comes to light the tougher it would be for the guilty camp to put up an argument.

Because this is a case of circumstantial evidence everything seems to point to the jury should have found Jeremy innocent because of reasonable doubt.

Just the tiniest thing like the NOTW deal not coming to light or the withholding of some information about how bad Sheilas illness was probably would have changed the jurors verdict

Hartley was very bad tempered off late because we were all fed up with his 'I believe Mugford' statements and it was out in the open he was not impartial as he was a friend of the relatives

He kept that hidden for ages making his arguments and views more credible

It is going to be difficult to find anti Bamber people with the information out there now and there is something strange going on after Shonas message 'she was having to leave the forum'

It was a nice message and we hadn't fallen out so It's a big mystery

I agree with your first, second and third points.  Though the second point seems to have been canceled out over the years, by the relatives' genuine belief in Jeremy's guilt and their successful ability to project this belief on to their associates.  Now I suppose it could be argued that if the silencer evidence is falsified, then the relatives have a vested interest in shoring up their position.  And it becomes difficult for us to decipher whether their belief in Jeremy's guilt actually is genuine.  I suspect if it wasn't, Vidvic and Hartley would have sussed this by now.

I always got on with Hartley but at times I found his opposition to Mike exasperating.  I believe both he and Vidvic (who I have also always personally found decent) have acted out of a misplaced loyalty to the relatives.  They might disagree but that's how I see it.

I didn't see Shona's parting message but I got on very well with her, albeit we were on completely opposite sides.

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

P.S Shona, i am sorry i missed your last pm but i was logged on but not actually at my P.C and missed it, if that makes sense. Please get in touch on my e-mail account.

Hmm, I wonder when that last pm was? Because if she had deleted her account then you would not have received it anyway. You  say that it is not personal to you and that it is not a question of one upmanship with you? Come on simong, that is the whole point of a debate to get one over on the opposition. It is in man's nature to be on the winning side. You also say that it has been that the debates have become personal. Yes probably they have? But I will also add that it has by no means been one sided and on the whole what with john lamberton wading in in his various guises constantly stirring things up with all his abuse towards the pro bamber team. Added to the fact that some of those anti bambers have gone over to his forum indicates to me that what they really want is the illusion that they can actually win an argument. Because with all the new evidence that has come to light, not only have they refused to acknowledge this new evidence that completely shatters their whole argument that JB is guilty. But they simply will not budge from the original trial "evidence". But also choose rather to speculate and philosophise about what they think that Sheila Caffell could or could not do.
You know what I think? I think john lamberton has set up his forum because there he can feel safe in the fact that he can post abuse about various members here on this forum without suffering the shame of defeat. You see Hartley also pm'd me as well and I am fully aware of his views, which are that he feels that he cannot contribute any more to the forum. He added that he may or may not be back. But the real reason that most of the anti bamber brigade have left is that they can only reiterate and produce the same old stale arguments. In other words they have left because they have run out of steam as Bob said.

[grahameb]

simong
I think this would be a good time for you and Paul to come back to the forum.
Things change on a daily basis with this case and you have probably read what has been going on with the campaign centre.
I am only interested in the truth and I have only ever been interested in the truth and at the moment I am horrified about what is going on supposedly on Jeremys say so.
I am going to canvass for some more people to join the forum even if they are anti Bamber as there is still much to discuss
If you think I am confident of Jeremys case being referred I am not, and if the police, CCrc read the forum, Bambertweets and Jeremys blog things do not seem clear cut at all,

This is still a brilliant forum and the only place where we can debate openly

Keep up the brilliant work Jackie. For those who campaign for a good cause are better than those who campaign against it.

[ngb1066]

Rocky
The more evidence that comes to light the tougher it would be for the guilty camp to put up an argument.

Because this is a case of circumstantial evidence everything seems to point to the jury should have found Jeremy innocent because of reasonable doubt.

Just the tiniest thing like the NOTW deal not coming to light or the withholding of some information about how bad Sheilas illness was probably would have changed the jurors verdict

Hartley was very bad tempered off late because we were all fed up with his 'I believe Mugford' statements and it was out in the open he was not impartial as he was a friend of the relatives

He kept that hidden for ages making his arguments and views more credible

It is going to be difficult to find anti Bamber people with the information out there now and there is something strange going on after Shonas message 'she was having to leave the forum'

It was a nice message and we hadn't fallen out so It's a big mystery

I agree with your first, second and third points.  Though the second point seems to have been canceled out over the years, by the relatives' genuine belief in Jeremy's guilt and their successful ability to project this belief on to their associates.  Now I suppose it could be argued that if the silencer evidence is falsified, then the relatives have a vested interest in shoring up their position.  And it becomes difficult for us to decipher whether their belief in Jeremy's guilt actually is genuine.  I suspect if it wasn't, Vidvic and Hartley would have sussed this by now.

I always got on with Hartley but at times I found his opposition to Mike exasperating.  I believe both he and Vidvic (who I have also always personally found decent) have acted out of a misplaced loyalty to the relatives.  They might disagree but that's how I see it.

I didn't see Shona's parting message but I got on very well with her, albeit we were on completely opposite sides.

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

P.S Shona, i am sorry i missed your last pm but i was logged on but not actually at my P.C and missed it, if that makes sense. Please get in touch on my e-mail account.

Hmm, I wonder when that last pm was? Because if she had deleted her account then you would not have received it anyway. You  say that it is not personal to you and that it is not a question of one upmanship with you? Come on simong, that is the whole point of a debate to get one over on the opposition. It is in man's nature to be on the winning side. You also say that it has been that the debates have become personal. Yes probably they have? But I will also add that it has by no means been one sided and on the whole what with john lamberton wading in in his various guises constantly stirring things up with all his abuse towards the pro bamber team. Added to the fact that some of those anti bambers have gone over to his forum indicates to me that what they really want is the illusion that they can actually win an argument. Because with all the new evidence that has come to light, not only have they refused to acknowledge this new evidence that completely shatters their whole argument that JB is guilty. But they simply will not budge from the original trial "evidence". But also choose rather to speculate and philosophise about what they think that Sheila Caffell could or could not do.
You know what I think? I think john lamberton has set up his forum because there he can feel safe in the fact that he can post abuse about various members here on this forum without suffering the shame of defeat. You see Hartley also pm'd me as well and I am fully aware of his views, which are that he feels that he cannot contribute any more to the forum. He added that he may or may not be back. But the real reason that most of the anti bamber brigade have left is that they can only reiterate and produce the same old stale arguments. In other words they have left because they have run out of steam as Bob said.

Shona has not deleted her account, she is simply not posting here any more.  She seems to prefer the Lamberton forum, upon the basis that she does not get attacked there.  If she feels more comfortable doing that fair enough, but she will not experience any genuine debate there.  There are only contemptuous attacks on Bamber and his arguments coupled with sneering personal attacks on members of this forum.  The Lamberton forum only exists to attack this forum and it feeds off this forum.  We know that most of the posters there are Lamberton himself but if members here want to participate there good luck to them.

I take on board what Simong says about anti Bamber members feeling this forum is a hostile environment.  I do not entirely accept that this is the reason for Hartley leaving as he has done so several times before then reregistered.  Nevertheless I accept that as moderators/administrators we have not done enough to ensure a level playing field and ensure that posters do not feel driven away by personal attacks.  If Grahame and I are honest I think we should accept that we have been more willing to intervene when pro Bamber posters have been attacked than anti Bamber posters.  If that has meant that some of our regulars no longer want to post I am sorry.  All I can say is that if these posters choose to return I will do my best to ensure that they get a fair and respectful hearing and do not become the subject of personal attacks.  I have not discussed this with Grahame but I believe that he will support me in this.  It is certainly my understanding of the way Mike Tesko wants his forum to be moderated.   

Nothing I have said above relates to the trolls from the facebook guilty page who have periodically attacked this forum.  They are not interested in debate and they are not welcome here. Lamberton himself is banned here as he is on most other forums and that will remain the case.

I hope Simong will decide to post here again and I endorse what Jackie has said.  I do believe that the forum can once again become a venue for frank and vigorous discussion of all viewpoints on the case, and on other topics.  I urge everyone to give this a try.  I will do my best.

[Roch]

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

Nice to hear from you Si.  How's your brother doing?  I hope he is well and that he might pay the forum a visit.  When there are no guilty posters around, I feel I have to do their job for them!  I think the only argument that remains as a line to follow for the guilty argument, is a scenario where JB knew more about the night in question than he has let on.  This might tie in with Julie Mugford's eventual approach to police and any queries that surround the sequence of phone calls.  I've never been able to buy the third party accomplice scenario however.  So for me, the only alternative would imply some kind of Jeremy / Sheila  pact or manipulation scenario.  I've never gone to 100% innocence in my stance on the case.  Though I am probably hovering around 90%.  As for the old guilty posters, I think they could sometimes be prone to getting personal also.  But we wont hold that against them eh.   We all get burnt out on here from time to time.  I hope they return to posting at some point.

Cheers...

[chochokeira]

Rocky
The more evidence that comes to light the tougher it would be for the guilty camp to put up an argument.

Because this is a case of circumstantial evidence everything seems to point to the jury should have found Jeremy innocent because of reasonable doubt.

Just the tiniest thing like the NOTW deal not coming to light or the withholding of some information about how bad Sheilas illness was probably would have changed the jurors verdict

Hartley was very bad tempered off late because we were all fed up with his 'I believe Mugford' statements and it was out in the open he was not impartial as he was a friend of the relatives

He kept that hidden for ages making his arguments and views more credible

It is going to be difficult to find anti Bamber people with the information out there now and there is something strange going on after Shonas message 'she was having to leave the forum'

It was a nice message and we hadn't fallen out so It's a big mystery

I agree with your first, second and third points.  Though the second point seems to have been canceled out over the years, by the relatives' genuine belief in Jeremy's guilt and their successful ability to project this belief on to their associates.  Now I suppose it could be argued that if the silencer evidence is falsified, then the relatives have a vested interest in shoring up their position.  And it becomes difficult for us to decipher whether their belief in Jeremy's guilt actually is genuine.  I suspect if it wasn't, Vidvic and Hartley would have sussed this by now.

I always got on with Hartley but at times I found his opposition to Mike exasperating.  I believe both he and Vidvic (who I have also always personally found decent) have acted out of a misplaced loyalty to the relatives.  They might disagree but that's how I see it.

I didn't see Shona's parting message but I got on very well with her, albeit we were on completely opposite sides.

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

P.S Shona, i am sorry i missed your last pm but i was logged on but not actually at my P.C and missed it, if that makes sense. Please get in touch on my e-mail account.

Hmm, I wonder when that last pm was? Because if she had deleted her account then you would not have received it anyway. You  say that it is not personal to you and that it is not a question of one upmanship with you? Come on simong, that is the whole point of a debate to get one over on the opposition. It is in man's nature to be on the winning side. You also say that it has been that the debates have become personal. Yes probably they have? But I will also add that it has by no means been one sided and on the whole what with john lamberton wading in in his various guises constantly stirring things up with all his abuse towards the pro bamber team. Added to the fact that some of those anti bambers have gone over to his forum indicates to me that what they really want is the illusion that they can actually win an argument. Because with all the new evidence that has come to light, not only have they refused to acknowledge this new evidence that completely shatters their whole argument that JB is guilty. But they simply will not budge from the original trial "evidence". But also choose rather to speculate and philosophise about what they think that Sheila Caffell could or could not do.
You know what I think? I think john lamberton has set up his forum because there he can feel safe in the fact that he can post abuse about various members here on this forum without suffering the shame of defeat. You see Hartley also pm'd me as well and I am fully aware of his views, which are that he feels that he cannot contribute any more to the forum. He added that he may or may not be back. But the real reason that most of the anti bamber brigade have left is that they can only reiterate and produce the same old stale arguments. In other words they have left because they have run out of steam as Bob said.

Shona has not deleted her account, she is simply not posting here any more.  She seems to prefer the Lamberton forum, upon the basis that she does not get attacked there.  If she feels more comfortable doing that fair enough, but she will not experience any genuine debate there.  There are only contemptuous attacks on Bamber and his arguments coupled with sneering personal attacks on members of this forum.  The Lamberton forum only exists to attack this forum and it feeds off this forum.  We know that most of the posters there are Lamberton himself but if members here want to participate there good luck to them.

I take on board what Simong says about anti Bamber members feeling this forum is a hostile environment.  I do not entirely accept that this is the reason for Hartley leaving as he has done so several times before then reregistered.  Nevertheless I accept that as moderators/administrators we have not done enough to ensure a level playing field and ensure that posters do not feel driven away by personal attacks.  If Grahame and I are honest I think we should accept that we have been more willing to intervene when pro Bamber posters have been attacked than anti Bamber posters.  If that has meant that some of our regulars no longer want to post I am sorry.  All I can say is that if these posters choose to return I will do my best to ensure that they get a fair and respectful hearing and do not become the subject of personal attacks.  I have not discussed this with Grahame but I believe that he will support me in this.  It is certainly my understanding of the way Mike Tesko wants his forum to be moderated.   

Nothing I have said above relates to the trolls from the facebook guilty page who have periodically attacked this forum.  They are not interested in debate and they are not welcome here. Lamberton himself is banned here as he is on most other forums and that will remain the case.

I hope Simong will decide to post here again and I endorse what Jackie has said.  I do believe that the forum can once again become a venue for frank and vigorous discussion of all viewpoints on the case, and on other topics.  I urge everyone to give this a try.  I will do my best.

I don't think you're giving yourself the credit you deserve there, NGB. It's my view that you went out of your way to be tolerant to posters of all viewpoints, whether anti, pro or neutral. That's far from easy to do at times when some members seemed intent on all out warfare or when trolls were bombarding us with posts.

Hartley had nothing to complain about. During the last few weeks of his membership he became highly abusive towards Mike and other members, yet he was not banned. Inevitably, some members - and I was one of them - became sick of these offensive posts of Hartley's and challenged them: that, in my opinion, was what peed off Hartley, he cannot bear being challenged.

[clifford]

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

Nice to hear from you Si.  How's your brother doing?  I hope he is well and that he might pay the forum a visit.  When there are no guilty posters around, I feel I have to do their job for them!  I think the only argument that remains as a line to follow for the guilty argument, is a scenario where JB knew more about the night in question than he has let on.  This might tie in with Julie Mugford's eventual approach to police and any queries that surround the sequence of phone calls.  I've never been able to buy the third party accomplice scenario however.  So for me, the only alternative would imply some kind of Jeremy / Sheila  pact or manipulation scenario.  I've never gone to 100% innocence in my stance on the case.  Though I am probably hovering around 90%.  As for the old guilty posters, I think they could sometimes be prone to getting personal also.  But we wont hold that against them eh.   We all get burnt out on here from time to time.  I hope they return to posting at some point.

Cheers...

Hold on Dave, Mugford did not aproach the police did she. Batterby done that, or am I mistaken?

[clifford]

Even though Jeremy had supossibly spilled his guts to her Mugford never blew the whistle.
Does'nt ring true to me.
She viewed the bodies and saw the carnage, yet still stuck by JB.
The woman is an out and out liar.

[Roch]

Cliff, what do you think Battersby's motivation was to drag Mugford to the police?

[chochokeira]

Hey Rochy, Hope you are well Sir. Just thought i would clear up any conspiracy involving the disappearing posters who offered an alternative viewpoint.

The last time i spoke to Hartley by pm (about three or four weeks ago) he seemed exasperated by the forum and couldn't see the point of posting anymore. Nothing to do with the strength of argument against, being pissed off or a change in his opinion of the case, just lethargy. I think it is a real shame as his knowledge of the case was excellent.

I have spoken to Bob and Shona by pm and they seemed sick of posting and things turning personal all the time. I am sure Shona would word that last sentence better but i hope you get the gist. As an observer of the forum it has been interesting to watch as one counter arguer leaves the forum, the Pro Bamber forum members debate more vehemently with the next person with an alternative opinion until, well, we are now as extinct as the Dodo! Although this seems a criticism, it really isn't. The pro JB forum members are very sincere in their belief in a miscarriage of justice. The subject seems very personal to you and the proactive way you have tried to help JB's cause is a credit to you all.

For us with an alternative viewpoint, it just isn't so personal. If Jeremy Bamber gets an appeal and wins his freedom, then i wish him all the best. I speak for myself but posting on here has never been about oneupmanship with you pro JB'ers. I certainly won't be gloating if the CCRC reject his application. This is a man's life we are talking about. I also won't be upset if he succeeds in his application.

It is a shame that all the guys who offered an alternative argument have gone. I am sure that a lot of you will feel that personal battles have been won and we have retreated into a corner to die or lick our wounds. Personally i feel that us guys have disappeared not through the strength of your argument  but because of the atmosphere of the debate.

In closing, I have always had a lot of respect for Mike, in that he allowed us guys to join in and post on this forum. I also feel by doing so, it added a lot of credence to the forum.

All the best
Si

Nice to hear from you Si.  How's your brother doing?  I hope he is well and that he might pay the forum a visit.  When there are no guilty posters around, I feel I have to do their job for them!  I think the only argument that remains as a line to follow for the guilty argument, is a scenario where JB knew more about the night in question than he has let on.  This might tie in with Julie Mugford's eventual approach to police and any queries that surround the sequence of phone calls.  I've never been able to buy the third party accomplice scenario however.  So for me, the only alternative would imply some kind of Jeremy / Sheila  pact or manipulation scenario.  I've never gone to 100% innocence in my stance on the case.  Though I am probably hovering around 90%.  As for the old guilty posters, I think they could sometimes be prone to getting personal also.  But we wont hold that against them eh.   We all get burnt out on here from time to time.  I hope they return to posting at some point.

Cheers...

Hold on Dave, Mugford did not aproach the police did she. Batterby done that, or am I mistaken?

Good point, Cliff

[clifford]

Cliff, what do you think Battersby's motivation was to drag Mugford to the police?

TBH Dave I think Mugford told her porkies, and things snowballed, and she had no way out.
She could not bear to tell Battersby that JB had dumped her, so came up with a story.
Lets be honest here, it got them BOTH off the hook for their past transgressions.
Speaking of which the bank manager stated that the pair of them were with a police officer when they confessed their sins to him. Did he not have to contact the police to say that the bank were not going to take further action.
You try fiddling the bank, and see if they will turn a blind eye. The cops were up to their necks in it.