"Womans body" seen in Kitchen through Kitchen window (PS Adams)...

[sandy]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Didn't someone state yesterday that there has been a falling out between Jeremy and the CCRC, what is all that about?

Surely that will mean the end of any possible referral.

He wants the negatives off the CCRC but the CCRC don't own the negatives and Bambers legal team are allowed to go and see them themselves and have not. If this is all he is relying on his referral is doomed, else why make all this fuss.

Hi porthouse.  I think it is doomed anyway since there is nothing new in any of the reports.  How did you find out about the negatives anyway?  I was told that there is a huge legal issue involved here and that Jeremy will just not be told what can be done under existing laws.

[porthouse]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Didn't someone state yesterday that there has been a falling out between Jeremy and the CCRC, what is all that about?

Surely that will mean the end of any possible referral.

I mentioned it since i was informed of a huge rift between Jeremy and the CCRC over legal issues.  Thus why Jeremy had asked for the forum to be taken down.  Apparently the CCRC don't like public criticism of any sort, goes against their already tarnished image.

Yes but who would the Public believe over these issues?? a liar and a murderer or professional people..I know who i would.

[Roch]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Is it possible that it can only be 'proved' in real terms, if the remaining contemporaneous logs and pocketbooks are also released?

[porthouse]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Is it possible that it can only be 'proved' in real terms, if the remaining contemporaneous logs and pocketbooks are also released?

The officer himself said he made a mistake when later interviewed and you can't get more real facts than that.

[John]

The police are not infallible, I should know as I once worked for them.  They do make mistakes and don't always own up to them.  I personally have seen that the situation is getting worse now and something really needs to be done.

[Roch]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Is it possible that it can only be 'proved' in real terms, if the remaining contemporaneous logs and pocketbooks are also released?

The officer himself said he made a mistake when later interviewed and you can't get more real facts than that.

Then why withhold the documents referred to above?  Are you insinuating that police officers are not capable of telling lies like any other human being?

[porthouse]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Is it possible that it can only be 'proved' in real terms, if the remaining contemporaneous logs and pocketbooks are also released?

The officer himself said he made a mistake when later interviewed and you can't get more real facts than that.

Then why withhold the documents referred to above?  Are you insinuating that police officers are not capable of telling lies like any other human being?

You can't keep saying it's lies when these facts have been proven.

[Kaldin]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

How do you know they've looked into it? I haven't seen anything from the CCRC regarding that issue.

[porthouse]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

How do you know they've looked into it? I haven't seen anything from the CCRC regarding that issue.

That was one of Bambers many fantastic new evidence received by the CCRC and was also looked into at the 2002 appeal.

[Kaldin]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

How do you know they've looked into it? I haven't seen anything from the CCRC regarding that issue.

That was one of Bambers many fantastic new evidence received by the CCRC and was also looked into at the 2002 appeal.

Yes, but did the judges have all the logs at the 2002 appeal?

[smiffy]

porthouse posted;
You can't keep saying it's lies when these facts have been proven

You can.
what is a fact in a legal sense?... a determination on evidence presented at a given time.

what is established as fact in a legal sense can be changed by the use of evidence not previously used that may change what is proven fact at one given time to a new proven fact at a later time.

in the process evidence that was once taken as being truthful by the additional evidence may later be considered to be untruthful..ie lies.


of course people can claim by considering evidence not available at trial that some of the evidence given at trial that was accepted as truth to be lies with this evidence at hand.

porthouse's comment is thus rendered incorrect and wrongly founded. People are justified in making claims that witnesses were telling lies in the case.

[John]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

How do you know they've looked into it? I haven't seen anything from the CCRC regarding that issue.

That was one of Bambers many fantastic new evidence received by the CCRC and was also looked into at the 2002 appeal.

It never ceases to amaze me of all this new fantastic evidence which ultimately amounts to zilch.

Where is this evidence that Jeremy didn't murder his family because I have yet to see anything which comes anywhere near.  The evidence provided to the trial albeit circumstantial does in fact provide an extremely valid basis for a conviction and has in fact withstood the test of time these last 26 odd years.

I wonder do those who advocate on behalf of Jeremy really know what they are doing now or are they so influenced by sentiment that they cannot see the wood for the trees anymore?

[Roch]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

Didn't someone state yesterday that there has been a falling out between Jeremy and the CCRC, what is all that about?

Surely that will mean the end of any possible referral.

He wants the negatives off the CCRC but the CCRC don't own the negatives and Bambers legal team are allowed to go and see them themselves and have not. If this is all he is relying on his referral is doomed, else why make all this fuss.

The negatives need to be examined under great scrutiny.  In 2007, during an adjournment debate about withheld evidence in this case, Fiona Mactaggart stood up in the House of Commons and said 'the CCRC is nobody's patsy'.  Exactly what does 'allowed to go and see' entail re these negatives?  It sounds like EP don't want Sutherst going anywhere near them.

[Richard lee]

If these logs have been introduced as a grounds for appeal, can the CCRC not call on the firearms team to make statements? I'm not convinced that Sheila was downstairs but I do think the logs need explaining because there is room for doubt there. If I was on the CCRC I'd want to know what they meant.

The CCRC have looked into this and taken statements and to be honest is just going over old ground and was proved that the officer made the mistake saying he thought it was a woman and thats when it was written one dead male and female when in fact it was only one dead male.

How do you know they've looked into it? I haven't seen anything from the CCRC regarding that issue.

That was one of Bambers many fantastic new evidence received by the CCRC and was also looked into at the 2002 appeal.

It never ceases to amaze me of all this new fantastic evidence which ultimately amounts to zilch.

Where is this evidence that Jeremy didn't murder his family because I have yet to see anything which comes anywhere near.  The evidence provided to the trial albeit circumstantial does in fact provide an extremely valid basis for a conviction and has in fact withstood the test of time these last 26 odd years.

I wonder do those who advocate on behalf of Jeremy really know what they are doing now or are they so influenced by sentiment that they cannot see the wood for the trees anymore?

That's true and all this other new evidence is BS too about Taff Jones notebook etc and SC was still alive because they were all dead when the Police got there and that's why JB has never made a fuss about these new finds cause he knows it's false and he left them all dead as the Police found them. By his few supporters keep making up these stupid clams, they really do undermine his case.

[nugnug]

if its all bullshit why are the police still holding on to the evidence.

why dint they release it all to prove its bullshit.