A Question For Hartley

[Hartley]

And why should he not be Hartley?
The family had seen to it that he was to spend the rest of his life in gaol.
They were not happy with the guilty verdict, but wanted more. Sad thing is they got it.
Please do not insult my intellegence by suggesting the family were heart broken.
The deaths saved their arses, and you know it.

Cliff, I hope I'm misinterpreting what you have written, if I am not then you have certainly gone down in my estimation. 

[Buddy]

I think it was the murder of five family members that really did it.

Substitute family members to cash cows, and I might agree

[grahameb]

There is clear evidence that marks on the aga surround were deliberately made on 11th September 1985, and that a silencer which was used to make those additional marks, did not get sent to the lab' to be checked for blood and fibres, until 20th September 1985 - a presence of this paint from the aga on the silencer was used to secure the convictions for these murders...

Jeremy is only convicted of the murders by verdict of a jury based on false evidence, it does not mean that he killed anyone, it only means he is convicted, in the same way that those who are found not guilty, could have committed the crimes they were found not guilty of?

What matters is the quality of the evidence used by the prosecution to secure the convictions, convictions would only be valid if the evidence used was above suspicion, and not dodgy ...

I still can't get my head round the fact they accepted the silencer as evidence? There were no "independent witnesses" to testify that (1) they did actually find the silencer and (2) that they found it in that condition? How could that happen in a British court of law and then again that it was never objected to by the defence? As strange as it may seem it was as if the defence also wanted to see him convicted? For the more I look into the defences cross examination the less confidence I have in the defence?

I can even remember as I sat in front of the television watching the news that night wondering with astonishment just how a man could be convicted on such shallow and unconvincing evidence? I remember asking my trainee barrister friend of mine at the time if there was any way that I could get hold of the trial transcript. She told me that probably there was no way of doing so. So I really felt even back then after the original trial that there had been a gross miscarriage of justice.

So I truly am astonished that none of the family, absolutely none of the family has even an ounce of doubt that Jeremy is guilty? Because there are so many inconsistencies which have been discussed already that must at least make them even consider the remote possibility that he may indeed be innocent. I am quite simply dumbfounded that they all without exception have no doubt at all that they could be mistaken?

Sorry, but I cannot see them as a normal balanced family. It just does not happen in a real family. This lack of love and forgiveness for one of their own. Do they go to church I wonder? Well if they do then they are certainly in contradiction at least where the command for forgiveness by Jesus  is concerned, that is if they think him to be guilty?

[Hartley]

Substitute family members to cash cows, and I might agree

Well, you certainly blow hot and cold, yesterday you made a big song and dance about Mike calling me an idiot, yet today you suggest that surviving family members are happy that five of their relatives were murdered.

I find that a hundred times more offensive than being called an idiot, heck I'm almost embarrassed for you. 

I don't suppose a mod/admin will find this worthy of being reported? 

[Buddy]

Well, you certainly blow hot and cold, yesterday you made a big song and dance about Mike calling me an idiot, yet today you suggest that surviving family members are happy that five of their relatives were murdered.

I find that a hundred times more offensive than being called an idiot, heck I'm almost embarrassed for you. 

I don't suppose a mod/admin will find this worthy of being reported? 

I made a song and dance because I do not consider you an idiot, but you are somewhat blinkered.
And get off your high horse harts, I post as I see it, the same as you.
Winging to the mods does your credibility no justice.

[Hartley]

I made a song and dance because I do not consider you an idiot, but you are somewhat blinkered.
And get off your high horse harts, I post as I see it, the same as you.
Winging to the mods does your credibility no justice.

Sorry, complaining about a pretty sick comment that you have made about victims of this case somehow affects my credibility? 

Wow, just wow. 

[jf71]

What was presented to the jury regarding jeremy's behaviour after the horrible event at whf ?

[Roch]

Hartley

Another important factor to consider, is that not a single piece of information or evidence which has been released, indicates that a miscarriage of justice has occurred in this case.

That's a very bold statement to be making, as if it's a gospel truth, when in actual fact it is no more than your own personal opinion... contrary to what you have stated below.

Hartley

That is not simply my opinion, but is taken from the fact that despite two appeals and the current submission to the CCRC, Jeremy's conviction and sentence remains intact.

Me

I wouldn't fancy watching you use this same reasoning to Eddie Gilfoyle.  Well I would... but only at a safe distance.

I was questioning the reasoning you used to substantiate your 'important factor to consider'. 

I've watched a couple of Eddie Gilfoyle videos on Youtube.  He's not one for pulling punches and he doesn't appear to suffer fools.  You are aware of the 'Don't Let it be You' campaign and associated document.  I took the line that there will be valid reasons why Eddie Gilfoyle and Susan May have linked in with Jeremy Bamber, for this particular campaign.  I cannot imagine that they would simply jump in to bed with a child murderer, in an attempt to bring to light their own miscarriages of justice? 

Hartley

to state that because something was withheld in another case that upon it's release proved the authorities got it wrong, is not an argument to be used in yet another case without sufficient justification.

What might help to settle this either way, would be for stuff requested to actually be released, otherwise it's a mute point isn't it?  You keep making the point that it's folly to assume the stuff being withheld proves Jeremy Bamber's innocence.  Well it can hardly further prove his guilt can it? Otherwise it would never have been withheld in the first place.

Nick

I asked roch for an explanation... its a relative non-point to me

Nick, no offence but you do the same when you demand that Mike Tesko substantiate every nuance relating to allegations of perverting the course of justice, fabrication of evidence etc.  As if EP keep a 'R v Bamber Corruption File' just in case the defence need it. 

[Chochokeira]

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, is it an attempted derogatory comment, if it is then it needs some .... erm ..... work, I guess.  If you are at work then perhaps you should not be posting on a forum when you should be working?

Which is precisely the point I have been making which you appear unable to understand, even though you are saying exactly the same thing.

There is no evidence (unlikely to be is an incorrect description).

There are allegedly some documents that are withheld, which may or may not contain evidence indicating Jeremy to be innocent.

Nobody has seen the withheld files.

Therefore, there is no reason to assume that they may contain evidence indicating Jeremys innocence, it is clutching at straws.

In fact the evidence which is available shows Jeremy to be guilty, so it is illogical to dismiss that based on something which might not even exist.

Allegedly withheld my foot! I wonder what it was Hartley that robbed you of a sense of justice and of your humanity.

[Chochokeira]

Good post Keira.

Thanks, Cliff.

[Jackiepreece]

Brilliant Rochy!!!
Brilliant Keira I especially liked the humanity comment

There is non and I have looked hard
It does not make sense Haiti and Jeremy

It's personal and involves money

[jon]

Brilliant Rochy!!!
Brilliant Keira I especially liked the humanity comment

There is non and I have looked hard
It does not make sense Haiti and Jeremy

It's personal and involves money

COLP never found any proof of that visit to Haiti !!

[Chochokeira]

COLP never found any proof of that visit to Haiti !!

 

[Jackiepreece]

 :D :D :D

Jon you are getting funnier everyday !!!!

[Buddy]

Cliff, I hope I'm misinterpreting what you have written, if I am not then you have certainly gone down in my estimation. 

A bit OTT there apologies