Has your position changed?

[tonyb]

Anyone changed their minds on guilty / innocent by viewing the forum.

[andrea]

I have, as you know.

As for others, i dont know, i know shona thought he was innocent, until she came on here.

[nugnug]

mine has in thought he was guilty till i came on here.

[Newbury1]

My postion on JB's guilt on joining the forum was c.60% now its nearer 80%.

However; I do believe any withheld information should be on the table and I do believe some of the evidence has been tampered with / distorted or deliberately destroyed.

If you could determine "reasonable doubt" as a % (that would deliver a not guilty vote), what would that % be?

[andrea]

60% plus?
Not my strong point!

[tonyb]

I thought I'd better post mine. I always believed he was innocent but on reflection I believe that a botched investigation,myths,spin,dredful defence didn't make a difference to the correct outcome. You know I trully hope I am wrong but the evidence and proof as released on here lead me to that conclusion. I do however hope they find in favor and order a retrial. However unlikely that may be. Tony, the fucking idiot clown     

[ngb1066]

I had an open mind but tended towards guilty until I started reading the material here a year ago.  I progressively became convinced that a serious miscarriage of justice had occurred.  The forum is in my view the best resource for information on the case.

[sc82]

I don't know any more. When i first came here I was very much on the fence. I try to look at it from all sides. I then started to be much more on the innocent side. In the last few weeks I've become very confused and I must be honest that is very much to do with the whole Z situation, and now we're expected to follow the "Taff Jones was murdered".  It just makes those who are pro Bamber look like fools. I'm starting to feel like I need to see much more evidence instead of heresay and Mike insisting its true because he says it is.  Oh god, I'm going to get lynched now ...

[andrea]

I don't know any more. When i first came here I was very much on the fence. I try to look at it from all sides. I then started to be much more on the innocent side. In the last few weeks I've become very confused and I must be honest that is very much to do with the whole Z situation, and now we're expected to follow the "Taff Jones was murdered".  It just makes those who are pro Bamber look like fools. I'm starting to feel like I need to see much more evidence instead of heresay and Mike insisting its true because he says it is.  Oh god, I'm going to get lynched now ...

Good post sc82

[tonyb]

I don't know any more. When i first came here I was very much on the fence. I try to look at it from all sides. I then started to be much more on the innocent side. In the last few weeks I've become very confused and I must be honest that is very much to do with the whole Z situation, and now we're expected to follow the "Taff Jones was murdered".  It just makes those who are pro Bamber look like fools. I'm starting to feel like I need to see much more evidence instead of heresay and Mike insisting its true because he says it is.  Oh god, I'm going to get lynched now ...

Spot on. Plus one

[ngb1066]

I don't know any more. When i first came here I was very much on the fence. I try to look at it from all sides. I then started to be much more on the innocent side. In the last few weeks I've become very confused and I must be honest that is very much to do with the whole Z situation, and now we're expected to follow the "Taff Jones was murdered".  It just makes those who are pro Bamber look like fools. I'm starting to feel like I need to see much more evidence instead of heresay and Mike insisting its true because he says it is.  Oh god, I'm going to get lynched now ...

Mike presents a lot of theories based upon his detailed knowledge of the case evidence.  Mike has made it clear that he does that to stimulate debate, and he succeeds in doing that.  Just because you may disagree with some of Mike's theories should not in my view affect your overall view on the case.  Assess the material here and reach your own overall conclusions.  That is what I have done.  I have not agreed with all of Mike's ideas but I have to say I find most of them convincing and they accord with my own analysis of the case.  Mike's posts on the silencer evidence in particular are very carefully reasoned and are powerful.

[sc82]

Sorry that shouldve said "expected to follow the whole "Taff Jones was murdered" theory". Don't get me wrong, I still think the whole case stinks to high heaven and I am still more on the innocent side but I'll be honest and say i'm not 100%. I can still see where some of the "guilty" arguments are coming from. I would say that I hope the CCRC come through for Jeremy. I don't think anyone can seriously say he had a fair trial. On the evidence we've seen, in my opinion, his conviction isn't safe. For me, I've yet to see any concrete evidence of his guilt and in my opinion, for that reason, he shouldn't be in jail. Beyond reasonable doubt and all that 

[tonyb]

Mike presents a lot of theories based upon his detailed knowledge of the case evidence.  Mike has made it clear that he does that to stimulate debate, and he succeeds in doing that.  Just because you may disagree with some of Mike's theories should not in my view affect your overall view on the case.  Assess the material here and reach your own overall conclusions.  That is what I have done.  I have not agreed with all of Mike's ideas but I have to say I find most of them convincing and they accord with my own analysis of the case.  Mike's posts on the silencer evidence in particular are very carefully reasoned and are powerful.

I'm going to reply to regards mikes silencer evidence. The Photos he produced and claimed were of widdam fitting it to the rifle after a lot of posting became a re enactment of the event that happened in the armoury and was happy with the use photos of the reconstruction of the scene. When I pointed out the obvious he calls me a fucking idiot and clown. Truth hurts if you spout bullshit. If he stuck with the FACTS and didn't embellish fact wit fiction I think everyone would be happier and better informed

[Newbury1]

60% plus?
Not my strong point!

Hi Andrea - therefore reasonable doubt in your opinion is 60%.

In other words if you only thought Bamber 40% guilty, that would represent enough reasonable doubt to vote not guilty?

It must be such a difficult job for a real Jury member - you could either be letting a mass murderer go free or condemn and innocent man to life in prison - not a job for the faint hearted.

If we had the Scottish option of "not proven" in this country I believe JB would have walked, but not as an outright innocent man!

[andrea]

Hi Andrea - therefore reasonable doubt in your opinion is 60%.

In other words if you only thought Bamber 40% guilty, that would represent enough reasonable doubt to vote not guilty?

It must be such a difficult job for a real Jury member - you could either be letting a mass murderer go free or condemn and innocent man to life in prison - not a job for the faint hearted.

If we had the Scottish option of "not proven" in this country I believe JB would have walked, but not as an outright innocent man!

Told you it wasnt my strong point, maths!

what do you think is more realistic? 90%