Sniffer dog

[Nuala]

Nick,

Even the obvious relish with which you refer to unattributed and unproven claims about Jeremy, as above, in order to blacken Jeremy's character tends to undermine your claim to objectivity. Many of your claims are every bit as subjective as mine are at times. All of us here are subjective at times.

[Newbury1]

Nick,

Your comment,


"Thanks for your reply Grahame. I was just interested as some of the comments (While in NZ......) clearly refer again to the darker side of JB!"


contradicts your claims above. This comment represents use of uncorroborated, unverified and unattributed claims that could have been posted to Wikipedia by anyone, including those desperate to keep Jeremy in prison, to craftily blacken Jeremy's reputation here.

This comment is implicitly subjective and biased.

I simply suggested the comments made (not by me) refer to JB's darker side, which they do! - I did not write these comments - I am simply referring to them for comment - I do not use them to back any of my posts - I do not say I agree with them!, but...........!

 

[Newbury1]

Nick,

Even the obvious relish with which you refer to unattributed and unproven claims about Jeremy, as above, in order to blacken Jeremy's character tends to undermine your claim to objectivity. Many of your claims are every bit as subjective as mine are at times. All of us here are subjective at times.

I don't "relish" blackening JB's character, as you so boldly put it, he did a good enough job of doing that himself!

[jon]

I don't "relish" blackening JB's character, as you so boldly put it, he did a good enough job of doing that himself!

By doing what ?

[Nuala]

I don't "relish" blackening JB's character, as you so boldly put it, he did a good enough job of doing that himself!

Thank you. You have just confirmed my points

[Nuala]

I simply suggested the comments made (not by me) refer to JB's darker side, which they do! - I did not write these comments - I am simply referring to them for comment - I do not use them to back any of my posts - I do not say I agree with them!, but...........!

Nick,

You are using unattributed, uncorroborated and unproven claims from unreliable Wikipedia to support the negative view of Jeremy which you repeatedly promote here. It is absurd for you to attempt to take the high moral ground and to paint yourself as objective when you are every bit as subjective and biased as the rest of us are at times.

[Newbury1]

By doing what ?

Jon , are you serious or just winding me up!

JB dealing drugs / JB breaking in to the caravan site and stealing money are just two examples!

If any of JB's friends, now or then, want to suggest he had an exemplary charter then so be it, and if you want believe that then so be it!

If there is a witness list for the defence available called to support JB's good character then so be it. I'd certainly like to see it!

Do you believe JB didn't deal drugs?

Do you believe JB didn't break into the caravan park office and steal money?

Can you please advise me of any witness called by the defence to support JB's good character?

Do you believe JB was an angel, bearing in mind his actions following the murders (and I hope you are aware of these as I do not want to list them)?

[Newbury1]

Nick,

You are using unattributed, uncorroborated and unproven claims from unreliable Wikipedia to support the negative view of Jeremy which you repeatedly promote here. It is absurd for you to attempt to take the high moral ground and to paint yourself as objective when you are every bit as subjective and biased as the rest of us are at times.

Choc, I agree we both refer to unattributed, uncorroborated and unproven claims from unreliable sources!

But, I repeat, I do not use these to support my posts.........!

[Nuala]

Jon , are you serious or just winding me up!

JB dealing drugs / JB breaking in to the caravan site and stealing money are just two examples!

If any of JB's friends, now or then, want to suggest he had an exemplary charter then so bit, and if you want believe that then so be it!

If there is a witness list for the defence available called to support JB's good character then so be it. I'd certainly like to see it!

Do you believe JB didn't deal drugs?

Do you believe JB didn't break into the caravan park office and steal money?

Can you please advise me of any witness called by the defence to support JB's good character?

Do you believe JB was an angel, bearing in mind his actions following the murders (and I hope you are aware of these as I do not want to list them)?

Nick,

Why do you repeatedly attempt to blacken Jeremy's character by exaggerating his faults yet never detail the flaws in Sheila's character? Why do you take such relish in attacking Jeremy in such a one sided manner?

Sheila used class A drugs and attended weekly glamour parties where lines of coke were on the table

Colin said he believed Sheila's friend, Freddie, was a drug dealer - was Sheila involved?

Sheila posed for pornographic photos

Sheila had sexual experiences as a minor

Sheila was diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia

There are witness statements of Sheila's severe and violent psychotic episodes and mental disturbance

Sheila's violence made Freddie fear for the safety of everyone in her flat

Sheila's violent psychotic attacks had led to her twice being hospitalised in psychiatric clinics

Sheila's sons had to be removed from her care because they were at risk

Sheila told her psychiatrist that she feared that she and her sons would harm or rape each other

Sheila told her father that she was the Virgin Mary with a mission to save the world

Sheila believed that she and her family were possessed by the devil

Sheila was passed from one surrogate mother to another as a baby to a far greater extent that Jeremy

Sheila experienced far more disruption of her crucial developmental stages than Jeremy did.

In short, poor Sheila had a murderers profile, whereas Jeremy did not.

Yet we never hear any of this from you, you are instead intent on repeatedly attacking Jeremy's character while ignoring Sheila's many, serious problems.

[Newbury1]

Nick,

Why do you repeatedly attempt to blacken Jeremy's character by exaggerating his faults yet never detail the flaws in Sheila's character? Why do you take such relish in attacking Jeremy in such a one sided manner?

Sheila used class A drugs and attended weekly glamour parties where lines of coke were on the table

Colin said he believed Sheila's friend, Freddie, was a drug dealer - was Sheila involved?

Sheila posed for pornographic photos

Sheila had sexual experiences as a minor

Sheila was diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia

There are witness statements of Sheila's severe and violent psychotic episodes and mental disturbance

Sheila's violence made Freddie fear for the safety of everyone in her flat

Sheila's violent psychotic attacks had led to her twice being hospitalised in psychiatric clinics

Sheila's sons had to be removed from her care because they were at risk

Sheila told her psychiatrist that she feared that she and her sons would harm or rape each other

Sheila told her father that she was the Virgin Mary with a mission to save the world

Sheila believed that she and her family were possessed by the devil

Sheila was passed from one surrogate mother to another as a baby to a far greater extent that Jeremy

Sheila experienced far more disruption of her crucial developmental stages than Jeremy did.

In short, poor Sheila had a murderers profile, whereas Jeremy did not.

Yet we never hear any of this from you, you are instead intent on repeatedly attacking Jeremy's character while ignoring Sheila's many, serious problems.

Quote from me "he did a good enough job of doing that himself! Question from Jon - By doing what ?

I was simply replying to Jon's question!! 

Please note the context of my answer, and not just your slanted take on it!

Jon didn't ask me about Sheila's problems, but you have now provided a list 

 

[Hartley]

Any idea where the woods are?

Nope, I'm really sorry, all of these blasted trees are in the way. 

[tyler]

Any idea where the woods are?

Nope, I'm really sorry, all of these blasted trees are in the way. 

I do hope this isnt a pop at Keira?Getting in on other peoples disagreements again?
Some things(or peolple) never change 

[Newbury1]

I do hope this isn't a pop at Keira?Getting in on other peoples disagreements again?
Some things(or people) never change 

Hi Tyler, you've just fallen in by your comment (oops! so Have I  )!

Choc does jump on the back of others disagreements and hammered into Hartley after he had been banned. It's the nature of the forum!

[Nuala]

I do hope this isnt a pop at Keira?Getting in on other peoples disagreements again?
Some things(or peolple) never change 

Thank you, Tyler!

[Hartley]

I do hope this isnt a pop at Keira?Getting in on other peoples disagreements again?
Some things(or peolple) never change 

No it wasn't. Although perhaps you may like to heed your own advice.