Mat going by your old posts your not a fan of mine? Now I wonder why that is?
1
Foyer / Re: Hi
« on: Today at 09:45 AM »
Thanks for the welcome, Patti.
ReplyQuoteNotify
2
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:43 AM »
Guys........please, my name is Mat.
One T......
Quote from: Chochok Eira on Today at 09:39 AM
Hi Matt,
You do not appear to have introduced yourself in the foyer, as forum rules require, during any of your brief visits here. Would you do so please? You are not cleared to post until you do this.
Done.
ReplyQuoteNotify
3
Foyer / Hi
« on: Today at 09:41 AM »
Hi.
Believe Bamber is guilty. But happy for an appeal so all questions can be asked.
ReplyQuoteNotify
4
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:35 AM »
Susan.......No! Can't one of the mods here check my I.P address or something to confirm I'm not someone else? First hartley not NGB.
You're all so paranoid.
Gillian, yeah you're right.
ReplyQuoteNotify
5
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:30 AM »
Yes, but I could sit here saying it till I was blue in the face and there would still be doubt that I was telling the truth (understandbly) so the best bet it to wait until the news is officially given to you.
ReplyQuoteNotify
6
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:28 AM »
I'm not Hartley. Thanks Vidvic!
ReplyQuoteNotify
7
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:22 AM »
I knew there would be doubters. I shouldn't have said anything. Maybe I haven't worded it a hundred percent correctly.
But the CRCC have denied the request for appeal. Believe me, or think I'm crazy. You'll see.
ReplyQuoteNotify
8
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: The very best of luck to Jeremy
« on: Today at 09:09 AM »
Just a heads up.
He's lost.
On the grounds of the fact that rather than evidence most of the freshly submitted material posed questions - he's been found guilty and needed to give answers not pose questions.
Nothing new has been submitted to warrant an appeal. In fact, most that has been submitted is being disupted as to the actual reliability of it.
I'm hearing this just now. Don't ask how, but trust me - I'm right.
You'll all learn at 10.
ReplyQuoteNotify
9
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Why would the relatives read this forum?
« on: July 06, 2011, 10:09:PM »
Quote from: hartley on July 06, 2011, 09:18:PM
I'm sorry if this offends, and I'll take whatever punishment I deserve, but somebody really has to say this.
Jackie, you are a complete and utter fucking twat, jog on!
Sorry again everyone.
You, my new friend, are a bloody hero!!!
ReplyQuoteNotify
10
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Nevill could not hit Sheila back
« on: June 29, 2011, 10:02:PM »
Maybe Neville had never hit a girl before.. but he hadn't been faced with a woman pointing a gun at him before. Things change when you're having a weapon pointed at you and it becomes a fight for your life.
ReplyQuoteNotify
11
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Has John taken up Ngb1066 challenge about telling the truth
« on: May 20, 2011, 03:05:AM »
I rarely post here, I just read for opinions and update. But all the silly fighting between members is making topics unreadable and a moderator should start deleting posts where people are fighting or telling each other that they're going to be.
It ruins the flow of a topic when you've got a good debate happening and people are discussing facts - when suddenly rubbish is posted and people are called names, Jackie being TERRIBLE for this.
ReplyQuoteNotify
12
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: DC Hammersley
« on: March 30, 2011, 11:12:PM »
Quote from: shonapugs on March 30, 2011, 09:53:PM
Forgive me, everyone - was it Hammersley who was supposedly smuggled out in a body-bag?
Is this a true rumour? Or are you joking?
ReplyQuoteNotify
13
Jeremy Bamber Case Discussion / Re: Backspatter phenomena, could not have occurred at time of fatal shot under chin
« on: March 05, 2011, 10:28:PM »
Quote from: Hartley on March 04, 2011, 05:10:PM
According to Mr Fletcher a fire arms expert who gave evidence at the 2002 appeal stated that:
Quote
