Book Reviews - Murders/Suicide at WHF

[susan]

Hi Roch thanks for clearing that up I was beginning to think it was two football clubs in the European Cup

[-Harters-]

Would you say that your personal ID has been exposed on this forum and info dredged up about you that has been used to degrade you in some way?  Photos of your house or person etc?  If not, then I don't think it's the same.  However I have no wish to minimise your grievance in any way.

I'm not talking about me Roch, I think you may have the wrong end of the stick, so to speak, there is no grievance to minimise. Unless you know something I don't?

However, I do see the motivation as being the same, regardless as to whether anything is discovered and shared or not.

My original comment:

Unfortunately this appears to be what it degrades to, nothing more than people seeking to discredit each other.

In reality it's all quite irrelevant, other than to those wishing to score meaningless points in a meaningless exchange.

Tit for tat and repeat.

..... is referring to the level of animosity displayed and the points scoring which has pretty much enveloped and taken over every aspect of this forum and is intrinsically linked to bad relations formed with 'The Other' forum and its members.

The research into members identities is simply a part of that.

Posts such as:

Note to those on the L forum. who are interested in blacking people's names by revealing skeletons in their past should do their research on Ducky Drake. I will say no more, only "good night ducky".

Leads me to think that people enjoy the conflict.

[-Harters-]

You have been very well protected here Hartley and that will continue.  I hope/believe that you realise that.  It has taken some effort I can assure you.  People are naturally curious and there is nothing inherantly wrong in that.  It is the use which is made of information which is important in my view.  We do our best to ensure that proper standards are maintained here.

I am fully aware of that NGB.

[Roch]

Did you read the Drake links?  I thought it was interesting.  Those men protested their innocence for 19 years.  If while they were still in prison, I had said that to the red forum or several posters on here, I would have received a reply to the effect  "Well what else have they got to do?"   And if I'd suggested that they were fitted up by the police, I would have received the reply "I'm not generally in to conspiracy theories".

I know this isn't relevant to your point...

[-Harters-]

Did you read the Drake links?  I thought it was interesting.  Those men protested their innocence for 19 years.  If while they were still in prison, I had said that to the red forum or several posters on here, I would have received a reply to the effect  "Well what else have they got to do?"   And if I'd suggested that they were fitted up by the police, I would have received the reply "I'm not generally in to conspiracy theories".

I know this isn't relevant to your point...

I don't see the relevance. 

Yes interesting I suppose, particularly in the sense it is more about proving an unfair trial than proving innocence. Although I don't think that guessing what peoples reactions to another case would be, to be particularly helpful, if anything it assists in highlighting the divide, just in a more civil manner.

For all of it's interest, the actual reason the link was posted, is really quite boring.

[Roch]

I don't see the relevance. 

Yes interesting I suppose, particularly in the sense it is more about proving an unfair trial than proving innocence. Although I don't think that guessing what peopled reactions to another case would be, to be particularly helpful, if anything it assists in highlighting the divide, just in a more civil manner.

For all of it's interest, the actual reason the link was posted, is really quite boring.

It shows Drake and the system of justice to be completely fallible to police corruption, with a nice 19 year gap in between him / the jury being conned and exposure.  In the intervening 19 years, nobody managed to prove this to be the case.  Presumably all the prosecution statements in the intervening years must have all present and correct? 

[-Harters-]

It shows Drake and the system of justice to be completely fallible to police corruption, with a nice 19 year gap in between him / the jury being conned and exposure.  In the intervening 19 years, nobody managed to prove this to be the case.  Presumably all the prosecution statements in the intervening years must have all present and correct?

Sure, but nobody is suggesting otherwise, just because something happened somewhere else, it doesn't mean it happened here.

Likewise, if I give you a link to a case which shows the opposite, it doesn't reinforce my view.

[Roch]

Sure, but nobody is suggesting otherwise, just because something happened somewhere else, it doesn't mean it happened here.

Likewise, if I give you a link to a case which shows the opposite, it doesn't reinforce my view.

I understand the point you're making but it's more convenient for your side to take that line and it's more convenient for my side to take the opposite line.  Drake was conned by police corruption -  the system was conned by police corruption (i.e. both in the Bridgewater case).  The prosecution witness statements in the Bamber case are corrupt in my opinion, as is the silencer exhibit.  In my opinion, Drake and the jury were conned.  If the prosecution witnesses ever have the conviction or courage to take polygraphs, then depending on the results, I might take your line. 

[campion]

Roch,  Quotes from Cynthia Payne are interesting/boring?
  Vicars mp's and lawyers were among those who considered me to be the best Hostess in London.
  One barrister used to come when his court was closed at 4o/c.  He'd rush upstairs with his suitcase, and come downstairs as Mau d.

[Roch]

Roch,  Quotes from Cynthia Payne are interesting/boring?
  Vicars mp's and lawyers were among those who considered me to be the best Hostess in London.
  One barrister used to come when his court was closed at 4o/c.  He'd rush upstairs with his suitcase, and come downstairs as Mau d.

Didn't it become a bit of a cliche in 80's / 90's that one or two High Court judges would be dressed as babies for this kind of thing?  A mixture of corrective punishment and nurturing to ensue from Cynthia & co?

[campion]

  Roch,  And then Madam Cyn would say :-
  'Come into the Garden M... , AND LET ME TAKE DOWN YOUR PARTICULARS    !!!

[Roch]

  Roch,  And then Madam Cyn would say :-
  'Come into the Garden M... , AND LET ME TAKE DOWN YOUR PARTICULARS    !!!

I suppose Judges are only human.  We shouldn't begrudge them their kicks.

[ajross]

The jury in Jeremy's case,were " persuaded " by the judge who instructed them that the silencer " on its own " could lead them to believe that JB was guilty.
It's up to a jury ( such as it is ) to study a case,any case,before reaching their own conclusions instead of being swayed by the words of a judge and the manner in which he says them.It depends how gullible the jury is to take a judges word as  final,,instead of having worked out a case for themselves.
Judges aren't always right in their summing up.
In this case,,,yes,,,,I would blame the judge.

In Wilkes' book the judge suggests the he shouldn't be convicted on the silencer evidence alone. I think the problem with what he said is more that he lets personal opinion to creep in.

[ajross]

If anybody is interested I have just bought a VHS on amazon called Great Crimes and Trials - imperfect timings Robert Witney Duddy/Jeremy Bamber. Mine cost me 10p plus 2.80 postage, it is from a new seller so may never turn up but there is another copy for £14.99

[mertol22]

Sounds like a steal like the Signed Scott Lomax patti scooped on Amazon.