Book Reviews - Murders/Suicide at WHF

[lookout]

Steve,,books like this wouldn't be written if there wasn't any truth in what was said. Because there is every chance that Jeremy is innocent,it's the authors' way of literally telling the world that he's been dealt an unfair deal,i.e. unfair trial and an overall weak defence during the trial and subsequent appeals.
Part of the reason for this,is material hidden from view for years,,,,,,impaired/contaminated forensic tests,,,,
and a " rush " to get him convicted,for reasons that will be made clear in time.

Notice that there were no books supporting Peter Sutcliffe and his ilk,,because it was a foregone conclusion that he was guilty,and those like him were.
It has now been made aware,that along with other MOJ's,,that Jeremys' case indeed is cause for alarm concerning  a miscarriage,hence this is why he is determined to see it through this time round.

Why shouldn't the public know that the biggest mistake in history has been made.? It's only by writing books such as Scott Lomax has written,that Jeremy and others like him have got a chance of fighting their corners.

[maggie]

Hi steve, do you not have the slightest, teeniest doubt that Jeremy Bamberjustt may be innocent? Suely we should always have an element of doubt in any opinion we hold. Maybe not Mike who spent so much time with Jeremy but generally surely such doubt is healthy. As we weren't there we do surely have to keep a slightly open mind. Does it not ever worry you that an innocent man may have spent 27 years in prison and you believe this man should never be free   I just wonder how you can be so definitely sure.

[Steve_uk]

Steve,,books like this wouldn't be written if there wasn't any truth in what was said. Because there is every chance that Jeremy is innocent,it's the authors' way of literally telling the world that he's been dealt an unfair deal,i.e. unfair trial and an overall weak defence during the trial and subsequent appeals.
Part of the reason for this,is material hidden from view for years,,,,,,impaired/contaminated forensic tests,,,,
and a " rush " to get him convicted,for reasons that will be made clear in time.

Notice that there were no books supporting Peter Sutcliffe and his ilk,,because it was a foregone conclusion that he was guilty,and those like him were.
It has now been made aware,that along with other MOJ's,,that Jeremys' case indeed is cause for alarm concerning  a miscarriage,hence this is why he is determined to see it through this time round.

Why shouldn't the public know that the biggest mistake in history has been made.? It's only by writing books such as Scott Lomax has written,that Jeremy and others like him have got a chance of fighting their corners.

Lookout I don't mind Jeremy Bamber going through the legitimate court process,but you know as well as I do that some of these books are made just to make money for the authors. I also don't think it's appropriate that Jeremy should be allowed to take part in a radio phone in or give a television interview. It's awarding him a status which he does not deserve and it's upsetting to the relatives.

[Steve_uk]

Hi steve, do you not have the slightest, teeniest doubt that Jeremy Bamberjustt may be innocent? Suely we should always have an element of doubt in any opinion we hold. Maybe not Mike who spent so much time with Jeremy but generally surely such doubt is healthy. As we weren't there we do surely have to keep a slightly open mind. Does it not ever worry you that an innocent man may have spent 27 years in prison and you believe this man should never be free   I just wonder how you can be so definitely sure.

Because I've weighed the evidence and I'm sure that even if Sheila had drifted into a state of psychosis due to the Haloperidol having dissipated from her system(and this is the strongest of the Defence's arguments),she still would not have run amok with a gun. In all her psychotic states before August 1985(and we cannot be sure just how many there were) Sheila had never taken a kitchen knife from a drawer to threaten anyone:the violence was always internalized.

[lookout]

Lookout I don't mind Jeremy Bamber going through the legitimate court process,but you know as well as I do that some of these books are made just to make money for the authors. I also don't think it's appropriate that Jeremy should be allowed to take part in a radio phone in or give a television interview. It's awarding him a status which he does not deserve and it's upsetting to the relatives.

Steve,I'm sorry,but after nearly 27 years don't you think that the least Jeremy can be given,is a voice.?
He was at one time " removed " from a category A to B,but the relatives as usual kicked off and blow me,their influence upped him back where he started. Why should they care anyway if he's inside.? What difference should it have made to them.? They're following this case with quite an unhealthy outlook,and their eagerness in keeping him behind bars is questionable.
It was the prison governor who allowed Jeremy to take part in radio and televised interviews,also permission for another forthcoming video to be shown in the near future in which Jeremy tells his version of events to put people in the picture.
I would think the relatives have more than upset Jeremy,but notice he's said little or nothing about them against what they've all had to say about Jeremy. No,,this is not about the relatives,,it's about Jeremy and his grievances for a change.

[Steve_uk]

Steve,I'm sorry,but after nearly 27 years don't you think that the least Jeremy can be given,is a voice.?
He was at one time " removed " from a category A to B,but the relatives as usual kicked off and blow me,their influence upped him back where he started. Why should they care anyway if he's inside.? What difference should it have made to them.? They're following this case with quite an unhealthy outlook,and their eagerness in keeping him behind bars is questionable.
It was the prison governor who allowed Jeremy to take part in radio and televised interviews,also permission for another forthcoming video to be shown in the near future in which Jeremy tells his version of events to put people in the picture.
I would think the relatives have more than upset Jeremy,but notice he's said little or nothing about them against what they've all had to say about Jeremy. No,,this is not about the relatives,,it's about Jeremy and his grievances for a change.

We've been hearing about Jeremy and his grievances ever since the prison van arrived at Wormwood Scrubs from Chelmsford Crown Court. Didn't I read somewhere that Ann Eaton's children had been having nightmares over the whole case? Jeremy should be allowed to put his case through the proper channels,and have rewards for good behaviour like any other prisoner,but not be allowed preferential media access.

[lookout]

We've been hearing about Jeremy and his grievances ever since the prison van arrived at Wormwood Scrubs from Chelmsford Crown Court. Didn't I read somewhere that Ann Eaton's children had been having nightmares over the whole case? Jeremy should be allowed to put his case through the proper channels,and have rewards for good behaviour like any other prisoner,but not be allowed preferential media access.

No Steve,,the reason for Ann Eatons' kids nightmares stemmed from when they were at WHF and slept in the beds which the twins of Sheila had been found dead in. I'd have had nightmares too. It was only a year after that they comfortably moved themselves into the farmhous,without a thought as to how those impressionable children would have felt.
Ann actually asked one of the kids to help her make the bed/s.! Read about it,Steve,and please get your facts right.I'm surprised at you,as you're usually on the ball.

[Steve_uk]

I have read about the nightmares which is why I alluded to them in the first place. But all the bloodstained bedding and carpets had been burned,so the point you make is dubious.

[lookout]

I have read about the nightmares which is why I alluded to them in the first place. But all the bloodstained bedding and carpets had been burned,so the point you make is dubious.

The beds weren't destroyed though,Steve. I would sincerely hope that the bedding and anything else heavily bloodstained would have been destroyed.
In fact,,given what had happened at that farmhouse,I,personally,would have thought twice at moving into it at all. In actual fact,I wouldn't have,let alone taking young children who'd known what had happened and Lord only knows what those children were told about Jeremy. So is it any wonder they had nightmares.?

[lookout]

Ann and Peter Eaton already had homes of their own,so why didn't they stay put.? Why be in such a hurry to take over where someone else left off.? Very discomforting to say the least.
Because the Bambers lived there for so long,I should imagine that their presence was still felt. Then again,,I don't think there was much love lost anyway.Where there's no sense,there's no feeling either,because I know someone who knows the relatives,who pretty well summed that up.   

[Steve_uk]

Ann and Peter Eaton already had homes of their own,so why didn't they stay put.? Why be in such a hurry to take over where someone else left off.? Very discomforting to say the least.
Because the Bambers lived there for so long,I should imagine that their presence was still felt. Then again,,I don't think there was much love lost anyway.Where there's no sense,there's no feeling either,because I know someone who knows the relatives,who pretty well summed that up.

They were only tenants,as were June and Nevill,so why not move in over the shop? The relatives had to pick up the pieces of Jeremy's evil scheme,and have behaved with dignity at every turn.

[Steve_uk]

This is merely conjecture on your part. I don't see why you continue to make such comments.. ? Unless you were there and know these people, how can you make such statements as though they are fact.

Because it's dramatic licence which adds variety to the posts in this forum.You can take it or leave it as you see fit.

[lookout]

They were only tenants,as were June and Nevill,so why not move in over the shop? The relatives had to pick up the pieces of Jeremy's evil scheme,and have behaved with dignity at every turn.

The relatives did very well picking up the pieces ( of eight ) Steve. I bet they didn't complain. Except that there was trouble at t'mill 10 years later when AP thought he'd been diddled and there was a court case. Jeremy couldn't join in,could he.? And he'd been well fleeced.

[Steve_uk]

The relatives did very well picking up the pieces ( of eight ) Steve. I bet they didn't complain. Except that there was trouble at t'mill 10 years later when AP thought he'd been diddled and there was a court case. Jeremy couldn't join in,could he.? And he'd been well fleeced.

Jeremy joined in as much as he could,throwing a spanner into the works at every opportunity,dragging Ann and Peter Eaton up to Full Sutton prison when they both had a farm to manage as well as looking after children. When they got to York Jeremy had mysteriously dropped his claim to the tenancy of the farm,spending his last amount of money in the process.

[Caroline R]

Because it's dramatic licence which adds variety to the posts in this forum.You can take it or leave it as you see fit.

Steve? Don't you think the events were dramatic enough? I think I have mentioned before but every time I read one of your posts, I see JB in a long cloak and top hat, twiddling a heavily waxed moustache as a piano is being played frantically in the background! Just state you point without the flowery nonsense! It's much easier to read and you might get taken more seriously!