Author Topic: Who were the Defendants in this case?  (Read 34943 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #240 on: July 14, 2012, 07:50:PM »
Oh noooooooooooooo The porsche was a car kit...The police contacted the said porsche company and they had confirmed that JB had been in contact with them...He was going to buy that with his bonus of 2k from the caravan park.

Where does he mention the cost of the hospital treatment?  :)

David Shaw quotes it Patti in the "Sleuthing for Justice" report. Of course I have to take at face value what I read and I'm afraid I've no way of checking its validity,which is why fora of this sort prove useful.

As for Jeremy getting a bonus from the caravan park,well that at least has made me laugh..

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #241 on: July 14, 2012, 08:44:PM »
What words exactly? From what I have read Jeremy mentions the £15000 cost of the private psychiatric hospital to Dr. Craig and wasn't there some talk of a Porsche? I read that Jeremy does at some point say "My whole family are in there" but again this is ambiguous as we know full well what little regard he held them in.
The words that those men with the guns killed them.

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #242 on: July 14, 2012, 08:47:PM »
David Shaw quotes it Patti in the "Sleuthing for Justice" report. Of course I have to take at face value what I read and I'm afraid I've no way of checking its validity,which is why fora of this sort prove useful.

As for Jeremy getting a bonus from the caravan park,well that at least has made me laugh..

Hi Steve, he got his bonus because he was a share holder like AE...They both got the same amount each year.  It was PC Jones that told the court that JB had told him he was getting a porsche. But the defence had already contacted the place where JB had made his enquiries and they confirmed it was a kit car for about 2k.

Steve, I never believe what I read, I always look at the evidence, which is the most important thing... :)
« Last Edit: July 14, 2012, 08:50:PM by Patti »

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #243 on: July 14, 2012, 08:51:PM »
David Shaw quotes it Patti in the "Sleuthing for Justice" report. Of course I have to take at face value what I read and I'm afraid I've no way of checking its validity,which is why fora of this sort prove useful.

As for Jeremy getting a bonus from the caravan park,well that at least has made me laugh..
Don't you think it would be more useful if you examined the words of the relatives, who said that the inheritance was Jeremy's motive. Yet it were they who looked upon Jeremy and Sheila as being the cuckoos in the nest. They were the ones always talking asbout the inheritance, not Jeremy. Look at the cold and calculating way they went about implicating Jeremy in the murders. Don't you think it just a little bit odd that a whole family ganged up on him? Wouldn't you rather think that if it were one of your family that they would be the last person you'd think would do it. A odd family indeed if you ask me?

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #244 on: July 14, 2012, 08:54:PM »
Hi Steve, he got his bonus because he was a share holder like AE...They both got the same amount each year.  It was PC Jones that told the court that JB had told him he was getting a porsche. But the defence had already contacted the place where JB had made his enquiries and they confirmed it was a kit car for about 2k.

Steve, I never believe what I read, I always look at the evidence, which is the most important thing... :)
That court case concerning the caravan park as well. How money grubbing that was of the relatives to force that into the situation that Jeremy had to take them to court because they failed to give him his share. Another unjust decision by the courts. One also that portrayed the relatives as being creedy for money.

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #245 on: July 14, 2012, 09:08:PM »
That court case concerning the caravan park as well. How money grubbing that was of the relatives to force that into the situation that Jeremy had to take them to court because they failed to give him his share. Another unjust decision by the courts. One also that portrayed the relatives as being creedy for money.

Hi Grahame, something else niggled away at me when I read AE'S statement and, that was that the house had to kept in its original state, because JB wanted it kept that way and it still is to this day...She said JB wanted it as a shrine....this was said in the 1991/2 statement. Any ideas?  :) :)

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33772
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #246 on: July 14, 2012, 10:06:PM »
Hi Grahame, something else niggled away at me when I read AE'S statement and, that was that the house had to kept in its original state, because JB wanted it kept that way and it still is to this day...She said JB wanted it as a shrine....this was said in the 1991/2 statement. Any ideas?  :) :)

Might be a need to have a constant reminder or penance. A bit like a hair shirt.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #247 on: July 14, 2012, 10:12:PM »
Hi Grahame, something else niggled away at me when I read AE'S statement and, that was that the house had to kept in its original state, because JB wanted it kept that way and it still is to this day...She said JB wanted it as a shrine....this was said in the 1991/2 statement. Any ideas?  :) :)
I think probably it was Ann Eaton's idea to keep it that way and I have good information that it has not changed much since that day. The relatives haven't respected much else of what Jeremy has said. So I doubt very much if it was his idea?

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #248 on: July 14, 2012, 10:32:PM »
I think probably it was Ann Eaton's idea to keep it that way and I have good information that it has not changed much since that day. The relatives haven't respected much else of what Jeremy has said. So I doubt very much if it was his idea?

But she says in her statement that he wont let anything be changed, so it stays this way...I will find the bit and post if I can....:) :)

mertol22

  • Guest
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #249 on: July 14, 2012, 10:43:PM »
Its time to put the  chips on the table, if White House Farm has changed very little from then till now , the reason is ultra simple greed, why spend money on it , its been around over a hundred years and will stand for a hundred years more if terra firma is still here , a 100 mile wide piece of space debris will only change it.

Offline Jane

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 33772
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #250 on: July 14, 2012, 10:44:PM »
But she says in her statement that he wont let anything be changed, so it stays this way...I will find the bit and post if I can....:) :)

Hi Patti. Do you mean that AE keeps everything at WHF the way it always was because Jeremy "won't let anything be changed"!!!!? 'Cause, if you are saying that, it sounds to me like a massive guilt attack!!!

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #251 on: July 14, 2012, 10:46:PM »
I think probably it was Ann Eaton's idea to keep it that way and I have good information that it has not changed much since that day. The relatives haven't respected much else of what Jeremy has said. So I doubt very much if it was his idea?


I think probably it was Ann Eaton's idea to keep it that way and I have good information that it has not changed much since that day. The relatives haven't respected much else of what Jeremy has said. So I doubt very much if it was his idea?

Here it is: Aww it wont let me post it. its on page 30  :) :)

Offline Patti

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13193
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #252 on: July 14, 2012, 10:51:PM »
Hi Patti. Do you mean that AE keeps everything at WHF the way it always was because Jeremy "won't let anything be changed"!!!!? 'Cause, if you are saying that, it sounds to me like a massive guilt attack!!!

Hi april..it wont let me post it, but this is what she said.

" He wanted it buried with her ( her ring that is) and wanted to keep the house as a shrine. He never gave in, never and still hasn't."

This was in 1991.....So this tells me that JB has still has some control over the house...What do you think...it is on page 30 of AE's statement.  :) :)

Buddy

  • Guest
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #253 on: July 14, 2012, 11:14:PM »
Hi april..it wont let me post it, but this is what she said.

" He wanted it buried with her ( her ring that is) and wanted to keep the house as a shrine. He never gave in, never and still hasn't."

This was in 1991.....So this tells me that JB has still has some control over the house...What do you think...it is on page 30 of AE's statement.  :) :)
JB has no control of the house. He doesn't own it, nor do the Eatons.

Buddy

  • Guest
Re: Who were the Defendants in this case?
« Reply #254 on: July 14, 2012, 11:17:PM »
I think Hartley mentioned that the house still has the same wallpaper, and the broken lampshade is still in place.