Sheila attempted to commit suicide (but failed), and was shot by the police...

[grahameb]

Rushed answer:

I never mentioned masonic channels  I have no problem with RWB receiving info from Carr.  Exactly what such info was, I couldn't say.  I think at the very least he knew the crime scene had been trashed and that this alone could have proved majorly embarrassing for EP who were under severe pressure.

With regard to Mike's assertion re report 1612, I haven't got a clue.  Nobody knows what is in the unedited and as yet, unseen report.  It's contents could contain anything. 

Regarding Dr. Craig, I suppose it depends upon the circs in which they found Sheila.  She could have been in a virtual catatonic state with a gunshot wound to the throat.  You seem to be very keen on the police / professionals making multiple blunders from start to finish, when it suits a guilty argument.  Yet you have an aversion to the same when it does not suit a guilty argument.

I'll be back considerably later.

It is acknowledged by all parties that there were police cock-ups from the word go. This was in fact the main complaint from the relatives. I wouln't mind betting that RWB used his influence to oust Taff Jones from leading the investigation. Concerning the Masons I could not say. But many powerful Masons can and I'm sure do use their influence to achieve what they want.

[Roch]

There is a world of difference between writing down an incorrect time, or misinterpreting something said over a radio and later correcting it, and doing what you are suggesting they did.

It is also unlikely that so many personnel within the same force would require hearing aid apparatus, suffer from the early onset of dementia and be so poor at handwriting that they need to scribble every date out to correct it

[Roch]

Mike,,,are you in contact with Ron Cook at all.?

Lookout, you are referring to the poster 'Ron Cook' as opposed to the former police officer.  Ron has privately contacted many people linked to the case, in an unofficial capacity.

[susan]

Hi Roch  I was reading back today and it said at the Trial Jeremy never once said that Julie was telling porkies if this was the case have you any idea why he would do this. (Dare not ask Bridget )

[Roch]

Hi Roch  I was reading back today and it said at the Trial Jeremy never once said that Julie was telling porkies if this was the case have you any idea why he would do this. (Dare not ask Bridget )

I don't know Susan.  Unless he was instructed not to do so by his defence counsel? 

[Bridget]

Hi Roch  I was reading back today and it said at the Trial Jeremy never once said that Julie was telling porkies if this was the case have you any idea why he would do this. (Dare not ask Bridget )

What were you reading?

[susan]

Hi Bridget  Wow you have caught me out.  Actually I know where I read it that will surprise you.  An earlier post today was referring back to letters Jeremy had written to Julie and it was on the same page of posts back in 2011.  I bet you will find it Bridget and no doubt I will hear from you again

[Roch]

Hi Bridget  Wow you have caught me out.  Actually I know where I read it that will surprise you.  An earlier post today was referring back to letters Jeremy had written to Julie and it was on the same page of posts back in 2011.  I bet you will find it Bridget and no doubt I will hear from you again

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,1125.msg34512/topicseen.html#msg34512

 

[Bridget]

Thanks Roch.

Hi Roch  I was reading back today and it said at the Trial Jeremy never once said that Julie was telling porkies if this was the case have you any idea why he would do this. (Dare not ask Bridget )

I think that post of yours was a little misleading Susan. I'm sure at trial the defence will have refuted JM's evidence, what was being said in that thread was that he didn't accuse her of lying at trial in that letter.

[susan]

Hi Bridget  Thank you for being right once more one of these days I will be right and you wrong my dear Sorry for being misleading naughty step coming my way

[grahameb]

He must have had incredible trust in her not to tell that he was a murderer even to dare breaking up with her? Something there just doesn't ring true for me.

[susan]

Hi Grahame  what kind of a woman would carry on sleeping with a man after she had seen the little bodies of the twins in the mortuary if he had confessed to killing them.  Just too ridiculous to be true.

[Patti]

I've not read her statement yet...

[Jane]

Hi Grahame  what kind of a woman would carry on sleeping with a man after she had seen the little bodies of the twins in the mortuary if he had confessed to killing them.  Just too ridiculous to be true.

Hi Susan, hope your feet are dry! There's a curious parallel here between JM and Vickie Carr, Ian huntley's girlfriend. I could understand why VC gave him an alibi. I imagine, that under the circumstances it surely must have been impossible to believe that the man she shared a bed with was capable of such horrendous violence and in giving him the alibi she was attempting to make herself believe that he didn't do it. I think it possible that by saying Jeremy was responsible, JM was attempting to make herself  believe that he was.

[mertol22]

Hi Grahame  what kind of a woman would carry on sleeping with a man after she had seen the little bodies of the twins in the mortuary if he had confessed to killing them.  Just too ridiculous to be true.

A money mad kind of woman.