Yes i understand what you mean, i know how it works. The evidence from the original trial was strong enough to convict Bamber so that wont be used again, its been argued before.
You said why not judge Jb by the same standard, i said because he was found guilty at his original trial. Go back through the thread Grahame, you will see what i mean. Im ending up confused!
Yes I am hearing you Andrea and have understood your posts and you are of course entitled to hold your opinions. The only thing I object to is when folk in order to reinforce their opinion that Bamber is guilty emphasise continually that two appeal courts and the ccrc all uphold his conviction. Possible on the pretext of conveying the thought that they all see nothing wrong with the original conviction at all.
When in fact that is not what aqctually happens. If each appeal court when over all the original evidence (and this view is also held by some of the opposite persuasion to me) then most of it would be thrown out as unsusable or contaminated.
But that isn't what they do. The only thing they do is look to see if the proposed new evidence is enough to overturn that original conviction. So to my mind it is futile to use the argument that all these appeal courts in fact fully endorce Bamber's guilt. Because it doesn't.
I feel that I must again indicate where I stand in this case. The only reaqson that I see Bamber's conviction as being a miscarriage of justice is the fact that (1) I believe that the original evidence was contaminated and should not have been used as evidence. And (2) I do not believe that the evidence of Julie Mugford should have been used either. Why? Because (a) She was possible lying? and (b) She stood to benefit from his conviction. And (c) She was not charged with being an accessory after the fact.
Those are the only reasons that I believe this to be a miscarriage of justice. I have no feelings of goodwill towards Bamber himself. But if the trial was what I consider a fair one and that he was "fairly" convicted, then I would not be here defending his case today. I am no lover of murderers or child killers. If I truly believed him to be guilty then I would spit him out immediately and you would not see me for dust I can assure you. But as long as there is this niggling doubt in my mind I need to see justice done and I don't believe that it has been in this case.
