Julie Mugford's NOW contract and the new evidence ?

[guest154]

I did what I was asked to do egap, nothing else.  I have a duty to other members if they ask me to remove things said about them that they do wish other members to know.

If someone talks about me, Patti..........I am going to ask you to delete it from now on! 

NGB said.
I believe that the CPS and prosecution were not aware of the NoW deal.  I am not sure whether certain police officers knew.  I consider that to be quite likely, but we are unlikely to find out.

-----------------


So you admit that you don't have the contract and now that you do not know whether the police were aware of the NOTW deal. So whatever new evidence you have isn't from the police either... It is looking less and less likely that it is going to be something with as much substance as the defence claim.

[Patti]

Hi Patti

Perhaps you would have the courtesy to at least discuss the matter with me.

Eagp I sent you a PM which you did not reply to last week....I can't do anything else if you don't wish to converse.

[Patti]

If someone talks about me, Patti..........I am going to ask you to delete it from now on! 

NGB said.
I believe that the CPS and prosecution were not aware of the NoW deal.  I am not sure whether certain police officers knew.  I consider that to be quite likely, but we are unlikely to find out.

-----------------


So you admit that you don't have the contract and now that you do not know whether the police were aware of the NOTW deal. So whatever new evidence you have isn't from the police either... It is looking less and less likely that it is going to be something with as much substance as the defence claim.

Mat if you asked me to remove something that someone had posted of a personal nature about you then yes I would remove it for you....

[killingeve]

And I have said i did what I had to do for a member who was offended by that post egap.  Please except that.

Hi Patti

I'm sorry I disagree.  The forum rules should prevail not the whims of individual posters.  I objected to a post that Maggie put up about me but I did not ask for it to be moderated.  And indeed it wasn't moderated.  Didn't see you coming to my resuce.  You need to be objective in your moderating. 

[killingeve]

Eagp I sent you a PM which you did not reply to last week....I can't do anything else if you don't wish to converse.

Hi Patti

I actually went away on a weeks hol and did not log on.  By the time I returned the matter was resolved, or so I thought 

[Patti]

Hi Patti

I'm sorry I disagree.  The forum rules should prevail not the whims of individual posters.  I objected to a post that Maggie put up about me but I did not ask for it to be moderated.  And indeed it wasn't moderated.  Didn't see you coming to my resuce.  You need to be objective in your moderating.

But you did not object to me egap. May I suggest that you use the report procedure if there is anything you wish to report....I am not here 24/7 and I do not sit here all evening watching, so I miss many posts....

[killingeve]

Eagp I sent you a PM which you did not reply to last week....I can't do anything else if you don't wish to converse.

Hi Patti

It was actually the 27th Aug over two weeks ago.

[mertol22]

The nature of the crimes on that night played a large part in finding someone guilty and fast , jeremy bamber was that guilty person, as to the NOTW its unlikely it would have made little impact as it has been said the silencer evidence was enough together with the statement of jm , the defence should have attacked this statement and demanded more proof than hearsay the NOTW only was the benefit of jm .

[killingeve]

But you did not object to me egap. May I suggest that you use the report procedure if there is anything you wish to report....I am not here 24/7 and I do not sit here all evening watching, so I miss many posts....

Hi Patti

I'm not a wimp.  I can look after myself.  Balls of steel unless there's a moth fluttering around 
I understand the forum rules and the spirit.

[Patti]

The nature of the crimes on that night played a large part in finding someone guilty and fast , jeremy bamber was that guilty person, as to the NOTW its unlikely it would have made little impact as it has been said the silencer evidence was enough together with the statement of jm , the defence should have attacked this statement and demanded more proof than hearsay the NOTW only was the benefit of jm .

Mertol I take it Dallas is over...


I read something about hearsay in court not so long ago.....I will have to fish it out lol 

[mertol22]

Mertol I take it Dallas is over...


I read something about hearsay in court not so long ago.....I will have to fish it out lol 

correct about 15 mins ago , the fight for ewing oil starts at the next episode tomorrow night will be a good one

[Patti]

correct about 15 mins ago , the fight for ewing oil starts at the next episode tomorrow night will be a good one

I used to be addicted to the series, I must admit. I hope you haven't drank all of those beers...lol 

[mertol22]

I used to be addicted to the series, I must admit. I hope you haven't drank all of those beers...lol 

oh no patti just 2 25cl french biere bottles, a glass now of asda wine, i did not want to mix sutcliffe on this thread but may say something about his disputed illness on another .

[killingeve]

Maggie,it's okay,don't worry.I won't be answering that post,as I sensed something " not nice " in it.
That's not my style as you know,and I'm not easily hoodwinked into anything I'm wary of.x

Hi Lookout

I have sent you a pm about this.  I find it upsetting if posters think my posts are "not nice" and I'm attempting to hoodwink them.  Your feedback would be much appreciated.

[ngb1066]

If someone talks about me, Patti..........I am going to ask you to delete it from now on! 

NGB said.
I believe that the CPS and prosecution were not aware of the NoW deal.  I am not sure whether certain police officers knew.  I consider that to be quite likely, but we are unlikely to find out.

-----------------


So you admit that you don't have the contract and now that you do not know whether the police were aware of the NOTW deal. So whatever new evidence you have isn't from the police either... It is looking less and less likely that it is going to be something with as much substance as the defence claim.

I have never claimed that the defence have a copy of the contract and I have never suggested that I know whether the police were aware of the NOW deal, so I do not "admit" anything.  The new evidence is not evidence from police officers but that does not make it any less credible.