Bob you seemed really anti bamber when you first logged onto this site. You now seem a bit more mellow. Have you changed your mind, or do you enjoy the banter with us pro Bamber brigade.
Cliff - sorry if I came across as too anti - hope I didn't annoy too many people!
When I first arrived I had a pretty open mind, having known very little about the case, but I became 80% convinced he did it. To be more accurate, I became very convinced that Sheila didn't do it, and JB was the only other name in the frame.
I've eased my position a bit but I still find it extremely difficult to see how Sheila could have done it - particularly the fight with Nevill.
I do think JB needs a retrial though - purely based on the obvious incompetence of the police investigation. I also don't like all this PII business.
But mostly I enjoy the banter with (most!) of the other forum members 
That was nice and honest Bob. I think most of us find it difficult to understand how Sheila could have had the strength to overpower Nevill. but he was wounded so would not be too much of a threat.
Great to hear you enjoy the banter, as I enjoy your input to.
The bottom line for all those who are not certain is to keep an open mind, and remain civil.
Could someone please tell me where is the best place to start reading about Jeremy's case? There is so much info, I dont know where to start reading. Should I read the official site first then come back here to join in the discussion? Thanks
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:jP4ZtW5Off0J:www.sleuthingforjustice.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php%3Ff%3D74%26t%3D2445+Barbara+Wilson,+the+farm+secretary,+that+he+suspected+Jeremy+was+planning+to+kill+him.&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.co.uk IMO
Interesting you should offer that as a starting place Jon - The David Shaw account seems to be completely unsourced, and full of things that only appear there and nowhere else - i.e. how do we know he hasn't made a lot of it up? What makes you trust it?
Read page 11 , if you find anything that he can be sued over , sue !! http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,776.msg20391/topicseen.html#msg20391
Whether something is able to be sued over or not does not qualify it as a fact.
Also when The Police claim something is a ' fact ' it does not qualify it as a Fact !! The very public catastrophe of the appeal, ironically, energised an immediate fight back. How could the brutal West Midlands serious crime squad remain unscathed, having rampaged unchecked for more than two decades? In the end its overconfidence was its ruin; one interviewee too many, shackled naked to a chair, had been half suffocated with a plastic bag to force a confession. Questionnaires sent out to every prison were returned revealing in unrelated cases the same fabricated police verbals. Officers on the periphery of events in 1974 hinted at the true picture; one Special Branch officer at the Heysham Ferry confided that the night before giving evidence at the trial he had rewritten his entire notebook to coincide with the evidence given by a colleague in court the day before as to the actual time of arrival in Lancashire of the West Midlands police. He excused himself, "you know how things were".
But in the end, it was the simplest of stupidities that concluded the matter. As the members of the serious crime squad had written (and rewritten) their false accounts, indentations on the pages underneath revealed how their books had been altered. Revelations of the efficacy of the forensic test in proving similar fabrications led to the disappearance from police storage in the West Midlands of dozens of potentially problematic notebooks. But for the Birmingham Six, their failed appeal in 1987 had secured for them one unexpected advantage; the notebooks in their case had been retrieved before the appeal, and retained by a separate police force, Devon and Cornwall. And so it finally came about that the six men emerged into the world. If EP have nothing to hide produce their notebook's , do you agree they should Hartley !!
