Author Topic: Appeal for new information  (Read 23761 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #195 on: December 11, 2012, 11:35:AM »
Mark Williams-Thomas,,tomorrow@9pm ITV,programme called " On the Run ".

Thanks Lookout!

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #196 on: December 11, 2012, 11:38:AM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avqvY1NWFTo

Can anyone find a link to the RJ programme featuring JB ?
Some interesting comment's from DJ in above link !!

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #197 on: December 11, 2012, 12:02:PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avqvY1NWFTo

Can anyone find a link to the RJ programme featuring JB ?
Some interesting comment's from DJ in above link !!

Was there even a Rough Justice made about JB? I can't find any reference to it?

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #198 on: December 11, 2012, 12:27:PM »
Was there even a Rough Justice made about JB? I can't find any reference to it?
Me neither , maybe Vidvic will be able to help us here and point us in the right direction !!

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #199 on: December 11, 2012, 09:38:PM »
Was there even a Rough Justice made about JB? I can't find any reference to it?

Rough Justice was taken off the air because programmes were being made for programmes sake,not because there was an overwhelming case for innocence. Eddie Gilfoyle,Sheila Bowler,Jonathan Jones(the poor man's Jeremy Bamber)..I rest my case.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 10:59:AM by Caroline »

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #200 on: December 11, 2012, 10:06:PM »
Rough Justice was taken off the air because programmes were being made for programmes sake,not because there was an overwhelming case for innocence. Eddie Gilfoyle,Sheila Bowler,Jonathan Jones(the poor man's Jeremy Bamber)..I rest my case.
Was you there at the COA , when Vidvic was shouting loudly over DJ conflict of interest's regarding his role at the CCRC ?

Offline jon

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1437
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #201 on: December 11, 2012, 10:11:PM »
Rough Justice was taken off the air because programmes were being made for programmes sake,not because there was an overwhelming case for innocence. Eddie Gilfoyle,Sheila Bowler,Jonathan Jones(the poor man's Jeremy Bamber)..I rest my case.
Rough Justice helped overturn 18 convictions !!

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 21091
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #202 on: December 11, 2012, 10:22:PM »
Was you there at the COA , when Vidvic was shouting loudly over DJ conflict of interest's regarding his role at the CCRC ?

No I was not. This is a good read though..http://www.innocent.org.uk/cases/sheilabowler/trialanderror-sheilabowler.pdf

Offline vidvic

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • R.i 99.9
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #203 on: December 12, 2012, 12:17:AM »
Was you there at the COA , when Vidvic was shouting loudly over DJ conflict of interest's regarding his role at the CCRC ?

I think, if you bothered to research what I've told you then you'd find me correct Jon, though I admit its far easier for you to take pot shots from the sidelines. Do a google on Justtv, a company set up by Jessel to make tv programmes on alleged MOJ cases and then check credits for the documentary made in the run up to the 2002 appeal, made by princess productions, a company owned by Justtv's board of directors. When a case is recommended for appeal by the CCRC then it's value as a doc increases, which is precisely what happened to the bamber case after it was referred for appeal with David Jessel as a commissioner and why in Peter Eatons speech on the steps of the courts of justice I wrote the line 'there needs to be an enquiry into the events that led to the case being referred in the first place'.

In answer to a sensible question, Roch, I'm fairly sure that Rough justice did a segment on bamber, I'm sure I recall seeing the tape at some point, but not a whole show, but I don't have a copy. I've watched a lot of DJ's stuff and I might be merging different recollections, but if they didn't then they certainly thought seriously about it. At every stage either princess or just tv continually approach the relatives and when they refused to speak before the 2002 appeal they sent a helicopter into the farm to take aerial shots, hovering about 30ft from the house, trying to take shots into the main bedroom window. Nice.
rumor vagatus stulti et acceptantur a Idiotae

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #204 on: December 12, 2012, 10:13:AM »
  How do you, or they know it was the film companies' helicopter. It could well have been Police, special branch, olive branch, the Met, MI5, SIS, or even the Border Agency. Granted it wouldn't have been one of Mertol's  aliens, or a reincarnation of Hitler.

Caroline R

  • Guest
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #205 on: December 12, 2012, 11:00:AM »
Rough Justice was taken off the air because programmes were being made for programmes sake,not because there was an overwhelming case for innocence. Eddie Gilfoyle,Sheila Bowler,Jonathan Jones(the poor man's Jeremy Bamber)..I rest my case.

Do you believe that 'anyone' has been wrongly convicted? EVERY programme is made to attract ratings, if no one watched it (or very few) what would be the point in making it? Are you saying you think Sheila Bowler was guilty?

(Sorry Steve, I hit the modify button on your post by mistake)
« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 12:40:PM by Caroline »

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #206 on: December 12, 2012, 11:51:AM »
  Caroline, May I suggest you ascertain if Steve uk is offline since yesterday(it seesms so far away).
  He/She may unable to post, there again, she/he may be hiding behind a (brick) wall, which creates an echoing effect.

Offline vidvic

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
  • R.i 99.9
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #207 on: December 12, 2012, 01:47:PM »
  How do you, or they know it was the film companies' helicopter. It could well have been Police, special branch, olive branch, the Met, MI5, SIS, or even the Border Agency. Granted it wouldn't have been one of Mertol's  aliens, or a reincarnation of Hitler.

A) Because they wrote to the Eatons saying that they would do it.

B) The pictures were on the documentary.

I'm not an idiot Campion.
rumor vagatus stulti et acceptantur a Idiotae

Offline susan

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16196
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #208 on: December 12, 2012, 01:56:PM »
Hi vidvic  nobody on this forum could ever ever think of you as an idiot but a very nice decent guy.  :)

Offline campion

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: Appeal for new information
« Reply #209 on: December 12, 2012, 04:11:PM »
  Thankyou, Vidvic for informing us that you are not an idiot.
  I am glad, also, for you to now explain, that the relatives were properly  advised, by the filming people, that production  activity, was to  take place in the vicinity.