Example of how Relatives Names are Blackened.

[Jane]

I don't accept that interpretation of events..................................

I will persist in my persecution of Jeremy Bamber until he is decent enough to own up. A deathbed confession will suffice.

Perhaps your first sentence would be more correctly stated as you don't accept ANY interpretation of events which doesn't make Jeremy appear guilty. Your last sentence says it all, really, doesn't it? It certainly seems to validate what I said earlier. That the only truth you seek is proof of Jeremy's guilt.

[Lugg]

Vidvic says you have family connections with the Mugfords. Or have I misunderstood? Given the extreme virulence of your posts, I think you ought to be honest about where you are really coming from. I for one am not convinced that you genuinely believe Bamber is guilty.

There is a difference between holding an opinion and having an allegiance. Your allegiance is plain enough but not, to a sceptical eye, your real opinion.

I admire your investigative qualities Martin. I personally didn't notice that. But I did have my suspicions as Steve's reactions to certain things does rather betray his allegiance to Muggy as he seems to defend her at every point in a way that anyone with no personal attachment to her would? Unless he's got a crush on her of course? :D

[lookout]

Vidvic says you have family connections with the Mugfords. Or have I misunderstood? Given the extreme virulence of your posts, I think you ought to be honest about where you are really coming from. I for one am not convinced that you genuinely believe Bamber is guilty.

There is a difference between holding an opinion and having an allegiance. Your allegiance is plain enough but not, to a sceptical eye, your real opinion.

Martin,I remember  when Steve first appeared on the forum, the first thing I said to him was that he didn't believe Jeremy to be guilty. That his main aim was to trip up a few of the " old faithfuls " on the forum.
I still maintain that he doesn't believe Jeremy to be the guilty one,and that what he's doing,is looking to finding him innocent the same as we all are,but using his own version of tactics.Clever. 

[susan]

Hi lookout sorry have to disagree slightly on the post regarding steve uk.  I feel he wants so much for Jeremy to be guilty but is struggling with the evidence against him so he is making more up to try and cement the verdict in his own head.  I was quite puzzled at how he knew Jeremy brought cannabis or took from Amsterdam in an empty toothpaste tube.  He knows far too much tittle tattle about what Julie and Jeremy did or did not do for my liking it is not all a figment of his imagination.  What she said what he said must be some truth in there somewhere.

[Caroline R]

Hi lookout sorry have to disagree slightly on the post regarding steve uk.  I feel he wants so much for Jeremy to be guilty but is struggling with the evidence against him so he is making more up to try and cement the verdict in his own head.  I was quite puzzled at how he knew Jeremy brought cannabis or took from Amsterdam in an empty toothpaste tube.  He knows far too much tittle tattle about what Julie and Jeremy did or did not do for my liking it is not all a figment of his imagination.  What she said what he said must be some truth in there somewhere.

To be honest, Steve's opinion is no more important than anyone else's - I think he enjoys the attention that he often outrageous accusations bring him. Often it isn't a case of discussing the Bamber case but more a discussion of 'Steve's opinions' of the Bamber case!!

[susan]

Hi Lugg forget the feelings steve does not do them except trying to goad animal lovers.  He defends Julie at every opportunity and knows far too much about her for a connection not to exist some maybe a figment of his imagination but not all of it.  He told me I should do more reading so I am off to read Womans Own

[susan]

Hi Caroline  you are so right steve's knowledge on the Bamber case is worse than mine all the stuff he posts up he has skim read somewhere and does add on's and my oh my does he change the goalposts plus he contradicts himself from week to week I pay particular attention to his posts and I have a very good memory.   He does not pay attention either to other posts as he may have learnt a little more

[Lugg]

I've been discussing Steve's posts with campion and campion thinks that becayse Steve's posts are sometimes very long and that the answers to some questions do not seem to be direct answers, that he may have text dump somewhere and just cuts and pastes a lot of his posts? Just an idea?

[killingeve]

To be honest, Steve's opinion is no more important than anyone else's - I think he enjoys the attention that he often outrageous accusations bring him. Often it isn't a case of discussing the Bamber case but more a discussion of 'Steve's opinions' of the Bamber case!!

Hi Caroline

I've been thinking for a while now about starting a thread along the lines of 'Myths Created and Perputated By Steve_uk' in an attempt to clean up the forum.  He lauches onto threads and posts AT posters seemingly without rhyme or reason.

[susan]

Hi N/N  what steve is very guilty of is using other people's posts (not directed to him) and answering with his own views which are not relevant to the post posted.  It is as if he is not interested in answering our posts just wants to post his own stuff up all the time maybe good if he just posted and answered himself.

[Jane]

Hi Caroline

I've been thinking for a while now about starting a thread along the lines of 'Myths Created and Perputated By Steve_uk' in an attempt to clean up the forum.  He lauches onto threads and posts AT posters seemingly without rhyme or reason.

NaNu/Caroline Hi to you both. I have said on several occasions that Steve has ZERO interest in what is said by others, often including the few who agree with him. IMO, Steve's only interest is in online oratory and he enjoys seeing the words  he has written as opposed to just listening to the sound of his own voice.

[tyler]

If Steve does have a connection to JM,then that would explain a lot imo.To believe Jeremy innocent he would then have to admit that JM's testimony was false! I think that would be more than he could possibly bear!

[Jane]

If Steve does have a connection to JM,then that would explain a lot imo.To believe Jeremy innocent he would then have to admit that JM's testimony was false! I think that would be more than he could possibly bear!

Tyler, even if he doesn't have a connection to JM, I believe he encourages the belief that he has.

[susan]

Hi tyler I think you could have a point.  steve seems desperate to convince himself by convincing us of Jeremy's guilt this would exonerate Julie from any wrong doing.

[tyler]

Susan ....exactly! I think certain other members face the same problem,which is of coarse fully understandable.As was said at trial,it all comes down to who you believe - Jeremy or Julie.