The abusive remarks towards Jeremy Bamber

[Patti]

Hi Guy's & Dolls 

When I was young I was told that little ones should be seen and not heard.  I was also taught manners and that I was to respect my elders.

At the end of the day the extended family are not to blame for murders of their family.  They had no hand in it at all.  It must have been a heartbreaking time for all of them, especially June's sister Pamela.  I can understand their frustration and their loss.  Please lets not forget that. 

However, 27 years has passed and this case is still under discussion and, whether we like it or not their names will continue to crop up; there is no getting away from that.  Some of it will be good, some of it will be bad.  Sometimes, it not how we say it, it's the way we say it.  We do have to be mindful at times, when we discuss the living and the dead.  We can all put our point across, in a respectful way. There is no need to abuse anyone or to be abused. The mods should take care of that, anyway.

At times conversations get heated, but sometimes they go too far.....It's true that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit....

I also don't think we should be frightened of debating the families concerned....in what they did or didn't do. 

Lastly, I would like to say that I get on with Bridget, Ralph, Vic, Hartley and lovely Mat....who all think Jeremy is guilty....we don't have to fall out and have the lip on...Vic, dontcha dare laugh.

I'm on Jeremy's side....I think he never had a fair trial and that the police committed gross misconduct when they may have destroyed vital evidence in 1996....

 

[Lugg]

Well Patti from the answers that we have had from the opposition it is quite clear to me that their attitude comes across as "It is still ok to bash Bamber and his supporters. But we must not investigate or even doubt the testimonies of the family because they are very honest and upright people who never lie. Therefore we must believe them on their words alone. It happened at the trial and it is still happening today.
And to suggest that I don't know what it is to receive abuse until I become a supporter of the guilty party is quite simply rediculous to say the least. But to those who relish the idea of calling JB names and who wish to continue to call his supporters, who are interested only in questioning the accusations of the family, "hypocrites" and "liars" then please carry on till your hearts content. He is in prison anyway and cannot seem to do much to change that. So personally, although I can see that legitimate arguments should be permitted, I cannot see the reason for the constant abuse we receive just because it is apparent to us and many others, some very influential and respected people that there has been a miscarriage of justice. Indeed if I thought that Bamber was definitely guilty and that all the family past and present are lilly white and perfect as regards the truth, especially when some profess the Christian faith. Then I would not be on this forum and would abandon the cause immediately.

To answer Vic's doubt of my honesty in suggesting that I wasn't there at the beginning when Bamber was found guilty. And that I didn't know any of the family. (1) I most definitely WAS at the beginning. Because I tried to get hold of a transcript of the trial just after the verdict, but couldn't. The reason was because there certainly seemed something really unjust about the verdict. (2) The answer to this one is NO I did not and do not know any of the family personally and I have never said  I did. In fact I even said so at times in the past posts. What I did say however is that I knew many locals from that area and have done work for various farmers and knew those farmers who knew the family. For this it was of course implied that I was lying. Do you see how it works. By adding something that I never said and then suggesting that I am a liar for saying what I never said, I am shown up before the forum as a liar. Very smart move isn't it?

[susan]

Lugg Nobody on this forum thinks you are a liar and most members have the utmost respect for you and your passion for Justice.  In my humble opinion Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of a majority verdict not a unanimous one so we will always have an element of doubt as to whether or not the correct verdict was reached.  Many people on this forum are searching for just the truth no more no less.

[Lugg]

Lugg Nobody on this forum thinks you are a liar and most members have the utmost respect for you and your passion for Justice.  In my humble opinion Jeremy Bamber was found guilty of a majority verdict not a unanimous one so we will always have an element of doubt as to whether or not the correct verdict was reached.  Many people on this forum are searching for just the truth no more no less.

That is correct Susan. The "many" are searching for the truth. The "few" believe they have found it and use that as a justification for continually bashing him over the head with faults that only have their existance in "hearsay" and the poor research of some authors. Remember the definition of a novel? A factual account where the author hasn't enough facts to back up that account.

[Patti]

Well Patti from the answers that we have had from the opposition it is quite clear to me that their attitude comes across as "It is still ok to bash Bamber and his supporters. But we must not investigate or even doubt the testimonies of the family because they are very honest and upright people who never lie. Therefore we must believe them on their words alone. It happened at the trial and it is still happening today.
And to suggest that I don't know what it is to receive abuse until I become a supporter of the guilty party is quite simply rediculous to say the least. But to those who relish the idea of calling JB names and who wish to continue to call his supporters, who are interested only in questioning the accusations of the family, "hypocrites" and "liars" then please carry on till your hearts content. He is in prison anyway and cannot seem to do much to change that. So personally, although I can see that legitimate arguments should be permitted, I cannot see the reason for the constant abuse we receive just because it is apparent to us and many others, some very influential and respected people that there has been a miscarriage of justice. Indeed if I thought that Bamber was definitely guilty and that all the family past and present are lilly white and perfect as regards the truth, especially when some profess the Christian faith. Then I would not be on this forum and would abandon the cause immediately.

To answer Vic's doubt of my honesty in suggesting that I wasn't there at the beginning when Bamber was found guilty. And that I didn't know any of the family. (1) I most definitely WAS at the beginning. Because I tried to get hold of a transcript of the trial just after the verdict, but couldn't. The reason was because there certainly seemed something really unjust about the verdict. (2) The answer to this one is NO I did not and do not know any of the family personally and I have never said  I did. In fact I even said so at times in the past posts. What I did say however is that I knew many locals from that area and have done work for various farmers and knew those farmers who knew the family. For this it was of course implied that I was lying. Do you see how it works. By adding something that I never said and then suggesting that I am a liar for saying what I never said, I am shown up before the forum as a liar. Very smart move isn't it?

Hi Lugg

You know what I think of abuse and, it can never be justified. It tells you the type of person that person is...in reality.   

What happened to the transcripts? Who has them?   

[susan]

Hi Lugg  lets hope Mason Doyle comes up with a good book based on facts as I am sure he will.

[guest154]

Hi Guy's & Dolls 

When I was young I was told that little ones should be seen and not heard.  I was also taught manners and that I was to respect my elders.

At the end of the day the extended family are not to blame for murders of their family.  They had no hand in it at all.  It must have been a heartbreaking time for all of them, especially June's sister Pamela.  I can understand their frustration and their loss.  Please lets not forget that. 

However, 27 years has passed and this case is still under discussion and, whether we like it or not their names will continue to crop up; there is no getting away from that.  Some of it will be good, some of it will be bad.  Sometimes, it not how we say it, it's the way we say it.  We do have to be mindful at times, when we discuss the living and the dead.  We can all put our point across, in a respectful way. There is no need to abuse anyone or to be abused. The mods should take care of that, anyway.

At times conversations get heated, but sometimes they go too far.....It's true that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit....

I also don't think we should be frightened of debating the families concerned....in what they did or didn't do. 

Lastly, I would like to say that I get on with Bridget, Ralph, Vic, Hartley and lovely Mat....who all think Jeremy is guilty....we don't have to fall out and have the lip on...Vic, dontcha dare laugh.

I'm on Jeremy's side....I think he never had a fair trial and that the police committed gross misconduct when they may have destroyed vital evidence in 1996....

 

[Lugg]

Hi Lugg

You know what I think of abuse and, it can never be justified. It tells you the type of person that person is...in reality.   

What happened to the transcripts? Who has them?   

I don't know Patti. At the time I asked a barrister friend of mine if they could be obtained and she said, "Probably not". That is all I can say really. I think I read on the forum that the complete transcript is not in existance? But there are parts of it floating about.

[Patti]

I don't know Patti. At the time I asked a barrister friend of mine if they could be obtained and she said, "Probably not". That is all I can say really. I think I read on the forum that the complete transcript is not in existance? But there are parts of it floating about.

I'm not sure, but can you buy them?  Please don't tell me some of the transcripts are not available, that makes it ever worse...

[Lugg]

Hi Lugg  lets hope Mason Doyle comes up with a good book based on facts as I am sure he will.

Yes Susan. I am looking forward to its publication whatever side he falls in favour of. As I said there is nothing in it for me if he be guilty or innocent. But I am interested in justice and I hate corruption in high places. Where those people in high places are able to work the law in their favour and I really do believe that to happen. If you look at the various MOJ's that have finally been acknowledged you will see that most of those people now freed because of new evidence were actually subjected to the same verbal abuse as Bamber now is. But the hypocritical thing about it all is that now they are haled as heroes and victims of British Justice because they are free. Can you see my point? Everyone was certain they were guilty at the time and they said so in no uncertain terms. But now they have all changed their tune and praise the British Justice system for freeing them. Laughable isn't it?

[Caroline R]

Yes Susan. I am looking forward to its publication whatever side he falls in favour of. As I said there is nothing in it for me if he be guilty or innocent. But I am interested in justice and I hate corruption in high places. Where those people in high places are able to work the law in their favour and I really do believe that to happen. If you look at the various MOJ's that have finally been acknowledged you will see that most of those people now freed because of new evidence were actually subjected to the same verbal abuse as Bamber now is. But the hypocritical thing about it all is that now they are haled as heroes and victims of British Justice because they are free. Can you see my point? Everyone was certain they were guilty at the time and they said so in no uncertain terms. But now they have all changed their tune and praise the British Justice system for freeing them. Laughable isn't it?

Can't argue with any of that! Well said Lugg

[mertol22]

Jeremy Bamber has had stick lets say on the forum almost daily, anyone bilty i cant see changing now, the end product is you get debate,there are if you look still today  a couple of areas still untouched, in answer to the post of Lugg on the search of the truth, many will say there is no need to its already known, a view i dont share however the truth if it came out meaning full known disclosure of remaining documents may find either way.

[Bridget]

I would understand the purpose of this thread a little better if someone would point out a post where a 'guilty' poster has abused an innocent poster on THIS forum simply for their beliefs. I think in general we all get along together quite nicely.

Of course you are going I get a reaction if you describe people who someone else considers friends as evil, conniving thieves, but surely this also comes down to mutual respect between us as posters. Whatever I may think of him I don't use the kind of language suggested at the beginning of this thread to describe JB, and that is mainly out of respect for those here who believe differently. If some innocent posters cannot find it within themselves to show respect for the family they should at least afford some respect to those they are posting alongside and tone down the accusations. No one wants to stifle debate, but there are inoffensive ways to discuss a subject and then there are the frankly offensive. Anyone choosing the latter, no matter what side of the fence they are on, can expect a backlash.

[Lugg]

I would understand the purpose of this thread a little better if someone would point out a post where a 'guilty' poster has abused an innocent poster on THIS forum simply for their beliefs. I think in general we all get along together quite nicely.

Of course you are going I get a reaction if you describe people who someone else considers friends as evil, conniving thieves, but surely this also comes down to mutual respect between us as posters. Whatever I may think of him I don't use the kind of language suggested at the beginning of this thread to describe JB, and that is mainly out of respect for those here who believe differently. If some innocent posters cannot find it within themselves to show respect for the family they should at least afford some respect to those they are posting alongside and tone down the accusations. No one wants to stifle debate, but there are inoffensive ways to discuss a subject and then there are the frankly offensive. Anyone choosing the latter, no matter what side of the fence they are on, can expect a backlash.

So you don't consider the term "bamberbollocks.org" to be offensive towards someone who is only expressing their beliefs then? Or do you think it acceptable that I am am being hypocritical just because I question the views of some of the opposition? If that is so then you must find it very acceptable for someone to question the motives and in that the character of someone such as Simon McKay just because he volunteers to defend Bamber for free? There are three example for you straight off the cuff.

[Bridget]

So you don't consider the term "bamberbollocks.org" to be offensive towards someone who is only expressing their beliefs then? Or do you think it acceptable that I am am being hypocritical just because I question the views of some of the opposition? If that is so then you must find it very acceptable for someone to question the motives and in that the character of someone such as Simon McKay just because he volunteers to defend Bamber for free? There are three example for you straight off the cuff.

Frankly I think the premise of this whole thread is offensive to those of us who manage to post here without taking part in the sort of things of which you accuse us and some of the comments within this thread are a reaction to that.