Jeremy Bamber: the Prelude, the Tragedy and the Aftermath

[Jane]

The man didn't " just tell " someone this information,and it was nobody from this forum.
 Why must you always question and dispute anything that sniffs of being the truth ?
I suggest you do your usual " sleuthing " and find out for yourself then it would stop the chorus of your "backers" telling me my posts are rubbish.

I would have said that things were a bit rocky for some time after she'd confessed to her husband that her involvement in her part involving collusion that had resulted in a MOJ. It was he who'd decided to call it a day and file for divorce. I knew of the rocky relationship a couple of years ago.and did mention it on the forum,but got rebuffed.
The husband obviously doesn't like lies. He has admitted in a letter to a member that her testimony didn't hold water.

But you didn't specify "another" forum when you said "he has admitted it in a letter to a member". It defies belief that someone would end a long marriage for something that occurred YEARS prior to it. It must also be considered that, given her age at the time, she was in no position to dictate to police how she intended to "play" it. Her fall back could always have been police coercion.

[Jane]

But you didn't specify "another" forum when you said "he has admitted it in a letter to a member". It defies belief that someone would end a long marriage for something that occurred YEARS prior to it. It must also be considered that, given her age at the time, she was in no position to dictate to police how she intended to "play" it. Her fall back could always have been police coercion.

The only thing I'D be prepared to accept is that she MAY erroneously have taken full responsibility for the actions her 21 yr old self and cannot forgive herself -effects of the menopause, perhaps- in which case, her first course of action might have been to make contact with the relevant authorities here to start proceedings to get Jeremy released.

[sami]

jb did alot of staging before he left whf that morning but a couple of things he failed to do .are arrange the bullet cases and blood trails on sheila

[lookout]

The only thing I'D be prepared to accept is that she MAY erroneously have taken full responsibility for the actions her 21 yr old self and cannot forgive herself -effects of the menopause, perhaps- in which case, her first course of action might have been to make contact with the relevant authorities here to start proceedings to get Jeremy released.

I would imagine that JM is pondering how she can broach the subject without incurring problems for herself,though, however,it'll depend on how this present legal team will view the situation,I don't know, except that a subpoenae * will have to be in place in order for the admission to come from herself, personally,rather than it appear by letter. Always supposing that there's an appeal of course. *

Her admission came after she'd turned to religion. Karma ?

[sami]

he has had 2 already could it be 3rd time lucky as the old saying goes

[Caroline]

The man didn't " just tell " someone this information,and it was nobody from this forum.
 Why must you always question and dispute anything that sniffs of being the truth ?
I suggest you do your usual " sleuthing " and find out for yourself then it would stop the chorus of your "backers" telling me my posts are rubbish.

He didn't just tell them? Well, clearly he did and said person told other people and eventually (if we're to believe it) it trickled down to you. So I say again, GS certainly wouldn't tell just anyone something this serious.

If you post something of this magnitude on a public forum, you should expect that people are going to question you. It seems you have nothing but the word of 'someone on a forum' to back up your claim.

[lookout]

He didn't just tell them? Well, clearly he did and said person told other people and eventually (if we're to believe it) it trickled down to you. So I say again, GS certainly wouldn't tell just anyone something this serious.

If you post something of this magnitude on a public forum, you should expect that people are going to question you. It seems you have nothing but the word of 'someone on a forum' to back up your claim.

Magnitude ?
For goodness sake,you're making it sound as though I've committed some crime ! In which case I haven't ! With your method of thought-processing and posting,I clearly see it as a form of neuroticism on your part.
Take the " wallet " debacle and also the " last trailer " for instance,you really thought you'd struck gold and then to try and make it as convincing as possible,that theme continued as if in desperation at having solved the whole case.
I refuse to be in the firing line for this piece of information and start looking for it yourself the same as you did for the wallet,though with your off-hand attitude,I doubt if any information will be furnished.   

[lookout]

It's your misrepresentations making mountains out of molehills that's going to come a cropper,not me.

[Caroline]

Magnitude ?
For goodness sake,you're making it sound as though I've committed some crime ! In which case I haven't ! With your method of thought-processing and posting,I clearly see it as a form of neuroticism on your part.
Take the " wallet " debacle and also the " last trailer " for instance,you really thought you'd struck gold and then to try and make it as convincing as possible,that theme continued as if in desperation at having solved the whole case.
I refuse to be in the firing line for this piece of information and start looking for it yourself the same as you did for the wallet,though with your off-hand attitude,I doubt if any information will be furnished.

What you have posted is that Julie's husband has admitted to someone on a forum that she perjured herself in court. Were this true she would be in SERIOUS trouble. The above are simply my thoughts on aspects of things already known. What you have said is something different. I certainly would NOT have posted this without any corroboration and even then ......

No point getting personal Lookout, I'm simply pointing out the seriousness of your accusation.

[lookout]

What you have posted is that Julie's husband has admitted to someone on a forum that she perjured herself in court. Were this true she would be in SERIOUS trouble. The above are simply my thoughts on aspects of things already known. What you have said is something different. I certainly would NOT have posted this without any corroboration and even then ......

No point getting personal Lookout, I'm simply pointing out the seriousness of your accusation.

Accusation now ? Listen---------I would NOT have known unless it had been stated by a 3rd and 4th person,so don't be accusing me.
It would have seemed that 2 separate contacts were made,one to the husband and one to JM,which tells me that they don't and haven't lived together for a time. The letter to JM appeared to have been " pleading " with her to " own up " before JB's sentence gets longer with time. So far as I know there's been no response.
The matter of the divorce was already " public " last year for me to have read it in the first place.The possible lead-up to it I knew at the beginning of last year.

I'm not making a big thing out of this---------you are.

[Caroline]

Accusation now ? Listen---------I would NOT have known unless it had been stated by a 3rd and 4th person,so don't be accusing me.
It would have seemed that 2 separate contacts were made,one to the husband and one to JM,which tells me that they don't and haven't lived together for a time. The letter to JM appeared to have been " pleading " with her to " own up " before JB's sentence gets longer with time. So far as I know there's been no response.
The matter of the divorce was already " public " last year for me to have read it in the first place.The possible lead-up to it I knew at the beginning of last year.

I'm not making a big thing out of this---------you are.

It IS a big thing if true, but if not, then someone is lying to you and you should ALWAYS check before posting something like this on an open forum. I have search for a divorce between Julie and her husband and there is nothing. AND he isn't going to be sharing private letters with someone on a forum.

[lookout]

It IS a big thing if true, but if not, then someone is lying to you and you should ALWAYS check before posting something like this on an open forum. I have search for a divorce between Julie and her husband and there is nothing. AND he isn't going to be sharing private letters with someone on a forum.

It's in the HOLMES info,but you're that engrossed in forever posting " guilty " in nearly every sentence that you don't bother to read anything else.

[guest2181]

It's in the HOLMES info,but you're that engrossed in forever posting " guilty " in nearly every sentence that you don't bother to read anything else.

What is HOLMES info?

[guest2181]

What is HOLMES info?

I hope you don't mean Poppy Millers blog? 

[Caroline]

I hope you don't mean Poppy Millers blog? 

I have no idea what the HOLMES info is either??