Jeremy got to scene (whf) much faster than people give him credit for...

[mike tesko]

It is what Jeremy said when he testified that counts as his evidence, not what his counsel might have said whilst cross examining a witness...

[mike tesko]

The other thing to remember is that during a trial counsel for the prosecution and consel for the defence share information which might not be officially disclosed, and under these circumstances Rivlin QC may have been privvy to information, not known about by Jeremy...

This could have been the existence of the earlier call log details (3:26am) which Jeremy did not find out about until many years later...

[Patti]

Its simply not a case of who knows what its a matter of justifying and deliberating the said sequence of events in order to win a point.    No one knows for sure what happened in 1985 nor will we ever know.  fact! But, all points raised can be argued and, at the end of the day its a case of who wins that argument in front of jury.

Where one says Jeremy had 15 minutes to get to WHF is irrelevant because it does not matter how long it took to get there...The crime its self is of more importance, but I suppose all points won be either side adds to the way a jury will reckon with it all.....

Each individual theory can be bashed out, but what you can't foresee is how the jury will divulge it.. :D :D :D :D

[mertol22]

I think so...

im not sure if any guilty posters could have made the journey any quicker, woke from sleep in the early hours, perhaps they can find locally a route that resembles the route in question and try it .

[mike tesko]

Phone records prove that Jeremy called police at 3:36am, and that he arrived at the scene at 3:52am...

Jeremys call to Mugford was recorded at 3:30am, before Jeremy called the police (3:36am) - if Jeremy's call to the police was timed as suggested at 3;26am, it would mean that Jeremys call to Mugford was after he called police, not beforehand...

Truth of the matter is that Ralph called Jeremy at 3:25am, Ralph called police at 3:26am, panic alarm was activated at 3:29am, Jeremy called Mugford at 3:30am, and Jeremy called police at 3:36am, and Jeremy arrived at the scene at 3:52am..

[mike tesko]

Which side of Jeremys call to police (3:36am / 3:26am) would you like his call to Julie Mugford (3;30am)  to have taken place or occurred?

Before, (3: 36am) or after (3:26am) Jeremys call to the police?

[Jane]

Hi April
The problem as I see it is one of credibility and it most certainly doesn't inspire confidence in a defendant's credibility if that defendant is not consistent about crucially important parts of his case
Jim

Jim Hi

The night I was woken by a call from the hospital to tell me that my partner was dying was/still is a total blur. It was the second call I'd received in 5 days and I was faced with a three hour drive. I know the call came some time after 1am but I couldn't , then or now,tell you the exact time if my life depended on it, just as I can't tell you what the date was, only the month.

April

[Lugg]

Its simply not a case of who knows what its a matter of justifying and deliberating the said sequence of events in order to win a point.    No one knows for sure what happened in 1985 nor will we ever know.  fact! But, all points raised can be argued and, at the end of the day its a case of who wins that argument in front of jury.

Where one says Jeremy had 15 minutes to get to WHF is irrelevant because it does not matter how long it took to get there...The crime its self is of more importance, but I suppose all points won be either side adds to the way a jury will reckon with it all.....

Each individual theory can be bashed out, but what you can't foresee is how the jury will divulge it.. :D :D :D :D

Well said Patti.

[vidvic]

If Jeremy drove his car along the same route I took in the trial, and he did it two minutes faster than I did, then there can be no doubt that he drove recklessly along that route in an attempt to get there, that is what I am saying ( I am a trained professional driver and to drive along that route in the middle of the night with all its twists and turns at the speed he must have been driving, can only lead to one conclusion, that being that Jeremy did not waste any time in trying to get to the scene, he must have driven along parts of that route like a man possessed, until he became aware of the police car with flashing lights which caused him to slow down, a natural thing he might do, considering that Jeremy must have been breaking every speed limit along that route, before the police car showed up. He slowed down naturally, as any one of us would have done...

This is now becoming ridiculous. You invent new timings for all the calls and then claim he drove like a mad man, only he testified that he drove slowly so as not to Indanger himself. You are simply making it up as you go along! How does a man drive so fast yet get caught by a police car? Bamber only 2 years ago repeats that he was called at 3.10. What is the point in making these ridiculous claims when they would never be taken seriously anywhere but here?

[Alias]

Jeremy´s say about this....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-191151

[lookout]

Jeremy´s say about this....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-191151

If I close my eyes listening to those tapes,,he sounds like my late husband,his brother and my pa-in-law,,because they all sounded the same on the phone. Even my two nephews sound like that. Weird.

[-Harters-]

If I close my eyes listening to those tapes,,he sounds like my late husband,his brother and my pa-in-law,,because they all sounded the same on the phone. Even my two nephews sound like that. Weird.

Oh yeah. Very weird indeed.   

[lookout]

Oh yeah. Very weird indeed.   

I'm not kidding,,Hartley,,it does,honestly. If I had tapes of them,I'd prove it,but sadly I haven't.

[jim ignatowski]

Jeremy´s say about this....

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-jeremy-bamber-files-exclusive-audio-191151

This gets even more interesting
So, JB says in the interview that he received a tel call from "Dad" at 3.15 - 3.30 and following the ending of that tel call he tried to ring his "Dad" back but received an engaged tone.
JB then says that "that's when I rang the police"
So, the tel call to Jule must have been after the tel call to the police
What a shame that when JB was interviewed by the police, he didn't know whether he made the tel call to Julie before or after he made the tel call to the police
So, JB's memory/recollection of the sequence in which he made the tel calls has improved as time has proceeded.
You just couldn't make it up lol

[-Harters-]

I'm not kidding,,Hartley,,it does,honestly. If I had tapes of them,I'd prove it,but sadly I haven't.

I just meant that I find the notion of you listening to Jeremys voice and closing your eyes to be quite strange.

You don't need to prove anything, I'll take your word for it.