Why would Bamber say this in 2003?

[Jane]

Actually Jim, that was my post. However, I can understand the change because if I were innocent but knew my neck was on the line I might try and re-order the events a little - it doesn't point to guilt, it points to fear!!

 


Caroline, ABSOLUTELY. It seems to me that NOBODY on the guilty side has taken into consideration just how frightened Jeremy must have been. It's all about him doing, saying, going, being but not once has any thought been given to how he may have been FEELING which would apply whether he was innocent or guilty.

[jim ignatowski]

 


Caroline, ABSOLUTELY. It seems to me that NOBODY on the guilty side has taken into consideration just how frightened Jeremy must have been. It's all about him doing, saying, going, being but not once has any thought been given to how he may have been FEELING which would apply whether he was innocent or guilty.

I don't believe that JB was frightened at all - he considered that he had concocted the perfect murder plan and was consumed by his own arrogance
Jim

[Caroline R]

I don't believe that JB was frightened at all - he considered that he had concocted the perfect murder plan and was consumed by his own arrogance
Jim

In that case, he wouldn't have changed the sequence of the calls would he??

[Jane]

I don't believe that JB was frightened at all - he considered that he had concocted the perfect murder plan and was consumed by his own arrogance
Jim

That would make him a psychopath, Jim, and I believe several professionals have not judged him as such.

[-Harters-]

Eh? I'm not mocking you!! And of course it's up to me what I believe!! I didn't see you explanation, which may indeed be the case. However, I have to say that I find that odd given that DB was amazed at how many weapons were laying around, why didn't he put them all away and why did DB see fit to mention it as though it was the sole reason for him being there?

I took the 'silence speaks volumes' comments to be mocking and catty.

Who said it was the sole reason? Just yourself?

The reason was to take posession of the keys.

You wanted my input, silence is no longer speaking volumes. I'm not sure I can assist you any further than I already have.

[Caroline R]

I took the 'silence speaks volumes' comments to be mocking and catty.

Who said it was the sole reason? Just yourself?

The reason was to take posession of the keys.

You wanted my input, silence is no longer speaking volumes. I'm not sure I can assist you any further than I already have.

Who said "Silence speaks volumes"? Not I!

I didn't say it was the sole reason, I said why mention it as though that was why he'd gone there because that's the way it reads 'to me'

Thank you for your input but I think it had left more questions than answers and I very much doubt I will be alone in thinking that.

[Alias]

I should never have said anything about silence in the trenches.

[Jane]

I took the 'silence speaks volumes' comments to be mocking and catty.

Who said it was the sole reason? Just yourself?

The reason was to take posession of the keys.

You wanted my input, silence is no longer speaking volumes. I'm not sure I can assist you any further than I already have.

You should have directed your comment to me. It was I, not Caroline, who spoke of deep silences hiding loud words. I believe the original to have been said by Confucious. It is strange that only now, when the question has been posed time and again, that attempt has been made to answer it. The statement was meant to be provocative. It was meant as neither mocking nor catty.

[-Harters-]

You should have directed your comment to me. It was I, not Caroline, who spoke of deep silences hiding loud words. I believe the original to have been said by Confucious. It is strange that only now, when the question has been posed time and again, that attempt has been made to answer it. The statement was meant to be provocative. It was meant as neither mocking nor catty.

Erm..... you are kidding right April?

What about this thread from six months ago when it was actually yourself who commented on the meaning of the hand written sentence, giving particular attention to the location of a comma.

Yet you claim this is the first time an attempt has been made to answer?

The world's gone mad.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3335.0.html

[-Harters-]

Remember?   

Jam, I do understand what the sentence means. The comma explains that rather than going to WHF to take a gun back, he PUT a gun back whilst he was there.

.......

[Jane]

Erm..... you are kidding right April?

What about this thread from six months ago when it was actually yourself who commented on the meaning of the hand written sentence, giving particular attention to the location of a comma.

Yet you claim this is the first time an attempt has been made to answer?

The worlds gone mad.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3335.0.html

Yeltrah, I can't tell you how thrilled and overwhelmed I am that you can recall what I said 6months ago. I sometimes can't recall what I said 6 minutes ago :D Sadly though, it seems you may be the only one who can remember because nobody else has offered any explanation and I can't even READ what I said because the link won't work :D

[mike tesko]

Erm..... you are kidding right April?

What about this thread from six months ago when it was actually yourself who commented on the meaning of the hand written sentence, giving particular attention to the location of a comma.

Yet you claim this is the first time an attempt has been made to answer?

The world's gone mad.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3335.0.html

Relatives and Mugford are mad...

[-Harters-]

Yeltrah, I can't tell you how thrilled and overwhelmed I am that you can recall what I said 6months ago. I sometimes can't recall what I said 6 minutes ago :D Sadly though, it seems you may be the only one who can remember because nobody else has offered any explanation and I can't even READ what I said because the link won't work :D

Yes I have a so-so memory (not that my wife would agree).

I'm thrilled that you're thrilled. 

[mike tesko]

Why did Jeremy tell the firearms officers that Anthony Pargeters .22 bolt action rifle was inside the farmhouse if it was not?

[Caroline R]

Erm..... you are kidding right April?

What about this thread from six months ago when it was actually yourself who commented on the meaning of the hand written sentence, giving particular attention to the location of a comma.

Yet you claim this is the first time an attempt has been made to answer?

The world's gone mad.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,3335.0.html

I remember the last ‘discussion’ well and these were your ‘explanations’ last time. Where is the explanation about the shot gun being put back in the gun cupboard? These appear to your opinions and yet today your answer was quite specific??


“What is quite clearly stated?
Peter returned a gun to WHF? Or he returned a gun in WHF to it's proper place? Or he returned the plastic toy gun in the lounge back to the toy box? Or something else?
It couldn't be more cryptic if it tried. 
I think the tone of your posts is slipping back in to your old style. Maybe you need to consider who exactly is dismissing alternatives so readily? (Just an observation)  ”

“Lol, no, I'm not sticking to any theory, it may well be the case that your suggestion is spot on, I really don't know but I think it's unlikely for all the reasons that I've already given. My argument wasn't about what happened, it was about using the document posted in this thread as proof that it happened, where as it is not proof at all. A discussion point, sure, but nothing more without further information to support the theory one way or the other.”