The relevant section of Julie Mugfords statement .....
“There ws no appointment made. (cough!) I think we stood outside the bank for 10 minutes, building ourselves up. Susan was a basket case, very nervous I would have to do the initial talking. We went in as we felt we had to try and correct this. We went to the teller and asked to speak to the manager. We were initially refused (Why? an appointment HAD been made and they weren't alone!!). I said it's about fraud which changed the tellers mind. They went off to speak to somebody. I have been reminded that the visit to the bank occurred on 4th October 1985. The date was not significant in the sense of appointments (HA!!), it was a day we plucked up courage to go (and you say she didn't lie!! 
. It was close to the officer asking us if we had been to the bank. We went though to a room at the back and met someone who we assumed to be the manager. We told him we had lied and said the cheque book was gone. We said we'd spent the cheques Susan now had to do more talking because it was her cheque book. We offered to pay the money back and he asked us questions like, who signed the cheques? How much had we spent? And how we would pay the money back? We asked what would happen from here and would we be arrested. He said he needed to refer to his supervisors as it was not his decision to make (he said it was!). In relation to the arrest he said he didn't think we would be because it was so bizarre that without our admissions it would never be traced. He said that this happened quite a lot in banks and it was most peculiar that people i.e. us, would come to admit what they;ve done and pay off the debt. Te amount was pretty minuscule to the bank (no manager or acting manager would say that!!). We left out name and might have left Stan JONES number" (why? he was probably stood next to them!!
and further …..
"I have been specifically asked if there was any collusion with police to ensure that Susan and I attended court without a record and were therefore credible witnesses (this is the reason you asked for!). I am unaware of any if this occurred I did ask a question about how we could fix the situation and the response did act as a prompt to us. We were never directed , told to do anything or informed to do anything and we were not prompted. As far as I am aware our activities were not monitored. We went to the bank on the day we chose when we had built up the courage. We were not escorted or accompanied by the police on that day. I do not believe I would have immediately reported to Stan JONES that we had attended the bank, but I feel sure that I would have told him during one of our meetings or conversations."
This is completely at odds with what Dovey says and is completely blatant!
From Julie Mugford’s statement, page 23
“I next saw Jeremy on Friday, 6th September 1985 when he came to my flat and
helped with Brett to move my furniture to my present address. We left on a
reasonable happy note. I haven't seen him since.
There is one important thing I remember that I must add, when Jeremy phoned
me about 3.15 p.m. on Wednesday, 7th August 1985 he did say "I haven't been
to bed tonight". I remember this because I told him to go to bed.
I have been asked if I have read or been told about a bible found on Sheila's
chest when she was found dead. I can definitely say I haven't but it was
told to me by Jeremy. I will add that some time after the 7th August 1985,
Ann EATON asked me if I knew about a bible which was near Sheila and I told
her that I did and that it was found on her chest. I think I told her it
was creepy. I think she asked me about the bible on the Friday of the week of the murders.”
Julie alleges that Bamber confessed to her that that he had hired Mathew Macdonald to carry out the killings
From pages 11 and 12
“About 8.30 pm the same day Ds JONES and Dc CLARKE left the house leaving
Jeremy and myself alone. We went and sat in the lounge and I think the
first thing Jeremy said was that he was glad the day was over. I than said
to Jeremy, "Did you do it?"
He said,"No, I couldn't have done it, Matthew did it," I knew to whom
he was referring.
He said that before he had phoned me that morning Matthew had phoned from
the house, which I took to be the farm, and said that everything had been
completed and proceeded to tell him about his father who he stated that for
his age he was very strong and had put up a fight. He said that Matthew
had said he was sorry because during the fight with his father he had had
a mental blank and had fired 7 shots into him. I asked Jerry if the twins
and Sheila had felt anything and he told me the boys were still asleep and
didn't wake up and that Sheila had lay down on the bed and shot herself.
under the orders of Matthew who then put a bible on her chest. He told me that he had told Matthew where the gun was going to be, how to get into
the house. He had found out what bedroom they had all been sleeping in as
Sheila and the twins frequently slept in different rooms when they visited
the farm. He also told Matthew 'how to leave the house so it appeared locked,
and the route back to Goldhanger. I asked him how much he paid Matthew and
he said "£2,000."
It’s worth comparing Julie Mugford’s dishonest account of the visit to the bank with her account of Jeremy’s confession, which has a chilling similarity to it from the point of view of style. The addition of incidental details, which seemingly give a ring of truth to the story, is present in both. References to the person's mental state add a sense of realism. For example, Matthew had experienced a "mental blank" and Susan was "a basket case".
“The date was not significant in the sense of appointments, it was a day we plucked up courage to go”
"I asked Jerry if the twins and Sheila had felt anything and he told me the boys were still asleep and
didn't wake up and that Sheila had lay down on the bed and shot herself.
under the orders of Matthew who then put a bible on her chest."
