Police interview transcripts:

[nugnug]

no they would not necessarily of submited the transcripts to the defence.

[Adam]

Adam  why indeed was Freddi not called as a witness at the Trial and why were many others not called.  These qre questions we need answering and the forth coming book by Paul Harrison may just do this.

Jeremy was paying for a top quality defence. If they did not call witnesses that is their error. Or they decided the witnesses would not benefit Jeremy.

[nugnug]

or they they may very well not of known about these witness.

[susan]

Adam  do we know that the Defence knew about these witnesses at the time perhaps you have more information on this than I do or maybe the Defence were over confident and thought such witnesses were better left I cannot answer your questions but I am sure some of the more experienced posters will be happy to do so.

[Adam]

'bit of pressure' ??  Think they would have subjected him to more than that.  In the 1980s the police were out of control this is why recording of interviews was brought in.  You have no idea how they really spoke to him during these interviews and outside of the interviews.
For someone who claims to have an open mind you seem to be very certain Jeremy Bamber is guilty imo

The wording of the interviews seem fine. Questions relating to Jeremy, Mugford, the gun, Neville & the night in question. Jeremy had a lawyer with him. All the police could do is raise their voice, which I am sure Jeremy could handle.

Jeremy has never claimed the interview transcript is wrong or that he was bullied at all.

[Adam]

or they they may very well not of known about these witness.

I do not know who was or was not called during the 19 day trial.

If someone who was not called at trial has some major information which would benefit Jeremy, I am sure they would have been called up at the appeals.

[nugnug]

not if there statements were witheld under pii as some statements were in this case.

[Adam]

Adam  do we know that the Defence knew about these witnesses at the time perhaps you have more information on this than I do or maybe the Defence were over confident and thought such witnesses were better left I cannot answer your questions but I am sure some of the more experienced posters will be happy to do so.

The defence were certainly not over confident. Wilkes book said they believed at an early stage it was going to be an extremly difficult case to win.

[susan]

Adam sorry cannot comment never read Wilkes book will wait for Paul Harrisons which will be based on facts then I will get back to you on that one.

[Caroline R]

The defence were certainly not over confident. Wilkes book said they believed at an early stage it was going to be an extremly difficult case to win.

Wilkes's book is not a Holy Grail!!

[Adam]

or they they may very well not of known about these witness.

It was up to the highly paid defence to find them. They had long enough to find & interview people that knew Sheila. It is their job. There are no witnesses that ever said they saw Sheila physically attack other adults.

[Adam]

Adam sorry cannot comment never read Wilkes book will wait for Paul Harrisons which will be based on facts then I will get back to you on that one.

Wilkes book has got the best reviews & is considered the least biased. It can be bought on Amazon.

[nugnug]

and how could they find them exactly if the police dident tell them of her existence.

[grahameb]

Jeremy was paying for a top quality defence. If they did not call witnesses that is their error. Or they decided the witnesses would not benefit Jeremy.

A lot of evidence was not made available at the original trial. Indeed thousands of pages of evidence was not made available to the defence at the trial. Furthermore a lot of evidence is still being held by Essex police today that was not available at the trial. My contention is and always was that for this very reason Jeremy Bamber did not receive a fair trial.

[nugnug]

A lot of evidence was not made available at the original trial. Indeed thousands of pages of evidence was not made available to the defence at the trial. Furthermore a lot of evidence is still being held by Essex police today that was not available at the trial. My contention is and always was that for this very reason Jeremy Bamber did not receive a fair trial.

and if that evedence went agianst jeremy the police would have no reason to withhold.