72 page witness statement of Ann Eaton, made to COLP on 14 / 08/ 1991

[Adam]

You cant just go a x kill peopld cos you wa t their money and then just coolly walk awayunless you have severe mental/personality issues ...... surely?

I am no expert.

People do kill for inheritance.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LNqtwFjFBM&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[Jan]

Jeremy was also unconvincing in court.

Repeatedly being asked to speak up by the judge. A reporter on TV said he was very polite, a bit arrogant & seemed to be enjoying the attention. There was of course also the famous 'that is what you have to establish' line. The media reported that was the time a killer let his mask slip.

Tears or not, Julie kept to her WS despite strong cross examination from David Napley.

I think if  he was arrogant - it was because he knew he was innocent and did not think the police had a case against him. Which statement did she keep to? Not her original one - only ones in Sept. Because the two contradict each other.

[Adam]

I think if  he was arrogant - it was because he knew he was innocent and did not think the police had a case against him. Which statement did she keep to? Not her original one - only ones in Sept. Because the two contradict each other.

The case had gone through the police & DPP. He had been charged with multiple murder & had hired the best lawyer available. Arrogant ?

There are probably several WS drafts done until the witness is satisfied. They are the ones answering questions in court so need to be satisfied.

[Jan]

The case had gone through the police & DPP. He had been charged with multiple murder & had hired the best lawyer available. Arrogant ?

There are probably several WS drafts done until the witness is satisfied. They are the ones answering questions in court so need to be satisfied.

I don't think that she would know what the defence would ask her in court ? Would rather defeat the point would it not? As far as I am concerned a statement should be a written record of what happened . I cant imagine why she would need so many sessions to "get it right"

[Adam]

I don't think that she would know what the defence would ask her in court ? Would rather defeat the point would it not? As far as I am concerned a statement should be a written record of what happened . I cant imagine why she would need so many sessions to "get it right"

Assume the defence will ask her questions based on her WS. Or investigate themselves & ask other questions, such as about Julies bank fraud two years earlier.

[grahameb]

Jeremy was also unconvincing in court.

Repeatedly being asked to speak up by the judge. A reporter on TV said he was very polite, a bit arrogant & seemed to be enjoying the attention. There was of course also the famous 'that is what you have to establish' line. The media reported that was the time a killer let his mask slip.

Tears or not, Julie kept to her WS despite strong cross examination from David Napley.

I can well believe it. After having been coachederm questioned 32 times. I should imaging she must have had her ws burned into her mind?

[Roch]

It was not Blur. It had a female singer. Very mellow.

Adam, was it this video?

[Roch]

Tears or not, Julie kept to her WS despite strong cross examination from David Napley.

Once the police went round telling potential prosecution witnesses that there was no evidence to support a phone call from Nevill to Jeremy, some prosecution witnesses faced a stark choice.  Cooperate with bending the evidence to enable Jeremy to be prosecuted or let a murderer off the hook.   

Tell lies or a murderer will get off the hook.

Sad thing is, there was no evidence to support a call hadn't taken place.  It was inconclusive. 

Now if the police had went round telling potential prosecution witnesses that there was no evidence to support a call either had or hadn't taken place, that places an element of doubt regarding whether Jeremy is lying about the call.  A totally different complexion on the things. 

With regards to JM, I think it was sink or swim and the strong tide was being directed by the police / relatives.  She chose to swim with the tide and that's that.

[Jane]

Once the police went round telling potential prosecution witnesses that there was no evidence to support a phone call from Nevill to Jeremy, some prosecution witnesses faced a stark choice.  Cooperate with bending the evidence to enable Jeremy to be prosecuted or let a murderer off the hook.   

Tell lies or a murderer will get off the hook.

Sad thing is, there was no evidence to support a call hadn't taken place.  It was inconclusive. 

Now if the police had went round telling potential prosecution witnesses that there was no evidence to support a call either had or hadn't taken place, that places an element of doubt regarding whether Jeremy is lying about the call.  A totally different complexion on the things. 

With regards to JM, I think it was sink or swim and the strong tide was being directed by the police / relatives.  She chose to swim with the tide and that's that.

A really well balanced post Roch

[Roch]

A really well balanced post Roch

Thank you April.

[lookout]

Yes,,good post,Roch.

[Jane]

I am no expert.

You heard it here for the first time, folks!!!!!! The only time Adam has told the unvarnished truth.

[lookout]

 

[HMEssex]

I can well believe it. After having been coachederm questioned 32 times. I should imaging she must have had her ws burned into her mind?

Better rehearsed than any actOR!

[HMEssex]

You heard it here for the first time, folks!!!!!! The only time Adam has told the unvarnished truth.

Love it!