Mick Gradwell.....well someone had to start a thread lol

[nugnug]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i2CjYDJGTo&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Here he says 'Looking at the overall circumstances I feel it is a safe conviction and that Jeremy Bamber in cold blooded and calculated way killed his family. The evidence does point that way quite significantly'.

seems hes said a lot of diffrent things to a lot of diffrent people he seems to have done much the same in jersey.

[Alias]

seems hes said a lot of diffrent things to a lot of diffrent people he seems to have done much the same in jersey.

A bit of a flip-flopper.

[Jane]

A bit of a flip-flopper.

Sounds as if he's not 100% certain either way.

[Droosie]

The Tonight programme was in March 2012.

Quite some time ago then.

Has he commented since then about the case?

[lookout]

I think his nose is stuck into solving a cold case at present,,joining the Lancashire constabulary. That's the last I heard because he was on my local news at the time. I'll have to look it up.

[wilf]

proof beyond reasonable doubt is I think the expected requirement for guilt. 

wilf

[wilf]

I disagree with the itemised phone billing claim.

Jeremy could have rang his cottage from WHF,then just picked up the reciever when arriving back.

He probably thought it was too risky ringing the police from WHF & pretending to be Neville. Which is why he told the police Neville liked to keep things private.

could you in 1985 leave the phone ringing for the time it takes to get from WHF to Goldhanger? I thought it would cut out after a couple of units (a few mins)
While we are talking phone calls if one log is a copy of the other with mistakes how come the phone numbers are recorded correctly but not both shown on both logs I reason that to correctly report a phone number you would have to first write it down so where is the log with the details or if its on a jotter why and where

wilf?

[nugnug]

seems in the jersey child abuse case gradwell was telling david rose one thing and the victims something rather diffrent.

[Jan]

seems in the jersey child abuse case gradwell was telling david rose one thing and the victims something rather diffrent.

yes definitely a strange character. Not one I would be quoting personally

[Alias]

seems in the jersey child abuse case gradwell was telling david rose one thing and the victims something rather diffrent.

That hurts his credibility.

[nugnug]

yes definitely a strange character. Not one I would be quoting personally

i wouldn't ether but then ive done some proper research on him rather than just looking at his own website.

[tyler]

I like the way he says in the article that the police "accidentally" destroyed the evidence. Hardly! They had specifically been told not too and then just as DNA testing was advancing,the evidential items were destroyed! By none other than Special Branch!

[nugnug]

how can you acedently destroy evidence acedently lose it yes but destroy i think not.

[Alias]

I like the way he says in the article that the police "accidentally" destroyed the evidence. Hardly! They had specifically been told not too and then just as DNA testing was advancing,the evidential items were destroyed! By none other than Special Branch!

Noticed that too and jumped in my chair - there was nothing "accidental" about it. In my mind it was a big crime, and the people responsible should be held accountable.
Destroying evidence in a case that is still being appealed is nothing less than a crime - especially when they had been told not to.
HOW COME no one to this day was held accountable? Shouldn´t there at least be a hearing to clarify the circumstances?

[nugnug]

and they wouldn't of done that unless they had something to hide.